Σπάζοντας ειδήσεις | Φόρουμ | Βρετανικές ειδήσεις | ΑΜΕΡΙΚΑΝΙΚΕΣ ειδήσεις | Παγκόσμιες ειδήσεις | Πολιτικές ειδήσεις | Ειδήσεις sci-τεχνολογία | Ειδήσεις πολέμου & τρομοκρατίας | Αθλητικές ειδήσεις | Πολυμέσα | Καθορισμένη αρχική σελίδα

Πέμπτη, 31η Μαΐου 2007

Το Πακιστάν λαμβάνει τις μετα-πιό 9/11 ΗΠΑ. η στρατιωτική χρηματοδότηση, όμως έχει αποτύχει να ανακαλύψει το Al Qaeda, Taliban ηγέτες

Οχυρό Sarah

Ο νικητής δραπέτη της φυλής μετα-9/11 για τις νέες ΗΠΑ. τα στρατιωτικά δολάρια ενίσχυσης είναι Πακιστάν, αλλά πού τα χρήματα πήγαν;

Τα ενεργά στελέχη των ανθρώπινων δικαιωμάτων, οι κριτικοί της πακιστανικών κυβέρνησης και των μελών του συνεδρίου όλη η ανάγκη που ξέρει, αλλά το μεγαλύτερο μέρος των χρημάτων - που συμπληρώνουν συνολικά στα δισεκατομμύρια - ήρθαν μέσω ενός προγράμματος αμυντικού τμήματος υποκείμενου σε ουσιαστικά καμία του Κογκρέσου παράλειψη.

Αυτή είναι μια σημαντική εύρεση ενός περισσότερο από έτους έρευνας από το κέντρο για τη διεθνή κοινοπραξία της δημόσιας ακεραιότητας των εξεταστικών δημοσιογράφων (ICIJ). ΗΠΑ. η στρατιωτική ενίσχυση στο Πακιστάν από 11 Σεπτεμβρίου 2001, τρομοκρατικές επιθέσεις περιλαμβάνει σχεδόν $5 δισεκατομμύρια στα Ταμεία υποστήριξης συνασπισμού, ένα πρόγραμμα που ελέγχεται από το αμυντικό τμήμα για να επιστρέψει στους βασικούς συμμάχους στο σφαιρικό πόλεμο στον τρόμο. Οι εκθέσεις Πενταγώνου που ICIJ έλαβε μέσω των αιτημάτων νόμων ελευθερίας των πληροφοριών δείχνουν ότι το Πακιστάν είναι το αριθ. 1 παραλήπτης αυτών των κεφαλαίων - που λαμβάνουν περισσότερες από 10 φορές το ποσό που πήγε στο αριθ. 2 παραλήπτης, Πολωνία - και ότι υπάρχει πενιχρή τεκμηρίωση για το πώς τα χρήματα χρησιμοποιήθηκαν.

Το Πακιστάν ωφελήθηκε επίσης από άλλους μηχανισμούς χρηματοδότησης που οργανώθηκαν στη συνέπεια των 2001 επιθέσεων. Στα τρία έτη μετά από τις επιθέσεις, το Πακιστάν ήταν ο τρίτος μεγαλύτερος παραλήπτης του νέου περιφερειακού προγράμματος υποτροφίας αμυντικών αντιτρομοκρατιών του Πενταγώνου, με σκοπό να εκπαιδεύσει τις ξένες δυνάμεις στις τεχνικές αντιτρομοκρατιών. Περισσότερα από $23 εκατομμύρια καθορίστηκαν για το Πακιστάν φορολογικό το 2006 για «τη βελτίωση των ικανοτήτων απεργίας αντιτρομοκρατιών» στο πλαίσιο ενός άλλου νέου προγράμματος Πενταγώνου καλούμενου colloquially η παράγραφος 1206 εκπαιδευτικός, η οποία επιτρέπει στο Πεντάγωνο για να χρησιμοποιήσει μια μερίδα της ετήσιας χρηματοδότησής της από το συνέδριο για να εκπαιδεύσει και να εξοπλίσει τους ξένους στρατιωτικούς. Το Πακιστάν τελείωσε πρώτα στη φυλή για αυτήν την νέα Πεντάγωνο-ελεγχόμενη κατάρτιση.

Τα στοιχεία ICIJ δείχνουν ότι όταν όλες ΗΠΑ. τα προγράμματα συνδυάζονται, αύξηση του Πακιστάν στις ΗΠΑ. η στρατιωτική ενίσχυση στα τρία έτη μετά από το 9/11 είναι ζαλίζοντας 45.000 τοις εκατό, που αυξάνονται από ακριβώς $9 εκατομμύρια στα τρία έτη πριν από τις επιθέσεις σε περισσότερα από $4 δισεκατομμύρια στα τρία έτη κατόπιν. Στη διαδικασία, το Πακιστάν έχει γίνει το αριθ. παραλήπτης 3 των ΗΠΑ. στρατιωτική κατάρτιση και βοήθεια, σύροντας μόνο τους μακροπρόθεσμους ηγέτες Ισραήλ και Αίγυπτος.

Αυτό το tsunami της νέας χρηματοδότησης απεικονίζει το βασικό ρόλο του Πακιστάν στις ΗΠΑ. global war on terror. Shortly after 9/11, Gen. Pervez Musharraf, Pakistan’s leader, made a commitment to align his regime with the United States as it went after Osama bin Laden and his al Qaeda forces that were being protected by the Islamist Taliban regime in neighboring Afghanistan.

Since Musharraf closed ranks with the U.S., Pakistan’s financial rewards have been bountiful — and he has been the target of several assassination attempts and plots. On a visit to the U.S. in 2006, Musharraf told television interviewers that he made the commitment to join the war on terror after threats from the U.S., which Bush administration officials have denied. More recently, the administration has accused Musharraf of turning a blind eye to Taliban and al Qaeda operations in his own country, and critics in the U.S. and abroad have assailed U.S. support for Musharraf.

Pakistan is the sixth most populous country in the world, and, after Indonesia, the second largest Muslim-majority country. Violence and political instability have characterized the country throughout its history. Pakistan is teeming with intrigue; it is home to some of the world’s most vocal anti-American clerics and to religious schools that have served as recruiting grounds for the Taliban and other Islamist extremist groups. In tribal areas near the Afghanistan border, some leaders support the Taliban, and its largest province, Balochistan, has long been unstable and barely controlled by the central government in Islamabad.

The U.S. State Department rates Pakistan’s human rights record as poor and reports a long litany of abuses. That nourishes critics’ claims that U.S. largesse has been put to abusive purposes, including to buy weapons that have been turned against Pakistani civilians and to offer bounties on suspects the U.S. is seeking.

A key ally

Shortly after 9/11, Pakistan offered bases to the U.S. for its use in counterterrorism operations, banned numerous militant groups, began sharing intelligence and deployed tens of thousands of troops to tense regions, including the border between Pakistan and Afghanistan where al Qaeda leaders and Taliban remnants from Afghanistan were rumored to be hiding out.

According to Sen. Sana Baloch, an opposition lawmaker who fled the country out of safety concerns, the U.S. has several military bases inside Pakistan including some in the senator’s home province of Balochistan. “Most of the U.S. bases are based in Balochistan,” Baloch told ICIJ in an interview. “One or two of them are in Kharan, my own home district. The U.S. is using the bases in this area for the war on terror. We are very supportive of the U.S. in this role.”

In return for Pakistan’s assistance, in March 2005 the U.S. announced that it would resume sales of American F-16 fighter aircraft to Pakistan after a 16-year ban that had served to punish Pakistan for its clandestine nuclear weapons program. Pakistan also got debt write-offs, the reestablishment of U.S. military training programs and support for Musharraf’s administration despite concerns about his anti-democratic policies (Musharraf came to power through a military coup).

Lincoln P. Bloomfield Jr., assistant secretary of state for political-military affairs from 2001 to 2005, told ICIJ that U.S. policy is to pull Pakistan in closer. “Logistically,” he said, “we can’t overstate what we’ve been able to accomplish with Pakistan’s help.”

Others aren’t so sure. In a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing on March 1, 2007, Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., raised concerns about an increase in attacks on coalition forces along the Pakistan-Afghanistan border and about al Qaeda training camps reportedly given sanctuary inside Pakistan after the Pakistani central government made peace with local tribal leaders in the lawless region.

Concerns about oversight

The majority of new U.S. funding to Pakistan has come in the form of billions of dollars of Coalition Support Funds (CSF), a post-9/11 funding mechanism created to reimburse key countries for expenses incurred in supporting American counterterrorism operations. According to K. Alan Kronstadt, an expert on South Asia at the Congressional Research Service, by August 2006, CSF accounted for roughly $4.75 billion of the military aid Pakistan received from the U.S. since the terrorist attacks. Pentagon documents obtained by ICIJ say the money that went to Pakistan was largely for “military operations on the Afghanistan border.”

Coalition Support Funds are considered a reimbursement by some and a blank check by others. Craig Cohen, co-author of a recent Center for Strategic and International Studies study on U.S. aid to Pakistan, asked rhetorically whether CSF money is “intended to yield some sort of specific action on the part of the government,” adding, “If so, there’s clearly no oversight.”

Olga Oliker, an expert on U.S. defense policy and co-author of a recent RAND think tank report on the human rights performance of internal security forces in South Asia, said she’s concerned that U.S.-made weapons that go to Pakistani security forces and U.S. training that the forces receive are being used against civilian populations. “In implementing assistance,” she told ICIJ, “the U.S. has paid relatively little attention to human rights abuses and oversight. People weren’t paying attention.”

Baloch said that even as a senator, he did not have access to that information.

A former U.S. official previously based in Pakistan, who has intimate knowledge of Pakistan’s CSF receipts, told ICIJ that, “Right from the beginning it was very difficult to pin down what the costs were and how they were computed. Initially there were very round numbers reported. Now figures are coming out with more specificity. Whether or not they are inflated, it’s difficult to get a handle on that.”

Increased oversight

The new Democratic-controlled Congress has taken a greater interest in CSF payments to Pakistan. Under the previous GOP majority, there was virtually no oversight of CSF payments to any country. In January 2007, the House of Representatives acted to impose conditions on military aid to Pakistan by adopting the Implementing the 9/11 Commission Recommendations Act of 2007.

Section 1442 of the bill relates to Pakistan. It identifies areas of concern for U.S. policy, including the need for Pakistan to curb the proliferation of nuclear technology, to address the presence of the Taliban and other extremist forces and to secure its borders to prevent movement of terrorists.

The bill would impose limits on foreign assistance to Pakistan, declaring that U.S. assistance may not be approved until “the President determines and certifies to the appropriate congressional committees that the Government of Pakistan is making all possible efforts to prevent the Taliban from operating in areas under its sovereign control.” In addition, Pakistan would be required to demonstrate that it is making significant steps toward “free and fair parliamentary elections in 2007.” The bill also requires that the president submit a report describing the long-term strategy of U.S. engagement with Pakistan.

The full Senate has yet to take up the legislation, and the White House has opposed the proposed restrictions on Pakistani assistance, saying that any conditions placed on Pakistan would be “counterproductive to the important goal … of fostering a closer relationship.”

Regional context

From 1953 to 1961, during Cold War concerns about Soviet expansionism, Pakistan received nearly $2 billion (current dollars) from the U.S., one-quarter of which was military aid. Later, in the 1970s, concerns about Pakistan’s efforts to seek nuclear weapons led to a suspension of U.S. aid.

Meanwhile, as a result of the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in 1979, millions of Afghan refugees began to move across the border into Pakistan. Despite efforts to return them to their home country following the U.S.-led invasion of Afghanistan in 2001, roughly 2½ million Afghan refugees remain in Pakistan, many afraid of what they might have to face upon their return.

The current difficult relationship between Afghanistan and Pakistan is due in part to the number of Afghan refugees in Pakistani territory; the disputed border separating the two states; Pakistan’s nuclear capability; and finally, the collaboration between sections of Pakistan’s powerful and controversial Inter-Services Intelligence Agency (ISI) with the Taliban.

Fears regarding Pakistan’s nuclear program have again forced discussions about whether the U.S. should continue sending massive amounts of military assistance to Pakistan. That debate came into sharp focus with the 2004 confession by Abdul Qadeer Khan, also known as A.Q. Khan and considered the founder of Pakistan’s nuclear weapons program, that he had operated an illicit nuclear smuggling network to countries including North Korea, Iran and Libya. So far, the only punishment Khan has received from Pakistan is to have been placed under house arrest in Islamabad in what has been described as comfortable conditions.

Kronstadt of CRS said of Khan, “The [A.Q. Khan] tentacles haven’t all been uncovered. At some level, the chain may still be in operation. The U.S. and IAEA [International Atomic Energy Agency] haven’t had access to him to this day.”

Whose war?

Hundreds of people were detained in Pakistan after 9/11, and some of them ended up in the U.S. naval prison at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba. According to Amnesty International’s 2006 Annual Report, Pakistan’s security agencies continue to arbitrarily detain and arrest terrorist suspects.

The tribal region of Balochistan is known for documented cases of human rights abuses. According to press reports, at least three Pakistani politicians from Balochistan are being held for reasons of political dissent. A former politician, Abdur Rauf Mengal, who resigned in protest after Baloch political leader Nawab Akbar Bugti was killed in August 2006, has been held in solitary confinement.

“The American-supplied military arsenal has been used against Baloch nationalists,” Sen. Baloch told ICIJ. “Sophisticated helicopters bought to control the drug trade have been misused against the Baloch people.” He said he and others have gone to the State Department, “and the State Department says [the U.S. has] given military hardware with no conditions.”

A former U.S. official previously based in Pakistan acknowledged to ICIJ that in Balochistan, “The [Pakistani] army stepped in with a pretty heavy hand last year.”

Christine Fair, co-author of the RAND report and a South Asia expert at the U.S. Institute for Peace, said that the U.S. is nearsighted in its support for Musharraf. “I don’t think he’ll ever deliver what he says he will. The U.S. government is ‘all Musharraf all the time.’ And [the U.S. goal is] to keep him in place, to keep the army happy.”

Says T. Kumar, advocacy director for Asia and Pacific at Amnesty International USA: “Pakistan is a solid dictatorship. The U.S. is being taken for a big ride. Musharraf is not the right person for the war. Powerful sections of the ISI [remain] involved with the Taliban. They’re waiting for time, biding their time.”

See More:False Flag 

Have Your Say: Billions in Aid, With No Accountability
Please note, only selected comments will be published.

Or discuss this report in our new forums

RSS TrackBack URL

Name (required)

Mail (will not be published) (required)

Website

This entry was posted on Thursday, May 31st, 2007 at 7:46 pm and is filed under 9/11 Truth . You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

Loading ...

ADVERTISEMENTS

SITE MAPS

7/7 Afghanistan Alternative Energy Art BBC Big Brother Bilderberg Biometrics Bush CIA Climate Change Cover Up Cults Culture Database State David Hicks David Ray Griffin Democrats Demos Drugs Education EU False Flag FBI Fraud Free Speech Freemasons G8 Globalization Guantanamo Health News History ID Cards Internet Iran Iraq Israel Law Marches MI5 MI6 Microsoft Military MoD Money Music NASA Neocons NSA Oil Pakistan Podcast Police State Propaganda RFID RINF Rumsfeld Science Secrecy Security Slavery Space Sports Spying Stephen Lendman Technology Terrorism Tony Blair Torture TV UK News UN USA News Video Voting Warfare White House Wolfowitz World News Yahoo
2003 - 2005 Archives | 2005 - 2007 Archives | 2007 - 2008 Archives | Current Archives | Past Version