Political India: Engaging America

From The Hindu

The reported arrest of five men by Pakistan for collaborating with the CIA in its mission to track down Osama bin Laden, appears to have further shaken the deeply fraught relationship between the two countries' intelligence agencies, according to some experts here.

The reported detention of CIA informants comes at a time when Pakistan's intelligence agencies are facing unprecedented criticism following the events of May 2011 beginning with bin Laden being found in a cantonment area, the siege of naval airbase PNS Mehran and the killing of journalist Syed Saleem Shahzad.

With numerous intelligence specialists in Washington asking why Pakistan was focusing on alleged CIA informants instead of targeting al-Qaeda and Taliban fighters, concerns have also been expressed regarding the risks the growing chasm poses for continued drone strikes.

Even as these concerns mounted in Washington, Pakistan on Wednesday “strongly refuted” the report claiming that an Army Major was among the five Pakistani informants detained for spying on bin Laden in Abbottabad. “There is no army officer detained and the story is false and totally baseless,” said the Inter Services Public Relations in a statement.

Bruce Riedel, Senior Fellow at the Saban Center for Middle East Policy at the Brookings Institution, described U.S.-Pakistan relations as being “in a steep nose dive with the intelligence relationship leading the way.” Speaking to The Hindu he said that within the army there was a sense of deep humiliation owing to the U.S. strike against bin Laden, and “the officer corps is questioning its top leaders' competence and they face unprecedented public criticism”.

Mr. Riedel also alluded to heightened anti-Americanism in Pakistan, arguing that the Pakistani army shared “the anger and resentment the average Pakistani feels toward America, a sentiment stoked by every drone strike.”

Lisa Curtis of the Heritage Foundation, a former CIA officer like Mr. Riedel, said while “Pakistan's arrest of the CIA informants may add to ISI-CIA tensions, would not push the intelligence relationship to the breaking point.” In particular, Ms. Curtis told The Hindu the U.S. would be willing to accept “a high degree of tension in the relationship,” as it needed to track additional terrorists.

Ms. Curtis also raised the question of where the arrests of the informants would lead, saying, “If Pakistani authorities move to prosecute the individuals for espionage, this would put Pakistan in an awkward position of punishing individuals who helped track the world's most wanted terrorist.” A better course of action may be to quietly release the individuals and avoid further questions about loyalties, she added.

The drone programme in particular was said to have been at risk for several months, and continuing tensions might necessitate a shift in the location from which they were launched, from Pakistan to Afghanistan.

From The Hindu

Did not want to leave anything to chance

United States Navy SEALs were authorised by President Barack Obama to engage in a fierce fire-fight with the Pakistani military during their clandestine operation against al-Qaeda leader Osama Bin Laden on May 1, it has emerged.

As per an initial plan, the elite commando unit would have relied on backup from two combat-ready helicopters positioned on the Afghan side of the Durand line. However as it would take them 90 minutes or more to reach the primary strike team in Abbottabad, Mr. Obama stepped in and changed that plan at the last minute, insisting that the backup choppers and troops fly deep into Pakistani territory as well.

The President's decision to expand the size of the commando unit flying to Pakistan suggests that he was “willing to risk a military confrontation with a close ally in order to capture or kill the leader of al- Qaeda,” reports here said.

Even as U.S.-Pakistan relations sank to a new low in the aftermath of the raid, officials speaking on condition of anonymity said two further teams of specialists were on standby: “One to bury bin Laden if he was killed, and a second composed of lawyers, interrogators and translators in case he was captured alive.”

While sources said these teams were likely to have been stationed on the U.S. aircraft carrier Carl Vinson in the North Arabian Sea, they conceded that a running battle in Abbottabad between almost 80 U.S. commandos and the Pakistani law enforcement authorities would have “set off an even larger breach with the Pakistanis than has taken place”.

Speaking to the New York Times, one senior administration official said, “Their instructions were to avoid any confrontation if at all possible. But if they had to return fire to get out, they were authorised to do it.”

An official also explained that while the Americans may have been able to talk their way out of a potential confrontation with the Pakistani military or even local police, “given our difficult relationship with Pakistan right now, the President did not want to leave anything to chance.” It was this concern for the safety of the SEALs that prompted Mr. Obama to insist on “extra forces if they were necessary,” officials were reported as saying.

The NYT also quoted officials saying in planning for the possible capture of Osama it was decided they would take him aboard a Navy ship to “preclude battles over jurisdiction”.

The aim of that exercise would be to rapidly conduct a preliminary interrogation for information that might help prevent an imminent terror attack or pinpoint other al-Qaeda operatives.

The aftermath of Osama's killing has witnessed a spike in tensions between the U.S. and Pakistan, yet both sides have sought to limit the hostilities in some regards. Unconfirmed reports this week suggested that American investigators would soon be allowed to interview Osama's three widows, currently in Pakistani custody.

Simultaneously, the Obama administration put out a slew of statements affirming Pakistan's vital role as an ally in the U.S. continuing fight against terrorism.

However, even the publicly expressed resentment over the raid appeared to take on a theatrical air when some reports revealed that the former U.S. President, George W. Bush, and the former President of Pakistan, Pervez Musharraf, had struck a secret deal in late 2001 whereby a unilateral, clandestine U.S. strike against Osama on Pakistani soil would be permitted by Pakistani authorities.

The Guardian, quoting both serving and retired Pakistani and U.S. officials, reported that as part of this deal after the U.S. strike, “Pakistan would vociferously protest the incursion,” and while there would be a “hue and cry,” in Pakistan over the raid the Pakistani military establishment would not actually attempt to stop U.S. forces from conducting it.

From The Hindu

Even as the United States-Pakistan relationship has fallen to a dangerous low following the killing of al-Qaeda chief Osama bin Laden, U.S. President Barack Obama said in unprecedentedly candid remarks that he thought that “there had to be some sort of support network for bin Laden inside of Pakistan”.

Skirting the question of which specific agencies or individuals might have knowingly harboured the suspected terrorist for many years, he said, “We don't know whether there might have been some people inside of government, people outside of government, and that's something that we have to investigate, and more importantly, the Pakistani government has to investigate.”

In a relatively rare break from the general tenor of official comments, Mr. Obama also spoke of the geo-political sensitivities involved in an operation that entailed covert action in nuclear-armed Pakistan.

Noting that there would have been “significant consequences,” had bin Laden not been identified by the CIA at the compound, Mr. Obama said, “Obviously, we're going into the sovereign territory of another country and landing helicopters and conducting a military operation. If it turns out that it's a wealthy... prince from Dubai who's in this compound, and... we've sent Special Forces in — we've got problems.”

Discussing the links between Pakistan and terrorism in the interview, Mr. Obama was however careful to avoid implying that the ISI or any military establishment organisation was responsible for harbouring bin Laden.

White House National Security Advisor Tom Donilon also drew the focus of debate to counterterrorism cooperation with Pakistan, when he said in another interview over the weekend, “We have had difficulty with Pakistan, as I said, but we've also had to work very closely with Pakistan in our counter-terror efforts.”

While Mr. Donilon noted that more terrorists and extremists had been captured or killed in Pakistan than in any place in the world, Mr. Obama hinted that the flip side of the U.S.-Pakistan relationship was that a degree of mutual resentment may persist.

He said, “[Continuing counterterrorism cooperation] doesn't mean that there aren't going to be times where we're going be frustrated with Pakistanis. And frankly, there are going be times where they're frustrated with us.”

He added that there were not only individual terrorists in Pakistan but “also a climate inside of Pakistan that sometimes is deeply anti-American. And it makes it more difficult for us to be able to operate there effectively.”

From The Hindu

United States President Barack Obama put out yet another strong message that Osama Bin Laden's killing in Pakistan last Sunday was “justice done” to the victims of the 9/11 terror attacks when he travelled to the site of the attacks in New York City to lay a wreath at a memorial and spoke with the victims' families.

Three days after the nearly decade-long search for America's most wanted terrorist drew to an end, Mr. Obama laid a wreath of red, white and blue flowers at Ground Zero in Manhattan, and also spent time talking with fire-fighters, police officers and other first-responder teams that lost numerous colleagues in 2001.

Pursuing justice
Speaking at the “Pride of Midtown” Firehouse he reiterated a message that he, and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, had alluded to in the past few days — that the U.S. would pursue justice no matter how long it took. “What happened on Sunday, because of the courage of our military and the outstanding work of our intelligence, sent a message around the world, but also sent a message here back home that when we say we will never forget, we mean what we say,” he said.

After observing a few minutes' silence at around 1p.m. on a sunny afternoon in New York, the President said the Ground Zero site was symbolic of the “extraordinary sacrifice” that was made on that “terrible day almost ten years ago”.

He conceded, however that the actions of Sunday did not “bring back your friends that were lost”. Speaking to police officers at New York's First Precinct he also hinted that Osama's death would not be the end of terror threats, saying “there are still going to be threats out there and you are still going to be called on to take courageous actions and to remain vigilant.”

Meanwhile reports said that Mr. Obama would be meeting with members of the SEAL team that raided the Abbottabad compound where Osama was killed. On an upcoming visit to Fort Campbell, Kentucky, on Friday, an administration official was quoted as saying that the President would meet with Admiral William McRaven, a former SEAL and commander of the Joint Special Operations Command, which oversaw the successful raid.

While he was said to have already met with Admiral McRaven at the White House on Wednesday “to thank him personally in the Oval Office”, in Fort Campbell Mr. Obama “will have the opportunity to privately thank some of the special operators involved in the operation tomorrow at Fort Campbell”, an unnamed official was quoted as saying to the Washington Post.

From The Hindu

While last Sunday's covert operation resulting in the death of Osama bin Laden was initially portrayed as a capture-or-kill mission that faced significant resistance from the slain al-Qaeda chief and his guards, a slew of revisions in the official account of the event have raised suspicions that the United States forces might have killed numerous persons in the compound, including Osama, without sufficient provocation.

With the administration adopting an increasingly defensive tone since the earth-shaking events of May 1, earlier suggestions of Osama and his associates being killed “in a fire fight” were cast in doubt when officials admitted on Wednesday that that the only gunfire that U.S. Navy Seals faced during their raid came early on in the 40 minutes operation.

This early firing, the New York Times reported, quoting unnamed officials, occurred when Osama's courier, Abu Ahmed al-Kuwaiti, “opened fire from behind the door of the guesthouse” in the compound. In response the Seals not only shot and killed Kuwaiti but also a woman in the guesthouse.

After this point, “the Americans were never fired upon again,” the paper reported. This seriously conflicts with an earlier statement by White House Press Secretary Jay Carney, that U.S. forces “were engaged in a fire fight throughout the operation.” As indeed did another report, by MSNBC News, which reported that four of the five people killed during the operation were unarmed at the time and did not fire a shot.


The Obama administration has also contradicted its initial suggestion that Osama was killed in a “fire fight” after offering “resistance” – words used even by President Barack Obama when initially announcing Osama's death on Sunday night.

In its report the New York Times said that when the commandos reached the top floor of the house in the compound, they entered a room and saw Osama bin Laden with an AK-47 rifle and a Makarov pistol “in arm's reach,” and they “shot and killed him, as well as wounding a woman with him.”

White House Counter-terrorism Advisor John Brennan earlier offered a slightly more ambiguous account of Osama's “resistance,” saying, “Whether or not he got off any rounds, I quite frankly do not know… The President put a premium on making sure that our personnel were protected.”

On Tuesday Mr. Carney confirmed that Osama had been unarmed when he said, “Bin Laden's wife, rushed the U.S. assaulter and was shot in the leg but not killed. Bin Laden was then shot and killed. He was not armed.”

Other preliminary details released, such as the suggestion that Osama had used his wife as a “human shield” were also subsequently retracted, with some sources suggesting that these conflicting versions emerged due to the gradual release of information on the attack via debriefings with the assault team.

Even as the revisions in the official account of the incident hinted that the U.S. forces may have killed Osama with less-than-sufficient provocation, President Obama also announced that the “gory” post-death photographs of Osama would not be released by the White House for fear of becoming a new locus of propaganda by extremists.

From The Hindu

Leon Panetta, Director of the United States Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), has said that although the U.S. considered including other countries in the plan to launch an assault on Osama bin Laden's compound in Abbottabad the CIA ruled out participating with Pakistan at the outset because “it was decided that any effort to work with the Pakistanis could jeopardise the mission.”

Mr. Panetta said in a media interview that if the U.S. agency had shared such critical intelligence with Pakistan, “they might [have alerted] the targets.” Running a high-altitude bombing raid from B-2 bombers or launching a “direct shot” with cruise missiles were considered as an alternative, he said.

Those options were, however, ruled out due to the possibility of “too much collateral,” Mr. Panetta said to Time magazine. He pointed out, though, that the direct-shot option “[had still been] on the table [till] as late as last Thursday as the CIA and the White House grappled with how much risk to take in the mission.”

He said that he had worried about the potential consequences of involving Pakistan in the covert operation, saying: “What if you go down and you are in a fire-fight and the Pakistanis show up and start firing?”

From The Hindu

Despite the killing of Osama Bin Laden, al Qaeda leader and alleged mastermind of the 9/11 terror attacks, there is unlikely to be any major shift in the United States’ strategic approach in Afghanistan and Pakistan, experts here said.

Speaking to The Hindu, Richard Betts, Adjunct Senior Fellow for national security studies, at the influential Council on Foreign Relations, said “The symbolic significance of Bin Laden's death will lead uninformed people to think that the war against terrorists is over, and that the U.S. can withdraw from Afghanistan.”

However in reality, the issue in Afghanistan did not change much, Mr. Betts said, as both al Qaeda and the Taliban still existed, and the reasons for and against American persistence in the war in that region are about the same as they were before Bin Laden was killed.

Similarly Lisa Curtis, Senior Research Fellow at The Heritage Foundation, a think tank based in Washington, said that while the killing of Osama is a major step forward in the fight against global terrorism, “it does not represent the end of that fight.”

Speaking to The Hindu Ms. Curtis, formerly with the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, the Central Intelligence Agency and the State Department’s South Asia Bureau, said “We have won a battle, not the long war.”

Arguing that it was essential that the U.S. remained committed to the mission in Afghanistan, Ms. Curtis and other specialists in the region argued against any notion of large-scale troop withdrawals from Afghanistan.

She said that a precipitous withdrawal would allow Afghanistan to go back to Taliban rule and to serve as an international terrorist safe haven. “We need to build on the major gain we just achieved by taking Osama... off the battlefield, not squander it by announcing we are withdrawing from Afghanistan,” Ms. Curtis added.

From The Hindu

The goodwill accruing to United States President Barack Obama for his administration's achievement in tracking down and killing al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden will certainly yield tangible benefits for him in domestic politics but may not make a decisive difference to his prospects in the presidential elections of November 2012, experts here concurred.

In comments to The Hindu, William Galston, an expert on domestic politics and a former policy adviser to President Bill Clinton, said Mr. Obama's standing with the public as a strong leader had been in “pretty steady decline,” and there was reason to expect that Osama's killing would help “re-strengthen” the President in this regard.

Yet, Mr. Galston said, even if Mr. Obama's overall standing benefited from a short-term boost in popularity, it was “not likely to last long,” if the history of other presidencies had any lessons to offer about initial public enthusiasm subsiding as the President's term in office progressed.

While experts concurred that the administration's actions to capitalise on this achievement could make a significant difference in the near term, they also said that “seizing the moment would imply that Mr. Obama needs to take some risks,” similar to the risks he took in deciding to go after Osama. This may include acceding to demands that are unpopular within his party, according to sources.

Some scholars of U.S. domestic politics did emphasise that Osama's death would help vindicate the President's governance style, and give “credence to patient tenacious approach.”

Speaking to The Hindu, Pietro Nivola, Senior Fellow of governance studies at the Brookings Institution, said, “Democrats have had difficulty establishing their credentials as being strong on national security and [Osama's death] helps establish their bona fide in that realm.”

He further said that in terms of the Republican Party's options, it would become “harder for them to critique [Mr. Obama] as vacillating ... so the GOP will be better off sticking to domestic economic issues and tone down their complaints about the administration's foreign policy.”

Similar to Mr. Galston, Mr. Nivola agreed that while Osama's death would likely give the President a “temporary boost and strengthen his hand in the forthcoming negotiations,” over the deficit and tax cuts, the “staying power” of such achievements was not clear. For example the impact of the former President, George W. Bush's resounding success in winning the Gulf war similarly did not last long, Mr. Nivola suggested.

It would certainly give the President good cover on national security issues going into the 2012 elections and have “enduring value” in that regard, but it was too early to tell whether it will decisively alter electoral prospects that year.

From The Hindu

U.S. President emphasises that America is not at war with Islam

On a day when the United States basked in the glory of its accomplishment in its decade-long war on terror, U.S. President Barack Obama sought to temper the triumphalism over the killing of Osama bin Laden by placing victims of the 9/11 attacks in the spotlight, and also by emphasising that America was not at war with Islam.

Shortly after he announced Osama's killing in a residential compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan, large crowds of revellers gathered outside the White House here and near Ground Zero in New York City, waving the American flag and chanting “USA, USA!” and “Yes, we can!”

While many of those speaking to the media expressed joy, a sense of justice delivered or closure, hearing the news of Osama's death, Mr. Obama sought to temper the emotional outpourings, cautioning, “We must also reaffirm that the U.S. is not – and never will be – at war with Islam.”

He said that he had made it clear, just as Mr. Bush did shortly after 9/11, that “bin Laden was not a Muslim leader; he was a mass murderer of Muslims.” Indeed, the al-Qaeda has slaughtered scores of Muslims in many countries, Mr. Obama said.

Yet the President firmly underscored the significance of bin Laden's killing for the families of those killed on September 11, 2001. He said: “It was nearly ten years ago that a bright September day was darkened by the worst attack on the American people in our history. The images of 9/11 are seared into our national memory – hijacked planes cutting through a cloudless September sky; the Twin Towers collapsing to the ground; black smoke billowing up from the Pentagon; the wreckage of Flight 93 in Shanksville, Pennsylvania, where the actions of heroic citizens saved even more heartbreak and destruction.”

Mr. Obama also said that while Americans understood the costs of war they would be relentless in defence of their citizens and “our friends and allies.”

“On nights like this one, we can say to those families who have lost loved ones to al-Qaeda's terror: Justice has been done,” he said.

There was unequivocal and bipartisan praise for the Obama administration's perseverance in tracking down and killing bin Laden. Former Presidents George W. Bush and Bill Clinton — also associated with pursuing bin Laden for terror attacks on U.S. soil — hailed his killing as justice delivered.

In a statement Mr. Clinton said, “I congratulate the President, the National Security team and the members of our armed forces on bringing Osama bin Laden to justice.” Mr. Bush, who was in office during the 9/11 attacks, said: “This momentous achievement marks a victory for America, for people who seek peace around the world, and for all those who lost loved ones on September 11, 2001.”

He added a strong message to those who would attack the U.S., saying: “The fight against terror goes on, but tonight America has sent an unmistakable message: No matter how long it takes, justice will be done.”

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton issued a similar statement saying that the death of bin Laden sent a message to the Taliban in Afghanistan that “you cannot wait us out. You cannot defeat us. But you can make the choice to abandon the al-Qaeda” and participate in a peaceful political process. She added that some doubted bin Laden would ever be caught, but “this is America... We persevere, and we get the job done.”

John Boehner, U.S. House Speaker and Republican of Ohio, said: “This is...a victory in our continued fight against the al-Qaeda and radical extremism around the world. We continue to face a complex and evolving terrorist threat, and it is important that we remain vigilant in our efforts.”

Former Republican Vice President Dick Cheney had direct words of praise for Mr. Obama when he said: “I also want to congratulate President Obama and the members of his National Security team. At this moment when bin Laden has been brought to justice, we especially remember the sacrifice of the young Americans who've paid the ultimate price in the defence of the nation, as well as the nearly 3000 Americans who lost their lives on 9/11.”

While the economic recovery and job creation are likely to continue to be key issues for the presidential elections in November 2012, many observers noted that the killing of bin Laden marked a major achievement for the Obama administration's continued war on terror and would likely improve Mr. Obama's odds of re-election significantly.