Picked up from GoatMilk, first printed in the South Asia Tribune in May of 2003. This same report was removed from the US CentCom website and reposted on the US Information Clearinghouse Website:

This is the first official estimate of losses suffered by Pakistan, given by the US military high command and analysts say these figures could now be used extensively by the anti-American political forces in Pakistan to pressurize General Pervez Musharraf and his Government to explain his Taliban U-Turn and justify what Pakistan received in return.

The Centcom figures are far in excess of what Pakistani Government officials and experts have been claiming, the highest claim being US$ 2-3 billion. In contrast, what the US has offered to Pakistan so far, a US$ 1 billion write-off of loans, looks like as spoon of tomato ketchup in place of a full fledged state banquet.

“This is a goldmine of political ammunition for the religious right wing forces, like the MMA, to blast the US and the Musharraf Government,” one analyst said.

These figures have been revealed in a detailed review of Pakistan’s role in the operation and are specifically mentioned under the title “Effects of Operation Enduring Freedom on Economy of Pakistan” at the US Centcom web site, a huge resource about the US and coalition activities under the Command.

“Operation Enduring Freedom adversely affected the already fragile economy of Pakistan. Major losses were caused to the civil aviation, tourism, investment and shipping due to rise in the rates of insurance,” the Centcom site data says.

But more mind boggling are the other stats revealed by the Centcom about use of Pakistani air and ground space and facilities provided for Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF). For instance, the CentCom data reveals that:

• Pakistan provided five air bases/airfields. However in emergency planes could land anywhere in Pakistan.
• On the average 400,000 liters of fuel per day was provided to US.
• A total of 57,800 sorties were generated from Pakistan’s air space/soil.
• In order to facilitate launching of air ops into Afghanistan, Pakistan provided 2/3rd of its air space as air corridor to the US/Coalition Forces. By so doing, Pakistan had to reschedule/ redirect many of its commercial flights.
• Pakistan Navy provided landing facility to the US/Coalition ships at Pasni.
• At sea, Pakistan Navy operations/training were curtailed in order to accommodate and facilitate the operations of US/Coalition Naval Forces.
• According to the US Marine Corps Gazette of June 2002, the Coalition Naval Operations at Pasni were the largest amphibious operations in size, duration and depth that the Marine Corps had conducted since the Korean War.
• In all, 8,000 Marines, 330 vehicles and over 1350 tons of equipment/logistic were off loaded at the beach and later flown to Kandahar from Pasni.

Besides these, in the War against Terrorism, according to the Centcom data, up to October 2002, the US side made 2,160 requests (of different nature) to Pakistan of which action on 2,008 was completed. Likewise 99 raids were conducted, 420 foreign nationals were apprehended of which 332 were handed over to the US, 34 were sent to other countries, 38 were released and 16 were under interrogation.

Read more »

The United States and Pakistan reached tacit agreement in September on a don’t-ask-don’t-tell policy that allows unmanned Predator aircraft to attack suspected terrorist targets in rugged western Pakistan, according to senior officials in both countries. In recent months, the U.S. drones have fired missiles at Pakistani soil at an average rate of once every four or five days.

The officials described the deal as one in which the U.S. government refuses to publicly acknowledge the attacks while Pakistan’s government continues to complain noisily about the politically sensitive strikes.

The arrangement coincided with a suspension of ground assaults into Pakistan by helicopter-borne U.S. commandos. Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari said in an interview last week that he was aware of no ground attacks since one on Sept. 3 that his government vigorously protested.

Officials described the attacks, using new technology and improved intelligence, as a significant improvement in the fight against Pakistan-based al-Qaeda and Taliban forces. Officials confirmed the deaths of at least three senior al-Qaeda figures in strikes last month.

Zardari said that he receives “no prior notice” of the airstrikes and that he disapproves of them. But he said he gives the Americans “the benefit of the doubt” that their intention is to target the Afghan side of the ill-defined, mountainous border of Pakistan’s Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA), even if that is not where the missiles land.

Civilian deaths remain a problem, Zardari said. “If the damage is women and children, then the sensitivity of its effect increases,” he said. The U.S. “point of view,” he said, is that the attacks are “good for everybody. Our point of view is that it is not good for our position of winning the hearts and minds of people.”

A senior Pakistani official said that although the attacks contribute to widespread public anger in Pakistan, anti-Americanism there is closely associated with President Bush. Citing a potentially more favorable popular view of President-elect Barack Obama, he said that “maybe with a new administration, public opinion will be more pro-American and we can start acknowledging” more cooperation.

The official, one of several who discussed the sensitive military and intelligence relationship only on the condition of anonymity, said the U.S-Pakistani understanding over the airstrikes is “the smart middle way for the moment.” Contrasting Zardari with his predecessor, retired Gen. Pervez Musharraf, the official said Musharraf “gave lip service but not effective support” to the Americans. “This government is delivering but not taking the credit.” Read more »

This has to be one of the best stories of the election. Yesterday, Alaskan Senator Ted Stevens was indicted of concealing over US$ 250,000 in “gifts” from an oil company looking for favors. The oil company used the Senator to secure business contacts in Pakistan and Russia, along with other favors.

According a report in the LA Times, in the last week of October 1999, Pakistan was desperate to remove powerful military and economic sanctions imposed after the successful nuclear tests in 1998. Stevens was chairman of the conference committee that was overseeing the change. But according to Capitol Hill sources, Senator Stevens made it clear that he wanted Pakistan to resolve a multimillion-dollar dispute with an Alaskan construction and engineering company, VECO, owned by his close friend Bill Allen.

For the background, a June 2003 LA Times report:

A provision giving the White House permanent authority to lift the sanctions against Pakistan appeared to be sailing through Congress - attached to the Defense Department appropriations bill that was moving through Stevens’ conference committee.

But it ran into trouble with Stevens, who was also the powerful chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee and its Defense Department appropriations subcommittee.

Stevens raised the issue of a contract dispute VECO was having with Pakistan over payment for VECO’s participation in construction of a US$ 70 million pipeline. He wanted Pakistan to resolve it. Some of the people involved maintain that Stevens said he would not pass the provision until VECO was taken care of, while others said his intervention was more benign.

The ever famous Charlie Wilson, who was Pakistan’s lobbyist at the time: Read more »