WikiLeaks cables: US special forces working inside Pakistan

[Turborama]

Source: The Guardian

US embassy cables reveal elite American troops secretly embedded with Pakistan military to hunt down militants

Declan Walsh in Islamabad
guardian.co.uk, Tuesday November 30 2010 21.30 GMT

Small teams of US special forces soldiers have been secretly embedded with Pakistani military forces in the tribal belt, helping to hunt down Taliban and al-Qaida fighters and co-ordinate drone strikes, the embassy cables reveal.

The numbers involved are small – just 16 soldiers in October 2009 – but the deployment is of immense political significance, described in a cable that provides an unprecedented glimpse into covert American operations in the world's most violent al-Qaida hotbed.

The first special forces team of four soldiers was deployed to an old British colonial fort in the northern half of the tribal belt in September 2009, helping Frontier Corps paramilitaries to carry out artillery strikes on a militant base. A month later, two more teams of six soldiers each were deployed to Pakistani army bases in North and South Waziristan, a lawless warren of mountains considered to be the global headquarters of al-Qaida.

Their job was to provide "intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance" support – ISR in military jargon – "general operational advice" and to help set up a live satellite feed from American drones flying overhead, presumably CIA-operated Predator and Reaper aircraft.

Read more: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/nov/30/wikileaks-cables-us-forces-embedded-pakistan

---

There have been suspicions about this in the past, but this time it's from the horses mouth, as it were....


US embassy cables: Pakistan approves secret US special forces deployment

guardian.co.uk, Tuesday 30 November 2010 21.30 GMT

Friday, 09 October 2009, 07:25
S E C R E T SECTION 01 OF 02 ISLAMABAD 002449
SIPDIS
EO 12958 DECL: 10/05/2034
TAGS PREL, PGOV, PTER, MOPS, PK
SUBJECT: (S) PAKISTAN ARMY GHQ AGAIN APPROVES EMBEDDING
U.S. SPECIAL FORCES PERSONNEL TO SUPPORT MILITARY OPERATIONS
REF: ISLAMABAD 2116
Classified By: Ambassador Anne W. Patterson, Reasons 1.4 (a)(b)(c), and (d)

1. (S) Summary: The Pakistani Army has for just the second time approved deployment of U.S. special operation elements to support Pakistani military operations. The first deployment, with SOC(FWD)-PAK elements embedded with the Frontier Corps in XXXXXXXXXXXX, occurred in September (reftel). Previously, the Pakistani military leadership adamantly opposed letting us embed our special operations personnel with their military forces. The developments of the past two months thus appear to represent a sea change in their thinking. End Summary.

2. (S) Pakistan Army General Headquarters (GHQ) informed ODRP that it approved a request from the Army's 11 Corps Commander, Lt. General Masood Aslam, for U.S. SOC(FWD)-PAK personnel to deploy to XXXXXXXXXXXX South Waziristan and XXXXXXXXXXXX North Waziristan, in the FATA, in order to provide intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) support and general operational advice to the 11 Corps' XXXXXXXXXXXX. The 11 Corps had informally approached ODRP about our providing such support approximately one week ago; ODRP responded positively.

3. (S) SOC(FWD)-PAK support to 11 Corps would be at the XXXXXXXXXXXX and would include a live downlink of unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) full motion video. SOC(FWD)-PAK's initial CONOPs envision deployment of six personnel each to XXXXXXXXXXXX. In order to finalize our planning and obtain formal go-ahead from CENTCOM, ODRP has requested additional information on the timing and purpose of the 11 Corps' planned military operations from Brigadier General Amjad Shabbir, the Army's Director General of Military Operations (DGMO).

4. (S) This is just the second time that GHQ has approved deployment of U.S. special operations elements to support Pakistani military operations. In September 2009, four SOC(FWD)-PAK personnel who were embedded with the Frontier Corps (FC) at XXXXXXXXXXXX in the FATA, provided ISR for an FC operation (reftel). This support was highly successful, enabling the FC to execute a precise and effective artillery strike on an enemy location.

5. (S) In recent days, the FC informally approached ODRP for a repeat deployment of SOC(FWD)-PAK personnel to XXXXXXXXXXXX. SOC(FWD)-PAK is preparing a CONOP while the FC obtains approval from GHQ.

6. (S) Comment: U.S. special operation elements have been in Pakistan for more than a year, but were largely limited to a training role. The Pakistani Army leadership previously adamantly opposed letting us embed U.S. Special Operations Forces (SOF) with their military forces to support their operations. The recent approval by GHQ -- almost certainly with the personal consent of Chief of Army Staff General Kayani -- for SOC(FWD)-PAK deployments to XXXXXXXXXXXX appears to represent a sea change in Pakistani thinking. Patient relationship-building with the military is the key factor that has brought us to this point. The Pakistanis are increasingly confident that we do not have ulterior motives in assisting their operations. In addition, the direct recipients of SOC(FWD)-PAK training appear to have recognized the potential benefits of bringing U.S. SOF personnel into the field with them for operational advice and other support. In addition, the success of the initial deployment to XXXXXXXXXXXX likely helped catalyze the follow-up requests for new and repeat support.

7. (S) Comment Continued: These deployments are highly politically sensitive because of widely-held concerns among the public about Pakistani sovereignty and opposition to allowing foreign military forces to operate in any fashion on Pakistani soil. Should these developments and/or related matters receive any coverage in the Pakistani or U.S. media, the Pakistani military will likely stop making requests for such assistance. End Comment.

ISLAMABAD 00002449 002 OF 002

PATTERSON

From: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/us-embassy-cables-documents/229065

[msongs]

1. like this isnt known or suspected by 2 billion people already lol nt

[Autumn]

2. Like that's news n/t

[bluedigger]

3. I'm shocked! Shocked I say.

At least we tried to blow some bad guys up...

[somone]

4. We're paying billions for that privilege

[Ikonoklast]

5. "Shocked, shocked I tell you!"

[KoKo]

6. Glad to see what we DU'ers have seen from reports from NON-MSM-Cable Lack of Reporting...

I think this is one of the TOP REVELEATIONS BY WIKI. WE HAVE INVADED PAKISTAN...and EXTENDED THE WAR INTO A THIRD THEATER. Rumsfeld/Cheney always talked about the WAR THEATERS!

SEEMS our President DEM has bought into the PNAC GROUP's MISSION of WAR FOR EVER ...and MANY THEATERS for WAR!

What's Next after Iraq/Afghanistan/Pakistan/Yemen? BTW...WIKI has a REVELATION that we are DRONE ATTACKING YEMEN killing CIVILIANS, TOO! How many more THEATERS OF WAR will the NEO-CONS ...CON OUR DEMOCRATIC PRESIDENT INTO? HOW MANY IS "TOO MANY?" Or, does no one care when they are being X-ray SCANNED and GROPED in "Intensive Searches" that far too many are only too happy to succumb to?

WHEN WILL THINGS GO.........TOO FAR?

[Mhak]

7. I'm glad to see so far nobody is surprised.

This is hardly "wikileaks" worthy.

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

8. We have people supporting/advising Pakistani troops?

This is not quite the same as "U.S. invades Pakistan".

Sorta not news.

:hi:

[daleo]

9. It's how Viet Nam started

And confirmation of suspicions is always news. It takes away plausible deniability.

[Javaman]

10. Cambodia redux

to anyone who is paying attention or old enough to remember.

[Turborama]

11. Pakistan 'privately approved' US drone strikes while publicly condemning them: Wikileaks

Source: ANI

The Pakistan government privately approved US drone strikes while publicly condemning the CIA's covert raids, according to diplomatic cables posted whistle-blower website Wikileaks.

=snip=

A second cable describes the US envoy's 2008 meeting with Pakistan Prime Minister Syed Yousaf Raza Gilani, in which he brushed aside the concerns about the use of Predator drones against targets in the tribal areas, and gave an insight into how he would deny any co-operation.

"I don't care if they do it as long as they get the right people. We'll protest in the National Assembly and then ignore it," he told Patterson.

The Pakistani government however dismissed the Wikileaks claims, with a spokesman for Gilani saying, "Our Prime Minister has made a very clear statement questioning the authenticity of these documents. There's nothing more to say."

Read more: http://www.karachinews.net/story/714338

[aquart]

12. Uh huh. So?

This is NORMAL.

[andym]

13. This won't go over well with nationalists in Pakistan.

There will be protests over this. Wonder if it could bring down their government.

[Igel]

14. Zardari?

Probably not. He still has plausible deniability.

In fact, he may rather like being able to squelch Kayani, if Kayani can't be sufficiently convincing that some underling took it upon himself to authorize the US presence. A lot of Pakistani politics involves making sure that you just appear to suck less than everybody else. Kayani doesn't look too sucky, therefore he has to be torn down. It makes for a delightfully cynical system in which chaos is possible at any time, nobody can hardly do anything because everybody else is supposed to be doing everything, and the goal is to simply limit your bad press. "Good press" comes not from being good, but from being better than others--and if they're foreigners or some Other, all the better. It's quite dysfunctional. (Give us 5 years.)

What it will do is make it harder for anybody to deal effectively with the Pak Taliban folk, who haven't exactly vanished. They will kill and oppress, and do so more, in all likelihood, as a result of this leak. The Army will be weakened; Zardari will not be rehabilitated. And the Taliban will look less sucky than both of them, at least for a while.

Of course, Assange has plausible deniability since few acts can be uniquely attributed to any single motivation or cause, outs can always be found, some way to say that the real cause isn't the apparent or even the cause claimed by the perp can always be adduced. That's the standard he's to be held to--guilty beyond any possible doubt.

Tricksters create havoc. They usually have some enablers, sort of buffoons-in-training.