w*********s
发帖数: 2136 | 1 【 以下文字转载自 Military 讨论区 】
发信人: whiteclouds (/ 参考消息 /), 信区: Military
标 题: 奥鸡巴想对巴基斯坦不宣而战。北京发最后通牒。
发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Mon May 23 03:59:30 2011, 美东)
US, Pakistan Near Open War; Chinese Ultimatum Warns Washington Against
Attack
Webster G. Tarpley, Ph.D.
http://tarpley.net/2011/05/21/us-pakistan-near-open-war-chinese
May 20, 2011
China has officially put the United States on notice that Washington’s
planned attack on Pakistan will be interpreted as an act of aggression
against Beijing. This blunt warning represents the first known strategic
ultimatum received by the United States in half a century, going back to
Soviet warnings during the Berlin crisis of 1958-1961, and indicates the
grave danger of general war growing out of the US-Pakistan confrontation.
“Any Attack on Pakistan Would be Construed as an Attack on China”
Responding to reports that China has asked the US to respect Pakistan’s
sovereignty in the aftermath of the Bin Laden operation, Chinese Foreign
Ministry spokesperson Jiang Yu used a May 19 press briefing to state Beijing
’s categorical demand that the “sovereignty and territorial integrity of
Pakistan must be respected.” According to Pakistani diplomatic sources
cited by the Times of India, China has “warned in unequivocal terms that
any attack on Pakistan would be construed as an attack on China.” This
ultimatum was reportedly delivered at the May 9 China-US strategic dialogue
and economic talks in Washington, where the Chinese delegation was led by
Vice Prime Minister Wang Qishan and State Councilor Dai Bingguo.1 Chinese
warnings are implicitly backed up by that nation’s nuclear missiles,
including an estimated 66 ICBMs, some capable of striking the United States,
plus 118 intermediate-range missiles, 36 submarine-launched missiles, and
numerous shorter-range systems.
Support from China is seen by regional observers as critically important for
Pakistan, which is otherwise caught in a pincers between the US and India:
“If US and Indian pressure continues, Pakistan can say ‘China is behind us
. Don’t think we are isolated, we have a potential superpower with us,’”
Talat Masood, a political analyst and retired Pakistani general, told AFP.2
The Chinese ultimatum came during the visit of Pakistani Prime Minister
Gilani in Beijing, during which the host government announced the transfer
of 50 state-of-the-art JF-17 fighter jets to Pakistan, immediately and
without cost.3 Before his departure, Gilani had stressed the importance of
the Pakistan-China alliance, proclaiming: “We are proud to have China as
our best and most trusted friend. And China will always find Pakistan
standing beside it at all times….When we speak of this friendship as being
taller than the Himalayas and deeper than the oceans it truly captures the
essence of our relationship.”4 These remarks were greeted by whining from
US spokesmen, including Idaho Republican Senator Risch.
The simmering strategic crisis between the United States and Pakistan
exploded with full force on May 1, with the unilateral and unauthorized US
commando raid alleged to have killed the phantomatic Osama bin Laden in a
compound at Abottabad, a flagrant violation of Pakistan’s national
sovereignty. The timing of this military stunt designed to inflame tensions
between the two countries had nothing to do with any alleged Global War on
Terror, and everything to do with the late March visit to Pakistan of Prince
Bandar, the Saudi Arabian National Security Council chief. This visit had
resulted in a de facto alliance between Islamabad and Riyadh, with Pakistan
promising troops to put down any US-backed color revolution in the kingdom,
while extending nuclear protection to the Saudis, thus making them less
vulnerable to US extortion threats to abandon the oil-rich monarchy to the
tender mercies of Tehran. A joint move by Pakistan and Saudi Arabia to break
out of the US empire, whatever one may think of these regimes, would
represent a fatal blow for the fading US empire in South Asia.
As for the US claims concerning the supposed Bin Laden raid of May 1, they
are a mass of hopeless contradictions which changes from day to day. An
analysis of this story is best left to literary critics and writers of
theatrical reviews. The only solid and uncontestable fact which emerges is
that Pakistan is the leading US target — thus intensifying the anti-
Pakistan US policy which has been in place since Obama’s infamous December
2009 West Point speech.
Gilani: Full Force Retaliation to Defend Pakistan’s Strategic Assets
The Chinese warning to Washington came on the heels of Gilani’s statement
to the Pakistan Parliament declaring: “Let no one draw any wrong
conclusions. Any attack against Pakistan’s strategic assets, whether overt
or covert, will find a matching response…. Pakistan reserves the right to
retaliate with full force. No one should underestimate the resolve and
capability of our nation and armed forces to defend our sacred homeland.”5
A warning of full force retaliation from a nuclear power such as Pakistan
needs to be taken seriously, even by the hardened aggressors of the Obama
regime.
The strategic assets Gilani is talking about are the Pakistani nuclear
forces, the key to the country’s deterrent strategy against possible
aggression by India, egged on by Washington in the framework of the US-India
nuclear cooperation accord. The US forces in Afghanistan have not been able
to conceal their extensive planning for attempts to seize or destroy
Pakistan’s nuclear bombs and warheads. According to a 2009 Fox News report,
“The United States has a detailed plan for infiltrating Pakistan and
securing its mobile arsenal of nuclear warheads if it appears the country is
about to fall under the control of the Taliban, Al Qaeda or other Islamic
extremists.” This plan was developed by General Stanley McChrystal when he
headed the US Joint Special Operations Command at Fort Bragg, North Carolina
. JSOC, the force reportedly involved in the Bin Laden operation. is
composed of Army Delta Force, Navy SEALs and “a high-tech special
intelligence unit known as Task Force Orange.” “Small units could seize [
Pakistan’s nukes], disable them, and then centralize them in a secure
location,” claimed a source quoted by Fox.6
Obama Has Already Approved Sneak Attack on Pakistan’s Nukes
According to the London Sunday Express, Obama has already approved an
aggressive move along these lines: “US troops will be deployed in Pakistan
if the nation’s nuclear installations come under threat from terrorists out
to avenge the killing of Osama Bin Laden… The plan, which would be
activated without President Zardari’s consent, provoked an angry reaction
from Pakistan officials… Barack Obama would order troops to parachute in to
protect key nuclear missile sites. These include the air force’s central
Sargodha HQ, home base for nuclear-capable F-16 combat aircraft and at least
80 ballistic missiles.” According to a US official, “The plan is green
lit and the President has already shown he is willing to deploy troops in
Pakistan if he feels it is important for national security.”7
Extreme tension over this issue highlights the brinksmanship and
incalculable folly of Obama’s May 1 unilateral raid, which might easily
have been interpreted by the Pakistanis as the long-awaited attack on their
nuclear forces. According to the New York Times, Obama knew very well he was
courting immediate shooting war with Pakistan, and “insisted that the
assault force hunting down Osama bin Laden last week be large enough to
fight its way out of Pakistan if confronted by hostile local police officers
and troops.”
The Shooting Has Already Started
The shooting between US and Pakistani forces escalated on Tuesday May 17,
when a US NATO helicopter violated Pakistani airspace in Waziristan.
Pakistani forces showed heightened alert status, and opened fire immediately
, with the US helicopter shooting back. Two soldiers at a Pakistani check
post on the border in the Datta Khel area were wounded.8
Possible Pakistani retaliation for this border incursion came in Peshawar on
Friday, May 20, when a car bomb apparently targeted a 2-car US consulate
convoy, but caused no American deaths or injuries. One Pakistani bystander
was killed, and several wounded. In other intelligence warfare, Ary One
television reported the name of the CIA station chief in Islamabad, the
second top US resident spook there to have his cover blown in six months.
US Envoy Grossman Rejects Pakistani Calls To Stop Border Violations
US Special Representative to Afghanistan and Pakistan Marc Grossman, the
replacement for the late Richard Holbrooke, on May 19 arrogantly rejected
Pakistani calls for guarantees that no more Abottabad-style unilateral
operations would be mounted in Pakistan.9 In refusing to offer such
assurances, Grossman claimed that Pakistani officials had never demanded
respect for their border in recent years.10
In the midst of this strategic crisis, India has gone ahead with inherently
provocative scheduled military maneuvers targeting Pakistan. This is the “
Vijayee Bhava” (Be Victorious) drill, held in the Thar desert of north
Rajastan,. This atomic-biological-chemical Blitzkrieg drill involves the
Second Armored Corps, “considered to be the most crucial of the Indian Army
’s three principal strike formations tasked with virtually cutting Pakistan
in two during a full-fledged war.”11
The Nation: A CIA-RAW-Mossad Pseudo-Taliban Countergang
One way to provide the provocation needed to justify a US-Indian attack on
Pakistan would be through an increase in terrorist actions attributable to
the so-called Taliban. According to the mainstream Pakistani media, the CIA,
the Israeli Mossad, and the Indian RAW (Research and Analysis Wing) have
created their own version of the Taliban in the form of a terrorist
countergang which they control and direct. According to one account, “
Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) operatives have infiltrated the Taliban
and Al-Qaeda networks, and have created their own Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan
(TTP) force in order to destabilize Pakistan.” The former Punjab Regional
Commander of the Pakistani Inter-Service Intelligence (ISI), retired
Brigadier General Aslam Ghuman, commented: “During my visit to the US, I
learned that the Israeli spy agency Mossad, in connivance with Indian agency
RAW, under the direct supervision of CIA, planned to destabilize Pakistan
at any cost.”12 Was this countergang responsible for last week’s double
bombing in Waziristan, which killed 80 paramilitary police?
According to the same account, Russian intelligence “disclosed that CIA
contractor Raymond Davis and his network had provided Al-Qaeda operatives
with chemical, nuclear and biological weapons, so that US installations may
be targeted and Pakistan be blamed….” Davis, a JSOC veteran himself, was
arrested for the murder of two ISI agents, but then released by the
Pakistani government after a suspicious hue and cry by the State Department.
CIA Claims The New Al Qaeda Boss Lives in Waziristan
If the US needs a further pretext for additional raids, it will also be easy
to cite the alleged presence in Waziristan of Saif al-Adel, now touted by
the CIA as bin Laden’s likely successor as boss of al Qaeda.13 It is
doubtless convenient for Obama’s aggressive intentions that Saif al-Adel
can be claimed to reside so close to what is now the hottest border in the
world, and not in Finsbury or Flatbush.
In the wake of the unauthorized May 1 US raid, the Pakistani military chief
General Kayani had issued his own warning that similar “misadventures”
could not be repeated, while announcing that US personnel inside Pakistan
would be sharply reduced. In the estimate of one ISI source, there are
currently about 7,000 CIA operatives in country, many of them unknown to the
Pakistani government. US-Pakistan intelligence sharing has reportedly been
downgraded. In response to Kayani’s moves, the CIA limited hangout
operation known as Wikileaks once again showed its real nature by attempting
to discredit the Pakistan commander with dubious US cable reports that he
had demanded more Predator drone attacks, not fewer, in recent years.
Especially since Obama’s West Point speech, the CIA has used Predator drone
attacks to slaughter civilians with the goal of fomenting civil war inside
Pakistan, leading to a breakup of the country along the ethnic lines of
Punjab, Sind, Baluchistan, and Pushtunistan. The geopolitical goal is to
destroy Pakistan’s potential to be the energy corridor between Iran and
China. Selig Harrison has emerged as a top US advocate for Baluchistan
succession.
Since May 1, six reported US Predator drones attacks have slain some 42
Pakistani civilians, goading public opinion into a frenzy of anti-US hatred.
In response, a joint session of the Pakistani parliament voted unanimously
on May 14 to demand an end to American missile strikes, calling on the
government to cut NATO’s supply line to Afghanistan if the attacks should
continue.14 Since the Karachi to Khyber Pass supply line carries as much as
two thirds of the supplies needed by the Afghanistan invaders, such a cutoff
would cause chaos among the NATO forces. All of this points to the inherent
insanity of provoking war with the country your supply line runs through.
US Wants to Use Taliban Boss Mullah Omar Against Pakistan
The State Department dropped all preconditions for negotiating with the
Taliban back in February, and the US is now reported by the Washington Post
to be talking with envoys of Mullah Omar, the legendary one-eyed leader of
the Quetta Shura or Taliban ruling council. It is apparent that the US is
offering the Taliban an alliance against Pakistan. US regional envoy
Grossman is hostile to the Pakistanis, but when it comes to the Taliban he
has been nicknamed “Mr. Reconciliation.”15 By contrast, the US is said to
be determined to assassinate the head of the Haqqani network using a Bin
Laden-type raid. The Pakistanis are equally determined to keep the Haqqani
as an ally.
If China stands behind Pakistan, then Russia might be said to stand behind
China. Looking forward to the upcoming June 15 meeting of the Shanghai
Cooperation Organization, Chinese President Hu praised Sino-Russian
relations as being “at an unprecedented high point,” with an “obvious
strategic ingredient.” In a press conference this week, Russian President
Medvedev was obliged indirectly to acknowledge that the much-hyped Obama “
reset” with Russia had amounted to very little, since the US ABM missile
program in Romania and the rest of eastern Europe, so obviously directed
against Russia, means that the START treaty is of dubious value, thus
raising the specter of a “new Cold War.” Given the NATO assault on Libya,
there would be no UN resolution against Syria, said Medvedev. Putin has been
right all along, and Medvedev is trying to imitate Putin to salvage some
chance of remaining in power.
Are We in July 1914?
The crisis leading to World War I began with the Sarajevo assassinations of
June 28, 1914, but the first major declaration of war did not occur until
August 1. In the interim month of July 1914, large parts of European public
opinion retreated into a dreamlike trance, an idyllic la-la land of elegiac
illusion, even as the deadly crisis gathered momentum. Something similar can
be seen today. Many Americans fondly imagine that the alleged death of Bin
Laden marks the end of the war on terror and the Afghan War. Instead, the
Bin Laden operation has clearly ushered in a new strategic emergency. Forces
which had opposed the Iraq war, from MSNBC to many left liberals of the
peace movement, are variously supporting Obama’s bloody aggression in Libya
, or even celebrating him as a more effective warmonger than Bush-Cheney
because of his supposed success at the expense of Bin Laden. In reality, if
there were ever a time to mobilize to stop a new and wider war, this is it.
References
1 http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics/nation/china-asks-us-to-respect-paks-sovereignty-independence/articleshow/8454577.cms
2 “China-Pakistan alliance strengthened post bin Laden,” AFP, May 15, 2011
, http://www.sundaytimes.lk/index.php/analysis/7546-china-pakistan-alliance-strengthened-post-bin-laden
3 http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/20/world/asia/20pakistan.html?_r=3
4 http://www.upi.com/Top_News/World-News/2011/05/08/Gilani-China-best-most-trusted-friend/UPI-96101304911435/
5 http://www.nypost.com/p/news/international/pakistani_pm_regrets_unilateral_GAOWNTpBXGJaJtwzWaZu0K?CMP=OTC-rss&FEEDNAME=
6 Rowan Scarborough,”U.S. Has Plan to Secure Pakistan Nukes if Country
Falls to Taliban, Fox News, May 14, 2009.
7 “US ‘To Protect Pakistan,” London Sunday Express, May 15, 2011, http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/246717/US-to-protect-Pakistan-
8 http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/05/17/us-pakistan-nato-idUSTRE74G0PS20110517
9 “US refuses to assure it will not act unilaterally,” http://thenews.jang.com.pk/NewsDetail.aspx?ID=15758
10 “No US assurance on unilateral ops,” http://nation.com.pk/pakistan-news-newspaper-daily-english-online/Politics/20-May-2011/No-US-assurance-on-unilateral-ops
11 “Getting leaner and meaner? Army practices blitzkrieg to strike hard at
enemy,” Times of India, May 10, 2011, http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2011-05-10/india/29527731_1_three-strike-corps-army-and-iaf-transformational
12 “CIA has created own Taliban to wreak terror havoc on Pakistan, claims
Pak paper,” ANI, May 12, http://my.news.yahoo.com/cia-created-own-taliban-wreak-terror-havoc-pakistan-091621821.html
13 “New al-Qaeda chief in North Waziristan,” May 19, 2011
14 http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/43033985/ns/world_news-south_and_central_asia/
15 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/afghanistan/8519535/US-steps-up-face-to-face-peace-talks-with-Taliban.html | t*n
发帖数: 14458 | 2 真的假的
【在 w*********s 的大作中提到】
: 【 以下文字转载自 Military 讨论区 】
: 发信人: whiteclouds (/ 参考消息 /), 信区: Military
: 标 题: 奥鸡巴想对巴基斯坦不宣而战。北京发最后通牒。
: 发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Mon May 23 03:59:30 2011, 美东)
: US, Pakistan Near Open War; Chinese Ultimatum Warns Washington Against
: Attack
: Webster G. Tarpley, Ph.D.
: http://tarpley.net/2011/05/21/us-pakistan-near-open-war-chinese
: May 20, 2011
: China has officially put the United States on notice that Washington’s
| p*****p
发帖数: 19331 | 3 假的
1.TG没这种气魄
2.美帝没有合适的借口，即使拉登躲在巴基，那也不能说巴政府故意藏的
3.美帝没这个能力，巴还是有一定军事力量的，美帝没那么多钱
【在 t*n 的大作中提到】
: 真的假的
| f****l
发帖数: 8042 | 4 阿富汗环境太差，美军想把基地搬到小巴哪里去。
【在 p*****p 的大作中提到】
: 假的
: 1.TG没这种气魄
: 2.美帝没有合适的借口，即使拉登躲在巴基，那也不能说巴政府故意藏的
: 3.美帝没这个能力，巴还是有一定军事力量的，美帝没那么多钱
| S***a
发帖数: 3956 | 5 借口好找得很.可以说两个士兵失踪,疑被塔里帮绑架到巴境内.要求入境搜查.
美国没这能力是真的.现有驻阿富汗的美军用来对付游击队都嫌兵力不足.
但是并不妨碍美国吓唬小巴,毕竟小巴内部各种政治势力很乱,抗压能力远远不如伊朗.
【在 p*****p 的大作中提到】
: 假的
: 1.TG没这种气魄
: 2.美帝没有合适的借口，即使拉登躲在巴基，那也不能说巴政府故意藏的
: 3.美帝没这个能力，巴还是有一定军事力量的，美帝没那么多钱
| x****u
发帖数: 12955 | 6
The more fragmented the political situation in Pakistan, the less likely the
Pak government is to cave to US demand. Otherwise, their fragile rule
would be further undermined.
Only a powerful and secure government can offer true concessions.
【在 S***a 的大作中提到】
: 借口好找得很.可以说两个士兵失踪,疑被塔里帮绑架到巴境内.要求入境搜查.
: 美国没这能力是真的.现有驻阿富汗的美军用来对付游击队都嫌兵力不足.
: 但是并不妨碍美国吓唬小巴,毕竟小巴内部各种政治势力很乱,抗压能力远远不如伊朗.
| S***a
发帖数: 3956 | 7 faint.越是统治不稳定的政府越需要外国势力撑腰.
当年中国军阀混战的时候各大军阀基本啥都敢卖.
the
【在 x****u 的大作中提到】
:
: The more fragmented the political situation in Pakistan, the less likely the
: Pak government is to cave to US demand. Otherwise, their fragile rule
: would be further undermined.
: Only a powerful and secure government can offer true concessions.
| x****u
发帖数: 12955 | 8
军阀混战和弱势政府是两码事好不好？
【在 S***a 的大作中提到】
: faint.越是统治不稳定的政府越需要外国势力撑腰.
: 当年中国军阀混战的时候各大军阀基本啥都敢卖.
:
: the
|
|
