Kidnapping and deporting civilians to Guantanamo, providing a safe-haven to Al Qaeda fighters
20/03/2004
- Opinión
In late November 2001, the Northern Alliance supported by US bombing
raids took the hill town of Kunduz in Northern Afghanistan. Eight
thousand or more men "had been trapped inside the city in the last
days of the siege, roughly half of whom were Pakistanis. Afghans,
Uzbeks, Chechens, and various Arab mercenaries accounted for the
rest." (Seymour M. Hersh, The Getaway, The New Yorker, 21 January
2002, http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/HER206A.html )
Also among these fighters were several senior Pakistani military and
intelligence officers, who had been sent to the war theater by the
Pakistani's military.
The presence of high-ranking Pakistani military and intelligence
advisers in the ranks of the Taliban/ Al Qaeda forces was known and
approved by the Washington.
Moreover, Pakistan's military intelligence, the ISI, which was
overseeing the operation, had a close and longstanding working
relationship with the CIA; since the 1980s it has channeled support
to a number of terrorist organizations, including Al Qaeda and the
Taliban, acting on behalf of its US counterpart. (See Michel
Chossudovsky, War and Globalization, the Truth behind September 11 ,
2002. Ch. 2, 3 and 4.
http://globalresearch.ca/globaloutlook/truth911.html )
According to Seymour M. Hersh's:
"President Bush said, 'We're smoking them out. They're running, and
now we're going to bring them to justice.'" (Ibid)
In fact, most of them were never brought to justice, nor were they
detained or interrogated. On the orders of Defense Secretary Donald
Rumsfeld, they were flown to safety:
"The Administration ordered the US Central Command to set up a
special air corridor to help insure the safety of the Pakistani
rescue flights from Kunduz to the northwest corner of Pakistan"
(Ibid)
"Musharraf won American support for the airlift by warning that the
humiliation of losing hundreds-and perhaps thousands-of Pakistani
Army men and intelligence operatives would jeopardize his political
survival. 'Clearly, there is a great willingness to help
Musharraf,' an American intelligence official told me. A C.I.A.
analyst said that it was his understanding that the decision to
permit the airlift was made by the White House and was indeed
driven by a desire to protect the Pakistani leader. The airlift
'made sense at the time,' the C.I.A. analyst said. 'Many of the
people they spirited away were the Taliban leadership'-who Pakistan
hoped could play a role in a postwar Afghan government. According to
this person, 'Musharraf wanted to have these people to put another
card on the table' in future political negotiations. 'We were
supposed to have access to them,' he said, but 'it didn't happen,'
and the rescued Taliban remain unavailable to American
intelligence.
According to a former high-level American defense official, the
airlift was approved because of representations by the Pakistanis
that "there were guys- intelligence agents and underground guys-who
needed to get out." (ibid)
In other words, the official story was, we were tricked into by the
Pakistani ISI.
Out of some 8000 or more men, 3300 surrendered to the Northern
Alliance, leaving between 4000 and 5000 men "unaccounted for".
According to Hersh's investigation, based on Indian intelligence
sources, at least 4000 men including two Pakistani Army generals
were evacuated. (Ibid)
US officials admitted, however, that
"what was supposed to be a limited evacuation apparently slipped out
of control, and, as an unintended consequence, an unknown number of
Taliban and Al Qaeda fighters managed to join in the exodus."
(quoted in Hersh op cit)
An Indian Press report confirms that those evacuated courtesy of
Uncle Sam were not the moderate elements of the Taliban, but rather
the "hard-core Taliban" and Al Qaeda fighters. (Times of India, 24
January 2002). The official story in India, however, was that the
US had been tricked by Pakistan's ISI into accepting the evacuation
of Taliban and Al Qaeda fighters including several of their
leaders.
"TERRORISTS" OR "INTELLIGENCE ASSETS" ?
As part of an operation led by Pakistan's ISI, the foreign and
Pakistani Al Qaeda fighters were flown to Kashmir where they were
incorporated into the two main terrorist rebel groups, Lashkar-e-
Taiba ("Army of the Pure") and Jaish-e-Muhammad ("Army of
Mohammed").
The Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) confirms that both Jaish
and Lashkar are supported by Pakistan's ISI:
"through its Interservices Intelligence agency (ISI), Pakistan has
provided funding, arms, training facilities, and aid in crossing
borders to Lashkar and Jaish…Many were given ideological training in
the same madrasas, or Muslim seminaries, that taught the Taliban
and foreign fighters in Afghanistan. They received military
training at camps in Afghanistan or in villages in Pakistan-
controlled Kashmir. Extremist groups [supported by the ISI] have
recently opened several new madrasas in Azad Kashmir." (Council on
Foreign Relations at
http://www.terrorismanswers.com/groups/harakat2.html, Washington
2002)
What the CFR fails to mention is the crucial relationship between
the ISI and the CIA and the fact that the ISI continues to support
Lashkar, Jaish and the militant Jammu and Kashmir Hizbul Mujahideen
(JKHM), while also collaborating with the CIA. Coinciding with the
1989 Geneva Peace Agreement and the Soviet withdrawal from
Afghanistan, the ISI was instrumental in the creation of the
militant Jammu and Kashmir Hizbul Mujahideen (JKHM). (See K.
Subrahmanyam, Pakistan is Pursuing Asian Goals, India Abroad, 3
November 1995.).
In the wake of the US bombing of Afghanistan, US press reports
confirmed that one of the main consequences of (the US sponsored)
evacuation of Al Qaeda fighters out of Kunduz in November 2001 was
to reinforce the Kashmiri terrorists organisations:
"Even today [March 2002], over 70 per cent of those involved in
terrorism in Jammu and Kashmir are not Kashmiri youths but ISI
trained Pakistani nationals. There are also a few thousand such
Jehadis in Pakistan Occupied Kashmir prepared to cross the LOC. It
is also a matter of time before hundreds from amongst those the
Bush Administration so generously allowed to be airlifted and escape
from Kunduz in Afghanistan join these terrorists in J&K." (Business
Line, 4 March 2002)
A few months following the November 2001 "Getaway", the Indian
Parliament in Delhi is attacked by Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-
Muhammad. (January 2002)
Moreover, since the onslaught of the US bombing of Afghanistan
(October 2001), the Al Qaeda-ISI sponsored Ansar al-Islam in
Northern Iraq has grown in size, most probably incorporating Al
Qaeda fighters who fled Afghanistan in the wake of the US bombings.
(Christian Science Monitor, 15 March 2002). While there was no firm
evidence, one suspects that some of the Mujahideen fighters
airlifted out of Kunduz in the US sponsored evacuation were
subsequently relocated to other countries including Northern Iraq.
(See Michel Chossudovsky, Who is behind the "Terrorist Network" in
Northern Iraq, Baghdad or Washington?
http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/CHO302B.html )
KIDNAPPING CIVILIANS
The plight of the Guantanamo detainees is now coming to light with
the release of prisoners from the Camp Delta Concentration camp in
Guantanamo, after more than two years of captivity.
The evidence suggests that most of the detainees are in fact
civilians.
Compare Seymour Hersh's account in the "Getaway" pertaining to the
US sponsored evacuation of hard core Al Qaeda and Taliban fighters
with the various accounts and testimonies pertaining to the
deportation of innocent civilians to Guantanamo.
What these comparisons convey is that Al Qaeda fighters and their
senior Pakistani advisers were "saved" on the orders of Donald
Rumsfeld. Meanwhile, also on the orders of the Secretary of
Defense, innocent civilians who had no relationship whatsoever to
the war theater were categorized as "enemy combatants", kidnapped,
interrogated and sent to Guantanamo.
Why?
Did the Bush administration need to "recruit detainees" among the
civilian population and pass them off as "terrorists"?
Did they need to boost up the numbers "to fill the gap" resulting
from the several thousand Al Qaeda fighters, who had been evacuated
on the orders of Donald Rumsfeld and flown to safety? Were these
"terrorists" needed in Kashmir in the context of a CIA covert op?
Whatever the motivation, we are dealing with a diabolical
intelligence operation.
Some 660 people from 42 countries, are currently being held in the
Camp Delta concentration camp in Guantanamo. While US officials
claim that they are "enemy combatants" arrested in Afghanistan, a
large number of the civilian detainees have never set foot in
Afghanistan. They were kidnapped in several foreign countries
including Pakistan, Bosnia and Gambia on the West Coast of Africa,
and taken to the US military base in Bagram, Afghanistan, before
being transported to Guantanamo.
Kellogg, Brown & Root (KBR), the British subsidiary of Vice
President Dick Cheney's company Halliburton has a multimillion
dollar contract to expand the facilities of the Guantanamo
concentration camp including the construction of prisoner cells,
guard barracks and interrogation rooms. The objective is to bring
"detainee capacity to 1,000" (Vanity Fair, January 2004)
At least three children are being held at Guantanamo, aged between
13 and 15 years old. According to Pentagon officials: "the boys were
brought to Guantanamo Bay because they were considered a threat and
they had "high value" intelligence that U.S. authorities wanted."
(Washington Post, 23 August 2003). According to Britain's Muslim
News: "out of the window has gone any regard for the norms of
international law and order ... with Muslims liable to be kidnapped
in any part of the world to be transported to Guantanamo Bay and
face summary justice."
(http://www.muslimnews.co.uk/index/press.php?pr=177 )
RECENT DEVELOPMENTS IN NORTHERN PAKISTAN
As the US elections approach, the search for bin Laden and his
deputy Ayman al-Zawahri has picked up pace in the border regions of
Northern Pakistan. This search has been carefully timed to
coincide with the election campaign.
In October 2003, in coordination with the Pentagon, the Pakistani
military launched an operation in the tribal areas of northern
Pakistan, following the visit in October to Islamabad of Deputy
Secretary of State Richard Armitage and Assistant Secretary of
State Christina Rocca.
The Pentagon describes the strategy to go after bin Laden as a
"hammer and anvil" approach, "with Pakistani troops moving into
semiautonomous tribal areas on their side of the border, and Afghans
and American forces sweeping the forbidding terrain on the other".
(The Record, Kitchener, 13 March 2004).
In March 2004, Britain's Sunday Express, quoting "a US intelligence
source" reported that
"bin Laden and about 50 supporters had been boxed in among the Toba
Kakar mountainous north of the Pakistani city of Quetta and were
being watched by satellite... Pakistan then sent several thousand
extra troops to the tribal area of South Waziristan, just to the
north." (quoted in South China morning Post, 7 March 2004)
In a bitter irony, it was to this Northern region of Pakistan that
at least 4000 Al Qaeda fighters were airlifted in the first place,
back in November 2001, on the orders of Secretary Donald Rumsfeld.
And these Al Qaeda units were also being supplied by Pakistan's ISI.
(UPI, 1 November 2001)
In other words, units of Pakistan's military intelligence, the ISI,
--which had coordinated the November 2001 evacuation on behalf of
Uncle Sam-- are now involved in the "hammer and anvil" search for
Al Qaeda in northern Pakistan, with the support of Pakistani
regular forces and US Special Forces.
From a military standpoint, it does not make sense. Evacuate the
enemy to safe-haven, and then two years later in the months leading
up to the presidential elections, "go after them" in the tribal
hills of North Pakistan.
Why did they not arrest the al Qaeda fighters in November 2001?
Is it incompetence or poor military planning? Or is it a diabolical
covert op to safeguard and sustain "enemy number one".? Because
without this "outside enemy" personified by Osama bin Laden and
Ayman al Zawahri, there would be no "war on terrorism".
And Bush needs more than the rhetoric of the "war on terrorism", he
desperately needs a "real" war on terrorism, within the chosen
theater of Northern Pakistan, which can be broadcast on network TV
in the US and around the World.
The hidden agenda behind "Operation Enduring Freedom" launched in
October 2001, was precisely to ensure that Al Qaeda leaders (i.e. US
sponsored intelligence assets) be able to escape. This operation
was an integral part of the propaganda ploy. Al Qaeda fighters were
flown to safety to keep the war on terrorism alive.
Al Zawahri is now being identified by the media as the brain behind
9/11, which serves to distract public attention from the fact, amply
documented, that the Bush administration had foreknowledge of the
September 11 attacks.
* * *
This article was published in Issue 7, Global Outlook, Spring 2004
http://globalresearch.ca/globaloutlook/GOISSUE7.html
© Copyright M CHOSSUDOVSKY 2004.
Michel Chossudovsky is the author of War and Globalization, the
Truth behind September 11 , Global Outlook, Shanty Bay, 2003.
http://globalresearch.ca/globaloutlook/truth911.html
https://www.alainet.org/fr/node/109636?language=en
Del mismo autor
- El escándalo del estudio sobre hidroxicloroquina 15/06/2020
- Coronavirus, una “falsa alarma”: Campaña contra el racismo y el neoliberalismo 12/06/2020
- Capitalismo global, “Gobierno mundial” y la crisis del coronavirus 22/05/2020
- En 2009 la vacuna contra la gripe H1N1 provocó daño cerebral en niños 19/05/2020
- “The Terrorists R Us.” The Islamic State “Big Lie” 25/09/2014
- Reservas-ouro da Ucrânia são evacuadas secretamente e levadas para os Estados Unidos 19/03/2014
- Climate Change: The Philippines Haiyan Typhoon is not the Result of Global Warming 19/11/2013
- Dangerous Crossroads: The Threat of a Pre-emptive Nuclear War directed against Iran 27/03/2013
- Terrorismo com face humana: a história dos esquadrões da morte dos Estados Unidos 15/01/2013
- Towards a "Soft Invasion"? The Launching of a "Humanitarian War" against Syria 05/08/2012