« 40 killed in 'suicide bombings' in Damascus | Main | US cannot rely on Pakistan for counterterrorism operations »




'Pak Army does not agree' with ISAF findings on Mohmand incident



The Inter Services Public Relations, the public affairs branch of the Pakistani military, rejected ISAF's report on the cross-border incident in Mohmand tribal agency that resulted in the deaths of 24 Pakistani soldiers. From the ISPR website:

Pak Army does not agree with the findings of the US/NATO inquiry as being reported in the media. The inquiry report is short on facts. Detailed response will be given as and when the formal report is received.

Pakistan refused to cooperate with ISAF to conduct a joint investigation into the Mohmand incident.

Major General Athar Abbas, the chief of the ISPR, granted an interview with The Associated Press today. He contradicted the ISAF investigation's finding that Pakistani troops fired first, and said they fired only in retaliation. [For details on ISAF investigation, see LWJ report, Pakistani fire, mutual errors led to Mohmand troop deaths: ISAF inquiry].

From AP:

Pakistani army spokesman Maj. Gen. Athar Abbas rejected the report's claim that Pakistani troops fired at American and Afghan forces first, triggering the incident. He told The Associated Press in an interview Friday that Pakistani forces retaliated only after coalition helicopters "started engagement." He also denied that Pakistan failed to notify NATO of the location of the two border posts that were attacked.

Abbas expressed surprise and frustration that the U.S. refused to apologize for the deaths of the soldiers, something many Pakistanis have demanded. He rejected an American offer to pay compensation to the victims' families, saying the army has its own welfare system.

Meanwhile, CENTCOM Commander General James Mattis canceled his planned briefing to the Pakistani military that was to provide the details of the report.



READER COMMENTS: "'Pak Army does not agree' with ISAF findings on Mohmand incident"

Posted by wallbangr at December 23, 2011 4:18 PM ET:

Is it just me or was the statement a little heavier on apologies than the military seemed, begrudgingly, to want it to be? I got the feeling that they were told to dumb down the blame for political reasons. That might explain why Clark's acceptance of the blame for errors on ISAF's part seemed, at least in my opinion, a tad bit disenginuous. Almost seemed like they were being forced to bite their tongues about how much of the blame truly was on the Paks. Am I alone in this perception?

Posted by Llowell Schweigert at December 24, 2011 1:57 AM ET:

This is great news. Now we can finally abandon the failed policy of courting these duplicitous knuckledraggers as allies, acknowlege the plot to hide bin Ladin was authorized at the highest levels and begin to address thosee Taliban safehavens in NW Pakistan. The Pak army leadership badly failed their troops after the last cross border incident, which our ambassador later acknowledged was caused as the Frontier Corps attempted to alert ISAF helicopters to their presence by firing small arms at them. At that time they should have told their troops not to fire at helicopters, because, unlike the Pak Army the US Army usually hits what they fire at.

Posted by Charu at December 24, 2011 3:12 AM ET:

The Pakistanis are determined to keep digging the hole that they are in! The PakMil is trying to misdirect their public's ire at their incompetency by feeding into their paranoia about the US. But the Pakistani state is in a financial deathspin and desperately need the US to help bail it out. And in the meantime, the PakMil is also waging war on its civilian government. Catch-33!

Posted by Eric at December 24, 2011 3:37 AM ET:

The ISI PR response was forseen in the Pakistani refusal to cooperate in a joint investigation, and the immediate pronouncements of outrage to the international and domestic media by heads of the army and government - before clear facts were even known. A series of border incidents preceded the one that hit the fan. Starting to look like this was calculated by Pakistan's Army and ISI from the start, with the aim of disengaging from the US to posture Pakistan better for a brokered setlement with the Taliban, and what else, I am not sure yet.

This is also to the USA's advantage if we play our cards right. The US benefits from a containment approach to Pakistan. No more aid; Targeted sanctions; Unilateral raids into the tribal areas and Balochistan, and active cooperation with India to build into Afghan infrastructure and trade partnerships. The US can establish a land corridor through Balochistan to Afghanistan without Pakistan's permission or cooperation: after they attack US troops and air assets, a de-facto state of war will exist between the US and Pakistan, and the Pak army seems keen to play right into that position. (its as well that we pretend we are not already there on some levels). There is one view to winding down the war in Afghanistan and getting ISAF out, but not really all of them. Continue to train and assist the Afghans until whenever -2024 or something like that. There is another view that the fight against terror networks is far from finished, and we need to have a freer hand to go after the militant safe havens in Pakistan, and wherever they are found, including Iran, Lebanon, even Saudi Arabia and Yemen if needs be. This recent disengagement from Pakistan only helps us to accomplish that, so -
Yay for that, and merry christmas to all.

Posted by khurram at December 26, 2011 12:25 PM ET:

As said by Mr Mushahid hussain Syed " US deals pakistan as rainy day Girl friend". Inquiry on Osama hide out in Pakistan is in process. Many in Pakistan Believes that Osama killing was plotted by CIA. with in month after Osama Killing almost squarden of navy seals was shot dead by Taliban. Does it make sense? Country with all latest weaponary will fall into prey of Taliban. It was all about vanishing the proof.
Coming over to NATO killings... i just put forward one question.. What if this would have been done by Pakistan with Americans. What america would have done with pakistan. Is soldiers blood is even cheaper than animals in USA.
White house refused even from formal apology.. Why? Just because it will endanger Obamas political career...
Acyually USA wants slaves not friend

Posted by Mr T at December 27, 2011 2:24 PM ET:

Pakistan is not our friend. Never has been, probably never will be. The end of Pakistan may be the only solution to that problem.

On a higher level, Pakistan and Afghanistan are not the real threat. Islam is the real threat. These murderers don't come to Pakistan from around the world to fight for Afghanistan or Pakistan. They come to fight for Islam because the religion demands it from it's followers. The religion teaches they can not stop the jihad until the entire world is converted.

Convert, subjugate, or kill. This is not just the mantra of Islamic radicals. It is mainstream, taught in schools and madrassas, and supported by wealthy Muslims and the Muslim street around the world. It can not be more clear. It is written in the Koran and discussed ad naseum in the Koranic writings. Numerous Fatwas supporting violent jihad to establish a global caliphate have been issued by leading Muslim scholars A Muslim that does not support that goal is deluding themselves. They fight themselves for power in the global caliphate but the goal is still the same.

Until Islam is reformed and violence is denounced by all levels of Islamic scholars and codified in it's writings AND teachings, this scourge on earth will continue. It is not just in Pakistan and until our policy makers admit and understand the real culprit, they will continue to beat around the edges and not implement the correct policies.

In fact, It is Islam itself that must solve the problem. They currently have no incentive to fundamentally change the religion. Those who try are labeled apostates and routinely killed. Try being a non muslim in a muslim country. Something big may need to happen to start that transformation. Perhaps Armegeddon.

Posted by Neonmeat at December 28, 2011 8:30 AM ET:

@ Khurram
You say:
'Many in Pakistan Believes that Osama killing was plotted by CIA'
I do not see why this would surprise you, it is the job of the CIA to hunt and track enemies of the US, they found him and the SEALs killed him. Do you really think Pakistan does not have spies operating in the USA also? That is the whole point of Governments having covert agencies such as the ISI and CIA.
No the USA does not want slaves but like every nation on Earth it does want to secure and protect what it views as it interests in the world. For the USA this means a stable Afghanistan that cannot act as a haven for terror groups targetting the USA. Pakistan did and continues to do the same thing except they believe a weak Afghanistan controlled by their proxy force the Taliban to be better than a Democracy that is friendly to the west.

@ Llowell Schweigert
Can you link to the article referring to Frontier Corps firing at ISAF Helos as this simply has astounded me! I know nothing about weapons or military practices etc but to fire on a Foreign Military aircraft just seems like a death wish.

Posted by Azam at December 29, 2011 1:58 PM ET:

reading these comments and even a naive would understand what US thinks of Pakistan and its forces as allies. i for one who thought (once ) that this partnership will benefit both and will help the masses of Afghanistan and Pakistan was definitely disillusioned. if Americans think they can do with out help of Pakistan and vice versa and moreover think they can come in and punish Pakistan ! thats end of sane thinking i guess.

If everyone here is taking leave of sanity let me also state "Pakistan is no Iraq or Afghanistan mates, this won't be a jolly good war"