Washington,May 30: THE FAILED Times Square bombing plot on May 1 has come back to haunt Pakistan.
Senior Pentagon officials were quoted by The Washington Post on Saturday as saying that the US military is looking at options for a unilateral strike in Pakistan if a successful terrorist strike on US soil were to be traced back to the country.
“ Planning has been reinvigorated in the wake of Times Square,” the paper quoted an unnamed official as saying.
The paper said ties between the alleged Times Square bomber, Faisal Shahzad, and elements of the Pakistani Taliban “ have sharpened the Obama administration’s need for retaliatory options” according to the officials quoted. It added: “ They ( the officials) stressed that a U. S. reprisal would be contemplated only under extreme circumstances, such as a catastrophic attack that leaves President Obama convinced that the ongoing campaign of CIA drone strikes is insufficient.” This admission comes only three weeks after US secretary of state Hillary Clinton said on CBS, a US news television channel that “ If, heaven forbid, an attack like this that we can trace back to Pakistan were to have been successful, there would be very severe consequences.” US President Barack Obama had stressed during his election campaign that if elected, he would be willing to order strikes in Pakistan.
In what seems to be a well- coordinated pressure build- up by the Obama administration to pressure Pakistan into acting against the terror outfits based inside its territory, the US President had sent national security adviser James L. Jones and CIA director Leon Panetta to Islamabad this month.
The Los Angeles Times had reported on May 26 that, “ Senior US officials used an urgent meeting with Pakistan’s President to present a dossier on terrorism suspect Faisal Shahzad, including a detailed chart describing his contacts with the Pakistani Taliban before his attempt to detonate an explosives- laden vehicle in New York City’s Times Square.” It was more of a warning than just a meeting between officials of two allies.
The warning was reportedly delivered to both Pakistan President Asif Ali Zardari and Army chief General Ashfaq Kayani.
Former Indian chief of Army staff Gen. V. P. Malik said this warning was “ meant to pressure the security establishment in Pakistan to act ( against the terrorists) and dismantle the terror infrastructure inside its territory.”
The Washington Post reported that the American options “ for potential retaliatory action rely mainly on air and missile strikes, but could also employ small teams of US Special Operations troops already positioned along the border with Afghanistan”. US military officials have, over the last several years, moved away from a “ large, punitive response to more measured plans meant to deliver retaliatory blows against specific militant groups”.
The paper quoted one official as saying that “ there is a broad consensus in the US military that airstrikes would at best erode the threat posed by al- Qaeda and its affiliates, and risk an irreparable rupture in the US relationship with Pakistan”. Over the years, US special operations teams in Afghanistan have demanded “ wider latitude” to carry out raids across the border into Pakistan. According to The Washington Post , “ They have argued that the CIA drone strikes do not yield prisoners or other opportunities to gather intelligence.
But a 2008 US helicopter raid against a target in Pakistan prompted protests from officials in Islamabad who oppose allowing US soldiers to operate within their country.” US military protocol says the CIA can strike targets in Pakistan without approval from the White House. According to The Washington Post , military forces, too, are authorised to carry out unilateral strikes in Pakistan but “ only if solid intelligence were to surface on any of three highvalue targets: al- Qaeda leaders Osama bin Laden and Ayman al- Zawahiri, or Taliban chief Mohammad Omar. But even in those cases, the military would need higher- level approval.” The paper quoted a senior Pentagon official as saying that, “ The bottom line is you have to have information about targets to do something [ and] we have a process that remains cumbersome.
If something happens, we have to confirm who did it and where it came from. People want to be as precise as possible to be punitive.” It added that US spy agencies have engaged in a major buildup inside Pakistan over the past year.
“ The CIA has increased the pace of drone strikes against al- Qaeda affiliates, a campaign supported by the arrival of new surveillance and eavesdropping technology deployed by the National Security Agency,” the paper said.
Meanwhile, in India, former national security adviser Brajesh Mishra said the US seems serious about taking action this time.
“ This is the second such warning in recent times,” he said. “ If there is an attack in the US that is traced back to Pakistan, obviously Washington will act.” Strategic affairs expert Commodore ( retd) Uday Bhaskar added: “ Today, the US is facing the same dilemma India has faced for many years, that is, how to deal with a Pakistan that has nuclear weapons and has a revisionist agenda. It has to maintain restraint but at the same time, it is concerned about securing nuclear weapons to prevent them from falling into wrong hands.” Military expert Brigadier ( retd) Gurmeet Kanwal said an American retaliation for an attack in case a Pakistani connection is established will go down well with the domestic audience in the US. But Pakistan is the key to US military supplies reaching Afghanistan.
Therefore, the warning is more of political rhetoric and that is unlikely to be translated into military realities.”