Pakistan again tips off terrorists before raids

Stop me if you heard this one before. From The Associated Press:

US officials say Pakistan has apparently tipped off militants at two more bomb-building factories in its tribal areas. The officials say that allowed the militants to flee after U.S. intelligence shared the locations with the Pakistani government.

One U.S. official said this was intended to give Pakistan another chance to build trust after the U.S. raid on May 2 that killed Osama bin Laden in Abbottabad.

As the AP notes, that makes it four times in the past several weeks that Pakistani officials have tipped off terrorist groups before conducting Potemkin raids based on US intelligence. That Onion parody is beginning to look more and more like the truth as each day passes.

Bill Roggio is a Senior Fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies and the Editor of FDD's Long War Journal.

Are you a dedicated reader of FDD's Long War Journal? Has our research benefitted you or your team over the years? Support our independent reporting and analysis today by considering a one-time or monthly donation. Thanks for reading! You can make a tax-deductible donation here.

Tags: , ,

18 Comments

  • Charu says:

    It isn’t a parody any longer; it is a factual representation. It also indicates how insane our policy is towards Pakistan… repeating the same thing over and over and expecting a different result. OTOH, we may be laying the case for a total breakup with this terrorist rogue state. I only hope that we have more in mind than just walking away. The soldiers who fought and died to clear Afghanistan of al Qaeda deserve more.

  • Villiger says:

    Charu,
    There is NO WAY that the US can just walk away from Pakistan. The two countries are locked in a tight embrace. This bitter embrace will only end when one or the other is strangled. As we have discussed before, a likely total break-up of Pakistan at some point.
    Just in case you missed Gates’ last press conference, here’s a link



    What is clear to me from the discussion is that Pak’s nuclear weapons is a key strategic priority, right on top up there on the list.
    The way i interpret this is that this is THE key objective. Afghanistan as Bill said (different context) is a side show. The Talibans come and go, even nation states come and go but nukes are forever. In the meantime, there’s a pretty decent effort underway in Af to break the Taliban movement.
    In Pakistan, admittedly, its frustrating. Even Kayani we now know has limits. The unwilling/unable conundrum in Pak stands solved. Their internal fissures are too sharp and deep. They are past the tipping point and its too late to retrieve and come clean even if they now wanted to.
    So to some degree we have to let nature take its course.
    Also strategies and tactics related to dismantling of the Pak State and disengagement of their nukes are by definition covert–and there lies an information gap, adding to the frustration of the lay observer.

  • Ram says:

    What will it take for US to change its relationship with Pakistan? Internally many people Pak seem to be questioning their own Army, but I doubt it will lead to change unless more pressure is put on their Army. Unfortunately I dont think anyone knows how to get Pakistan Army to change its ways. Sooner the US stops using carrots & more stick with Pakistan the more the likelihood that change will come sooner than later.

  • JZarris says:

    Umm, ok. I’d say we’ve done enough relationship mending and its time to start hitting those sites again…without warning.

  • In physics there is a concept called inertia. Uncle Newton, not to be confused with Sam, refined this idea.
    It basically means that a body

  • Tim says:

    I can remember the times when Pakistani leaders used to make trips every month to beg for food and aid to the US. Now, US officials travel to Islamabad every month to appeal for help in fighting a bunch of rag-tag, illiterate terrorists. Cruel times indeed…..

  • Very very depressing state of foreign affairs with Pakistan. You’d think they would learn but they don’t. At some point this blatant disregard for assisting our efforts will come to a boil. Then I hope a purge of the Pakistan military from top to bottom occurs with jail time for the violators of our trust. I hope there is there room in Guantanamo for these people.

  • Al says:

    Get out now. NO more money.
    Cut all ties with Karzai and Pakistan.
    Place sanctions on both countries.
    Continue and increase drone strikes.
    Get out some daisy cutters & MOABs to hit large camps.
    Work closely with India.
    Take out Pakistan nuke weapons and sites.
    We (CIA) must know just exactly where thay are. If we think military action vs. Iran may be justified, it is more-so vs. Pakistan.

  • sports says:

    I don’t think its appropriate to “cut and run” from either of the Stans.
    I think US policy should be to get even tougher with Pakistan and simply begin willing our way even if it means unilateral decisions to get the job done once and for all.
    Pakistan is probably ready to implode into anarchy. Do I feel sorry for them…no, not today…you reap what you sow.

  • Vienna,19-06-2011
    Pakistani army units move in tribal areas with
    tribal elders “permission”. This permission is
    given to Pakistani army by the elders after
    they ensure evacuation of the training camps
    or weapons fabrics.A communication and loyalty
    chain confirmed by agreements.
    That means Pakistani forces are not sovereign
    in their claimed sovereign territory of no man
    border lands on the west.The new trend that insurgents attacks from Afghanistan into
    Pakistani side of the Durand Line appears to
    be the answer.
    There is unpleasantness there. Pakistan has
    lodged protests both with the Afghanistan and
    with the United States.It appears there would
    be escalation of conflict.
    Who has better resources prevails. Pakistan is
    yet to see this reality.
    -Kulamarva Balakrishna

  • JRP says:

    The idea that we could take out Pakistan’s Nuclear Arsenal is 100% impractical. Every nuclear-armed nation knows better than to clump all its Nukes in one location where all could be destroyed in one attack.
    For a long time now I’ve advocated what I feel to be the best way of dealing with Pakistan; namely, to do with Pakistan what President J.F. Kennedy did with Cuba/USSR back in the autumn of 1962 during the Cuban Missile Crisis.
    Pres. Kennedy issued a televised warning, not an illegal threat, but a lawful warning, that any strike on U.S. soil from Cuba would be deemed to have been launched from the Soviet Union.
    President Obama should do likewise with Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal . . . declaring that any nuclear detonation on U.S. soil will be deemed to have been Pakistani in origin, and without further proof, based upon Pakistan’s intransigence in the War on Terror.
    The bottom line is that if you go out of your way to make yourself one of the usual suspects, you deserve to be rounded up.
    In addition to the aforesaid declaration of policy, the U.S. should cut off further funding to Pakistan and declare Pakistan’s Federally Administered Tribal Areas as lands we no longer recognize as being under the sovereignty of the Pakistani State. This will free up money to move troops into FATA in strength for the purpose of further squeezing Taliban/AQ.
    Warning/aid end/FATA Sovereign disconnent . . . That is my RX for dealing with Pakistan.

  • Steve m. says:

    I think it is time to stop blaming Pakistan, to quote the great poet GWB “Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice……………………… you’re not gonna fool me again”!

  • blert says:

    JRP…
    Pakistan is a very small country compared to the USA or USSR.
    Further, she dare not place her atomics all that close to India, nor in the badlands in the west.
    So her only practical locations for her atomics is within the Punjabi dominated areas of the country.
    Abbottabad would be an extremely likely location for some of her atomics. It’s already a militarized city — and always has elite security troops on hand, always.
    All the other candidates will have a similar profile.
    Major air bases are very UNLIKELY locations for atomics. They are missile targets for sure.
    Pakistan’s obsession with rockets tells all that atomics will be sent by rocket — all of them.
    She is also a first-use power, per Kayani.
    The Kennedy warning occurred when America was literally invulnerable to atomic attack. Russia, in 1963, had only one rocket base able to strike America — with just three pads — and requiring 24 hours to launch! ( From Estonia ! )
    Her weapons were so heavy that she couldn’t even fly them to America one-way! Since it was SAC policy to shoot down incoming bombers, over the arctic wastes, with atomic AA missiles… none could realistically get through.
    Today, any such utterance would trigger a sneak attack by China — who would have zero trouble mimicking Pakistan.
    It can’t possibly work.

  • My2Cents says:

    It’s a commonplace observation that history repeats itself, first as tragedy and then as farce. — Karl Marx
    Question

  • naresh c. says:

    Without the American aid and further IMF loans, Pakistan will enter hyperinflation sooner than people think. The deficits are just too high. Price controls will follow hyperinflation and shortages and starvation will follow price controls. And riots will follow starvation. It is going to be a disaster. Unfortunately, one has to stand helpless. One cannot prevent what one can foresee.
    Pakistanis cannot give up Jihad. Jihad is their holy duty.
    And sooner or later Americans will cut the aid. The only question is whether it takes five years or ten years or whether it happens sooner.

  • JRP says:

    @ Blert . . . I’m not worried about the Pakistani State proper launching Nukes at us or smuggling them into U.S. territory or U.S. territorial waters. What worries me is how to prevent Al Qaeda from acquiring nuclear bombs by Gift, Purchase, or Theft and smuggling them into the U.S. or off our shores. That’s the big concern. That’s everybody’s big concern.
    I’m open-minded . . . Do you have any ideas as to ways to prevent the above from occurring? Assuming you agree with my premise?
    It’s easy to point out the flaws in any idea. Moreover I couldn’t care less who gets credit for the idea that solves the problem. What is the solution for preventing AQ from handing us a Nuke-Nine11 down the road?
    Right now the media is filled with stories about a peace deal with the Taliban so we can exit Afghanistan. All that’s going to lead to is the Taliban tide washing back into the country and again becoming a hospitable host to Al Qaeda.
    No one seems willing to acknowledge what may be the new normal in U.S. National Security; namely, the need to wage low-level hot war in perpetuity. In other words, never getting out of the AfPak region for so long as Guerilla Groups like Al Qaeda or Nation States like Iran continue to pursue their policy of our national destruction.

  • villiger says:

    Blert, interesting analysis. But all of it is in the realm of chess being the only game on the board. Which is why a game of dominoes should also begin in all seriousness in parallel to chess. One game that Pakistan definitely doesn’t want to play is dominoes, unless of course its for Kashmir, which for Pak is now but a dream.
    I think the US is not playing the ‘diplomatic’ (read non-military) options very well. Its time for Hillary to go and for fresh-blood to be infused into the mix of options.
    Whatever now comes out of Pakistan is not going to be a pretty sight.
    ==
    JRP, there is no such thing as 100% impractical when options have not been fully explored. Again, that includes the UN where Pak’s nukes are not even a subject for discussion and other ‘diplomatic’ options. The final answers will obviously be a combination of diplomacy and military, ie cash/threats/embargoes/special ops/enhanced intnl alliances/some combination of events incl Pashtunistan, Baluchistan, dismissing Pak’s sovereignty in FATA etc etc.
    The time is not right but i bet you scenarios are being thought through in DC.
    Nothing is risk-free, including the option of benign neglect.
    Its easy to forget that part of the reason, a big part, of being in that area is because of Pak’s weapons. Even if this is not repeated daily, for obvious reasons, it is nonetheless a fundamental part of the end-game.

  • Paul D says:

    Good read below into the Pak army pre and post 911 who are from Top to bottom ISLAMIST!
    //www.historycommons.org/entity.jsp?entity=muzaffar_usmani&printerfriendly=true

Iraq

Islamic state

Syria

Aqap

Al shabaab

Boko Haram

Isis