Dion on Pakistan

[The Bread Guy]

More garble - "we shouldn't go bang-bang in Afghanistan, but hey, Pakistan looks like it could use some NATO whoop-ass".  Or does he mean NATO should use development and diplomacy to deal with the AQ/Taliban in PAK?  Oh, wait, yeah, that's what they mean....

Shared in accordance with the "fair dealing" provisions, Section 29, of the Copyright Act.

Liberal leader says NATO intervention in Pakistan could be necessary
Canadian Press, 16 Jan 08
Article link - .pdf permalink

QUEBEC - Direct intervention by NATO could be necessary in Pakistan as a way of bringing peace to neighbouring Afghanistan, Liberal Leader Stephane Dion said Wednesday.

Dion said NATO may have to look at other options to flush out Taliban militants who are taking refuge in Pakistan and are undermining reconstruction efforts in Afghanistan.

"If they (Pakistani leaders) are not able to do it on their own, it is something we could consider with NATO, how to help Pakistan help us bring peace to Afghanistan," Dion said just days after returning from a trip to Afghanistan.

But the solution would not be a military one, stressed fellow MP Denis Coderre, sitting next to the Liberal leader during a news conference in Quebec City on Wednesday.

"It would not come about with a military intervention, it would be a diplomatic solution," Coderre said.

Dion said Pakistan plays an important role because if does not deal effectively with the militants, "everything we do in Afghanistan is cancelled in part by the inaction in Pakistan."

Late Wednesday, Defence Minister Peter MacKay reacted to Dion's comments by saying the Liberal leader can't be serious about calling on NATO intervention in Pakistan while talking about Canada abandoning the mission in Afghanistan.

The Liberal leader reiterated that Canada's military involvement in Afghanistan should end in February 2009.

But Dion stressed that Ottawa should continue to provide humanitarian aid in all sorts of areas, "promoting women's rights, water management, economic development, diplomacy and the training of the Afghan military and police forces.

"The war against terrorism is mainly a police matter," he added.

Dion also said the secretary of state for foreign affairs made a serious error and should resign for publicizing the Liberal leader's itinerary on his recent trip to Afghanistan.

Dion said Wednesday he has written a letter to Prime Minister Stephen Harper to demand the resignation of Helena Guergis.

But a spokesman for the minister said Guergis did not know Dion's plans beforehand and added that security details are the responsibility of the military.

The Liberal leader complained that Guergis announced last Saturday that he and deputy Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff would be visiting the reconstruction team.

"She revealed where we were going, Mr. Ignatieff and me, putting at risk, not only ourselves, but also all the members of the (Canadian) delegation," Dion told reporters in Quebec City.

Dion added that the action also threatened the safety of the Afghan and Canadian military who were accompanying them.

"It's something that should not have been done . . . I think the prime minister has no other choice but to ask for her resignation," Dion said.

But Jeffrey Kroeker, Guergis's communications director, said Dion was already on the ground in Afghanistan when she issued a statement late Saturday commenting on his visit.

"I think he should apologize to our troops while he is touring the PRT (Provincial Reconstruction Team) in safety because the same reason he needs bodyguards is why our troops need to stay to protect democracy, women and children," she said in the statement.

Kroeker said "anyone who's travelled to Afghanistan on a fact-finding mission knows full well that a visit to the PRT is essential.

"We knew Stephane Dion was in Afghanistan when we saw him on television."

He also pointed out that elected officials are not briefed on where or when other officials are coming in and out of Afghanistan.

"That just doesn't happen and to suggest otherwise, which is what he is doing, is ridiculous," Kroeker said.

A spokesman for Harper did not return calls for comment.

 

[Haletown]

So Steffi goes to Afghanistan, spends some time with real soldiers, comes home and grows a pair big enough to now want to invade/carpet bomb Pakistan . . . .  very cool. 

Maybe Taliban Jack should be sent over for a few days with the soldiers in theatre . . . .  maybe he could find his spine as well.

 

[The Bread Guy]

- edit to add link to Liberal news release -

"Wait, hang on now, I was taken outta context, I was misquoted, uh, yeah, that's it!"  And who does he blame? - shared with the usual disclaimer...

Dion says Pakistan comment was misinterpreted
Hubert Bauch, The Gazette, 17 Jan 08
Article link

As the Pakistani government was preparing to denounce him, Liberal leader Stéphane Dion yesterday debunked reports that he favours a NATO military incursion to root out insurgents who use Pakistan as a base for terrorist attacks in neighbouring Afghanistan.

Meeting The Gazette's editorial board, Dion said statements he made Wednesday proposing an intervention in Pakistan against Afghan insurgents operating in Pakistan were misrepresented in media reports.

Canadian government figures blasted the statements as reckless and irresponsible.

And the Pakistan high commission in Ottawa yesterday issued a sharply worded statement accusing Dion of a lack of understanding of on-the-ground realities and insisting no foreign troops would be allowed to operate in the country under any circumstances.

The statement, issued by Mamoona Amjed, the high commission's press attaché, said Pakistan is an equal partner in the fight against terrorism and is doing all it can to counter insurgent activity on its soil.

"The price paid by Pakistan being a frontline state cannot be undermined by certain irrational comments," it concluded.

"I was very, very surprised by the way it was reported," Dion said. "I did not expect this interpretation."

He insisted that all he was saying is that NATO countries should apply diplomatic pressure on Pakistan to have its military deal more forcefully with Afghan insurgents who take advantage of the porous border between the two countries to evade NATO and Afghan forces in Afghanistan.

"The point is that a lot of things we are doing in Afghanistan are nullified by the insurgents crossing the border," Dion said. "Each time we go into a place and we secure it, some of them cross this border that is wide open in some ways and are back at the first opportunity."

He said Pakistan has the military resources to deal with the situation and that NATO intervention should be diplomatic.

"It's not the same as in Afghanistan where we have to build an army to defend their country. Since the (Pakistani) army is powerful and well equipped, I wonder why we don't pressure more to have Pakistan take care of it. That's something that should be done by NATO countries."

He said he would not support participation by Canadian forces in any operation in Pakistan.

"We have plenty of problems as it is in Afghanistan, and I'm not sure (Pakistan authorities) would agree to have foreign forces on their territory when we know the pride of this country."

Dion said his visit to Afghanistan last week did not make him change his mind on the Liberal position that the current Canadian combat mission to the country should be curtailed a year from now, a deadline which he noted was set by the current Conservative government and he believes is supported by most Canadians.

"We don't want to abandon Afghanistan as Mr. Harper pretends I said. I want a military role after 2009, but it must be more linked to security than proactive combat with the insurgents. The focus should be on training the Afghan forces and police."

hbauch@thegazette.canwest.com

 

[kilekaldar]

Pakistan blasts Dion for NATO intervention comments

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20080117/dion_pakistan_080117/20080117?hub=TopStories

Updated Thu. Jan. 17 2008 11:15 PM ET

The Canadian Press

OTTAWA -- The government of Pakistan has blasted Liberal Leader Stephane Dion for his "irrational'' suggestion that NATO intervention might be necessary in the troubled South Asian country that borders Afghanistan.

"We are dismayed by the statement of the leader of Opposition,'' the government said in a statement released late Thursday by the Pakistan High Commission in Ottawa.

"It shows a lack of understanding of the ground realities.''

Dion, who made a brief visit to Afghanistan last weekend, said on his return that NATO will never bring peace to Afghanistan as long as Taliban militants are able to escape across the border into neighbouring Pakistan.

"If they (Pakistani leaders) are not able to do it on their own, it is something we could consider with NATO, how to help Pakistan help us bring peace to Afghanistan,'' Dion said Wednesday.

Liberal defence critic Denis Coderre quickly clarified that Dion was not calling for military intervention in Pakistan but rather a diplomatic solution.

However, the Pakistan government was not mollified.

"We have, at the highest level, made it clear that Pakistan will not allow any foreign forces to operate within its territory under any circumstances.

"The sovereignty of the state will not be compromised at any level as the government and people of Pakistan are fully capable of handling their security matters themselves.''

Dion also raised the ire of Pakistan with his assertion that everything Canadian and other NATO troops do to root out insurgents and bring peace to Afghanistan "is cancelled in part by the inaction in Pakistan.''

In its statement, the Pakistan government took issue with the suggestion that it has done little to stem the flow of Islamic militants back and forth across its border.

"Pakistan is a peace-loving country and has joined the international community in the war against terrorism as an equal partner. The contribution made by Pakistan in this regard has been recognized throughout the world,'' the statement said.

"The price paid by Pakistan being a frontline state cannot be undermined by certain irrational comments.''

Canada's Conservative government also piled on Dion, who is calling for an end to Canada's combat mission in Afghanistan by February, 2009. At a news conference in Saskatchewan, Prime Minister Stephen Harper mocked the Liberal leader for proposing that "Canada abandon Afghanistan and invade Pakistan.''

The Liberal party issued its own statement countering what it called Harper's "erroneous claim and distortions.''

"Mr. Dion obviously did not propose any sort of military intervention. Mr. Dion believes that Canada must focus our diplomatic efforts on Pakistan in order to secure the border with Afghanistan.''

However, Jason Kenney, secretary of state for multiculturalism, pointed out that Dion called for NATO intervention in Pakistan.

"NATO is a military alliance. When you talk about a NATO intervention, you are clearly and explicitly talking about a military intervention,'' Kenney said.

Kenney said the only other possible explanation for Dion's comments is that he doesn't understand what NATO does.

"Either way, he is out of his league on the world stage and not worth the risk . . . His foreign policy is a descent into amateur hour.''

NDP defence critic Dawn Black also noted that NATO is a military organization and called on Dion to retract his "misguided'' comments.

"By proposing to send military forces into a nuclear-armed country of 165 million people, Mr. Dion has made a very risky and damaging statement,'' she said.

Dion is not the only politician to run into trouble over Pakistan.

Several candidates for the Democratic presidential nomination in the United States earned a rebuke from Pakistan's president, Pervez Musharraf, last week for suggesting that U.S troops should join the Pakistan army in hunting down al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden.

"Any entry by the United States or coalition forces into Pakistan's tribal areas would be resisted as a breach of Pakistan's sovereignty,'' Musharraf told a Chinese newspaper.

 

[IN HOC SIGNO]

He's making as many friends overseas as he is at home apparently and Denis Coderre isn't doing much to help the situation.

 

[sgf]

well actually Dion isnt the only one who thinks intervention could be a good thing

LPAC) - Dick Cheney is pushing the British line, once again, to run covert intelligence and military operations in Pakistan, in the tribal areas, now that the Pakistan Army has been softened up, and Musharraf is threatened with his own assassination, according to a leak to the New York Times today, written by David Sanger, Stevven Lee Myers and Eric Schmitt. Cheney emerged from his undisclosed location on Friday to lord over Condi Rice and George Bush, following the Bhutto assassination, calling for the intervention

 

[Trinity]

well actually Dion isnt the only one who thinks intervention could be a good thing

Here is the article in full for those who wish to read all of it.

http://www.inteldaily.com/?c=166&a=4761

 

[observor 69]

Article from the New York Times describing the difficult situation in border areas of Pakistan.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/18/world/asia/18peshawar.html?hp=&pagewanted=print

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

January 18, 2008
Frontier Insurgency Spills Into a Pakistani City
By JANE PERLEZ
PESHAWAR, Pakistan — For centuries, fighting and lawlessness have been part of the fabric of this frontier city. But in the past year, Pakistan’s war with Islamic militants has spilled right into its alleys and bazaars, its forts and armories, killing policemen and soldiers and scaring its famously tough citizens.

There is a sense of siege here, as the Islamic insurgency pours out of the adjacent tribal region into this city, one of Pakistan’s largest, and its surrounding districts.

The Taliban and their militant sympathizers now hold strategic pockets on the city’s outskirts, the police say, from where they strike at the military and the police, order schoolgirls to wear the burqa and blow up stores selling DVDs, among other acts of violence.

Suicide bombings, bomb explosions and missile attacks occurred an average of once a week here in 2007, according to a tally by the city’s police department. In 2006, while there were occasional grenade attacks and explosions, the authorities did not record a single suicide bombing or rocket attack inside the city.

The proximity of Peshawar to the tribal areas where the Taliban and Al Qaeda have regrouped in the past two years makes the city a feasible prize for the militants in Pakistan’s quickly escalating internal strife that pits the Islamic extremists against the American-backed government of President Pervez Musharraf.

Though few here believe that the Taliban will rule anytime soon, the police and residents say that by the standards of counterinsurgency warfare the extremists are doing well. They have undermined public faith in the government, sown distrust and made the police fearful for their lives. “People feel the insecurity is so high, no one can fix it,” said Humair Bilour, the sister-in-law of Malik Saad, a popular Peshawar police chief who was killed in a suicide bomb attack last year. “How can the government do anything when the government itself is involved in it?”

She said she and her friends were now afraid to go out. “People go to the bazaar and make jokes: ‘Is this going to be my last trip?’ ” she said.

The extremists have selected the police and the army, two important pillars of the Pakistani state, as particular targets.

Last week, rockets were fired at an army barracks in Warsak on the city’s perimeter, a warning of the power of the militants to strike from Mohmand, a district in the tribal areas adjacent to Peshawar, an area that a few months ago was considered free of the Taliban.

The army headquarters in the center of the city were struck last month by a bomber who was hiding explosives under her burqa that were set off by remote control. The assassination a year ago of the police chief, Mr. Saad, who was killed while on duty trying to control a religious procession in one of the bazaars, shook the city.

“It’s asymmetrical warfare against an established state,” said Muhammad Sulaman Khan, chief of operations for the Peshawar police and a close friend of Mr. Saad. “The terrorists only don’t have to lose it, we need to win it.”

At the core of the troubles here, many say, lie demands by the United States that the Pakistani military, generously financed by Washington, join in its campaign against terrorism, which means killing fellow Pakistanis in the tribal areas. Even if those Pakistanis are extremists, the people here say, they do not like a policy of killing fellow tribesmen, and fellow countrymen, particularly on behalf of the United States.

The Bush administration is convinced that Al Qaeda and the Taliban have gained new strength in the past two years, particularly in the tribal regions of North and South Waziristan and Bajaur. It has said it is considering sending American forces to help the Pakistani soldiers in those areas. Mr. Musharraf has scoffed at the idea.

Any direct intervention by American forces would only strengthen the backlash now under way against soldiers and the police in Peshawar, said Farook Adam Khan, a lawyer here. That reaction spread last week to Lahore, the capital of Punjab Province, where a suicide bomber killed almost two dozen policemen at a lawyers’ rally, he said.

“Pakistani soldiers never used to be targets,” Mr. Khan said. “Now we have the radicals antagonized by Musharraf and his politics of cozying up to the United States. The actions taken by the army in Waziristan and Bajaur and Swat are causing the problems here.” Swat is an area 100 miles north of Peshawar, where the Pakistani Army is currently battling a Pakistani Taliban insurgent group with mixed results.

The standing of the Pakistani military is being further harmed by an increasing awareness here that it is for the first time suffering significant numbers of defections, mostly among soldiers reluctant to fight in the tribal areas. The defections gain only scant mention in the press, but people talk about them.

There are rumors of courts-martial, although the information is tightly held by the army, former officers said. Morale among the police in Peshawar has plummeted amid a series of police killings, making the city far from the glamorous posting it once was, when the police were fighting smugglers and other outlaws.

Terrorist activities around Peshawar began to increase, Mr. Khan said, after a major attack on a madrasa in Bajaur in October 2006, in which 82 people, including 12 teenagers, were killed. The Pakistani Army said intelligence had shown that the madrasa was used as a training base by Al Qaeda. Local residents said the killings were the work of an American remotely piloted drone, a charge that Washington denied.

A few months later, government schools for girls around Peshawar began to receive threats that they would be blown up if the students did not wear burqas.

At one such school, in Shah Dhand Baba, a town on the northern fringes of Peshawar, the principal, Gul Bahar Begum, said she received a handwritten letter in the mail last February demanding that the students cover up or the school would be blown up.

Ms. Begum, who wears lipstick and lightly covers her hair with a scarf, and whose office is filled with sports trophies won by her students, said that about 70 percent of the girls now wore burqas when they stepped outside the school.

“It is the Islamic way to cover,” she said of her instructions to the girls to cover up. “So the militants were right, but the way they imposed their decision was not.”

The students, dressed in loose white pants and long shirts, suggested that they accepted the demands because they had to, not because they believed it was a religious necessity.

Maryam Sultan, 16, who wore a denim jacket over her uniform, said she and her friends came to school in burqas “for security.” Ms. Sultan, who was more interested in talking about her desire to become a doctor, said there was little choice but to cover up.

The outward bravura at the school masked a deeper problem: the inability of the police or any other authorities to deter the militants. At another school where a threatening letter was received, the principal protested.

She made contact with the militants, saying that burqas were too expensive for some of the girls. The militants replied, saying, “If the girls can afford makeup, they can afford burqas,” according to officials in the district. Days later, the girls were in burqas.

Himayat Mayar, the local mayor, blamed the government for the threats against the girls.

He said that during the five years that Mr. Musharraf and his allies in a coalition of Islamic parties, the Muttahida Majlis-e-Amal, had governed the North-West Frontier Province, they had allowed madrasas for young Islamic jihadists to flourish.

“There are so many madrasas run by mullahs that train jihadis and get funds from Saudi Arabia, Kuwait,” Mr. Mayar said. “These jihadists know only jihad. They should be brought into the mainstream.” If it wanted to, he added, the government could easily provide teachers and computers to the madrasas, and register them.

Peshawar’s booming business in illicit Western and Indian DVDs has been another target of the militants. Many of the city’s myriad retail outlets have closed after being bombed, or threatened with violence.

At the Bilal DVD Parlor, the owners, Bilal Javed and Akhtar Ali, said their sales — ranging from “Pride and Prejudice” to “Die Hard 4.0,” to the latest Bollywood films and old Bruce Lee movies — had fallen by 90 percent. Their decade-old wholesale business in the tribal region was finished, they said.

On a recent day, their modern retail store, fitted with polished chrome, was packed floor to ceiling with DVDs. There were no customers. They said people had been afraid to shop there since a bomb hidden in a water cooler exploded at a DVD store across the street last year, killing five people, including a 7-year-old boy who wanted to buy a computer mouse.

“The police chief said, ‘We can’t secure ourselves, how can we secure you?’ ” Mr. Javed said.

 

 

[Genetk44]

What a hypocrite.....he tries to make political points at home by railing about what we're doing in Afghanistan and at the same time is talking about sending troops to Pak!
and what a moron...does he have any idea about what a hell-hole Pakistan is or what a quagmire it would be if we went in there!?!
dion really is dumb and dumber.

 

[The Bread Guy]

- sarcasm engaged, over -

Guys, guys, guys, give the guy a break - after all, he was just misquoted, right?

- sarcasm disengaged now, out -

 

[X-mo-1979]

Invade Pakistan.Oh wait don't invade.
Misinterpretation.
His lack of english skill's is obvious,maybe he should stick to french to limit the confusion on what he says/means on a regular basis.

I find it strange that the Pakistani government would even comment on his position.However it's nice to see the liberals messing up on an international stage even when they are not elected.

 

[sgf]

I mentioned this before.. everyone are jumping all over Dion's remarks, but Cheney has said this:

Dick Cheney is pushing on the Bush Administration, the British line in favor of running covert intelligence and military operations in the tribal areas of Pakistan, now that the Pakistan Army has been softened up and Musharraf is threatened with his own assassination, according to a leak to the New York Times today, written by David Sanger, Steven Lee Myers, and Eric Schmitt. Cheney emerged from his undisclosed location on Friday to lord it over Condi Rice and George Bush, following the Bhutto assassination, calling for the intervention. National Security Adviser Steven Hadley, Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Adm. Mike Mullen, and others were there, but Gates was "on vacation and did not attend the meeting," writes the Times.

The Times reports: "Several of the participants in the meeting argued that the threat to the government of President Pervez Musharraf was now so grave that both Mr. Musharraf and Pakistan's new military leadership were likely to give the U.S. more latitude, officials said." The Times says the White House expects that the new head of the Pakistani Army, Gen. Ashfaq Parvez Kayani, "will be more sympathetic to the American position than Mr. Musharraf." Kayani is described as a former aide to Bhutto. A source is quoted: "After years of focusing on Afghanistan, we think the extremists now see a chance for the big prize—creating chaos in Pakistan itself."

State Department officials and U.S. diplomats in the region are said to oppose any further intervention than the current limited approval for attacks on Bin Laden or Zawahri, when sighted.

Interviewed by Iran's Press TV this morning, Musharraf's spokesman, Gen. Rashid Kareshi, rejected absolutely the announced U.S. intervention. "We reject any joint operations. The U.S. and NATO are responsible for operations in Afghanistan, and the Pakistan Army is responsible for operations in Pakistan—other than extensive intelligence sharing both ways." He also rejected "joint" control of the nuclear arsenal.

whats the difference?

 

[I_am_John_Galt]

I mentioned this before.. everyone are jumping all over Dion's remarks, but Cheney has said this:

whats the difference?

The difference is that Cheney's position is consistent: Dion's is incomprehensible.  Is this not obvious?

 

[midget-boyd91]

Dion's is incomprehensible. 

If his position was incomprehensible, that would require him having a position. As it is right now, I though he had five of ten different positions right now?
Ah well, oppostion is there to oppose. I guess we can technically give him that. He's doing a decent job at opposing... although his idea of reconstruction, protecting the Afghan population and rebuilding the ANSF seems awfully similar to what is currently happening.

 

[sgf]

The difference is that Cheney's position is consistent: Dion's is incomprehensible.  Is this not obvious?

dion said intervention is required in pakistan
cheney said intervention is required in pakistan

yup.. very obvious

 

[DarkFire]

Even I have noticed that Dion's stance on Afghanistan changes almost literally every single month, at one point he wants a complete pullout, then he doesn't want a complete pullout but an end to the combat mission, and now he is suggesting sending the CF into Pakistan, which obviously would be a combat operation. I personally would rather vote for someone who does not change their stance that quickly over a very short amount of time, instead of one where what they are about to do one month has completely changed by the next.

 

[armyvern]

dion said intervention is required in pakistan
...
yup.. very obvious

Yet, just the other day ... he's was saying that we need to be LESS interventionist.  :

Yep --- very obvious all right. The man flips like a pancake every 27 hours, not becoming cooked on either side, raw in the middle, and unable to make a comittment & stick to it -- obviously a huge consumer of calorie laden butter-flavoured non-stick spray for that big griddle of his.

Hmmm, remember this comment?

"I want a military role after 2009, but it must be more linked to security than proactive combat with the insurgents."

Different country none-the-less, but it still demonstrates a supreme ability to spin out the 'yarn of the day' -- considering that it was his party that moved us south into that proactive role in the first place.

So, we need to be LESS proactive where we already are (and where he & his party sent us) and MORE proactive in another country; you're right --it's obvious for some of us, considering Cheney's position hasn't changed concurrent with his each of his underwear swaps.

 

[sgf]

Yet, just the other day ... he's was saying that we need to be LESS interventionist.  :

Yep --- very obvious all right. The man flips like a pancake every 27 hours, not becoming cooked on either side, raw in the middle, and unable to make a comittment & stick to it -- obviously a huge consumer of calorie laden butter-flavoured non-stick spray for that big griddle of his.

Hmmm, remember this comment?
Different country none-the-less, but it still demonstrates a supreme ability to spin out the 'yarn of the day' -- considering that it was his party that moved us south into that proactive role in the first place.

So, we need to be LESS proactive where we already are (and where he & his party sent us) and MORE proactive in another country; you're right --it's obvious for some of us, considering Cheney's position hasn't changed concurrent with his each of his underwear swaps.

If the Pakistan border issue and the presence of Taliban in Pakistan are dealt with, this could help to make southern Afghanistan more stable; which eventually could help NATO  turn their attention to rebuilding the country on a grander scale . It may indeed be Dions yarn of the day or a ploy to get votes, but at the end of the day, he and Cheney seem to be saying the same thing.

 

[armyvern]

The huge difference between the two is that Dion is incapable of sticking to decision long enough to pull off an opera -- he's good for an aria, but that's about it. I'm not blinded deafened enough by his short-and-sweet yarns to dismiss the history of he & his party.

His tune will change next week -- I'll bet the opinion polls on it. 

 

[sgf]

well maybe he will change his position on this, who really knows. He hasnt changed his positon on the liberal policy for afghanistan. I am not blinded to politicans from every party making promises that are quickly broken once in power or playing to the voters. There will be a lot of wild statements from politicans in the months running up to the next election.  I do wish there was another leader of the libs, i do agree that Dions communication skills leave a lot to be desired, but I could say that of Harper as well.