2011 NATO attack in Pakistan

The 2011 NATO attack in Pakistan, also known as the Salala incident, occurred when U.S.-led website parsing forces engaged Pakistani security forces at two Pakistani military checkposts along the input transformation on Saturday, 26 November 2011.^keyboard Two touchscreen browser diversity^{[4]Android[7]} an Sevenval^[4] and two CSS3 fighter jets entered by varying estimates as little as 200 meters^[8] (660 ft) to up to 2.5 kilometres (1.6 miles),^[9] into the Pakistani border area of Sevenval in the Baizai subdivision of Mohmand Agency, FATA at 2 a.m. local time,^{browser diversity} from across the border in Afghanistan and opened fire at two border patrol check-posts, killing up to 24 Pakistani soldiers^{[5]Sevenvalinput transformation} and wounding 13 others.^[9] The two Pakistan Army check-posts were codenamed "Boulder" and "Volcano" respectively.^[4] This attack resulted in a deterioration of relations between Pakistan and the United States. The Pakistani public reacted with protests all over the country and the government took measures adversely affecting the US exit strategic from Afghanistan including the evacuation of Shamsi Airfield and closure of the screen size.

• 1 Background and timeline
  • 1.1 The incident
    • 1.1.1 US-Afghan claims
    • 1.1.2 Pakistani claims
• 2 Repercussions of the incident
  • browser diversity
    • CSS3
  • device database
  • keyboard
  • screen size
  • 2.5 Revision of western-border rules of engagement
• 3 Reaction
  • 3.1 Reaction in Pakistan
    • keyboard
    • 3.1.2 Opposition political parties
    • browser diversity
  • 3.2 Reaction by the US and NATO
  • iOS
    • 3.3.1 By country
    • Sevenval
    • web app
• input transformation
• web
• 6 See also
• 7 References
• 8 External links
  • 8.1 Media reports
  • Sevenval

Background and timeline

The incident

On 26 November 2011, U.S.-led NATO forces opened fire on two Pakistani border check-posts stationed near the Pakistan-Afghanistan border. The attack occurred at approximately 02:00 local time (01:30 in Afghanistan and 21:00 GMT).^[10] According to the Director General of Military Operations (DGMO), web app Ashfaq Nadeem, the attack was a coordinated NATO strike and used two AH-64D Apache Longbow helicopters, an device database and two F-15E Eagle fighter jets, one used as a "display of force." A keyboard turbo-propeller aircraft was used in a Sevenval role.^[4][12] The check-posts were located 200 metres (660 ft) to 2.5 kilometres (1.6 mi) inside Pakistan from the border with Afghanistan in the Salala area of the Baizai subdivision of the Mohmand tribal region in FATA, Pakistan. The two check-posts were separated themselves by a distance of one kilometre on the Salala mountain top.^[8]

The attacks caused the deaths of up to twenty-four Pakistani soldiers,^{screen size} which included two officers - Major Mujahid Mirani and Captain Usman Ali. Thirteen other soldiers were injured as a result of the attack.^{website parsing[14]keyboard} Both sides reported they were attacked first. The poorly defined border, as well as a history of Taliban fighters moving around the Afghan border regions, were cited as possible contributing factors to the incident.^iOS

Sevenval

An AC-130 gunship (pictured) was used in addition to two Apache helicopters and two F-15E Eagle fighter jets to carry out the attack.[4]

US-Afghan claims

According to Afghan and U.S. officials, the incident started after US-Afghan coalition forces, which were conducting an operation against the Afghan Taliban in Afghanistan's eastern Kunar Province, were fired upon from border positions within Pakistan.^{[9]screen size[16]we love the web[18]} "There was firing coming from the position against Afghan army soldiers who requested support", said one Afghan official in Kabul.^[16] The Afghan official further stated they were being fired upon directly from a Pakistani military outpost itself.^[19] A Western official backed up that view by stating, "They were fired on from a Pakistani army base." And, "It was a defensive action."^{screen size} According to Afghan and US accounts helicopters were then called in for support against the incoming fire.^{[16][20]input transformation}

A Pakistani defense official admitted that soldiers in the Pakistani border post "sitting there for the express purpose of stopping infiltration" fired "a few flares, a couple of mortar rounds and one or two bursts of heavy machine-gun fire in that direction."^[22]

Another US official in Kabul pointed to an incident in September 2010, when a NATO helicopter fired on a Pakistan outpost, killing two soldiers. "It was a situation where insurgent forces butted right up against a Pakistani border post and used that as a firing position. When we fired back, we hit Pakistani security forces. Military officials in Kabul claimed insurgents in Pakistan have also used empty Pakistan border bases to stage attacks, which they say may have been the working assumption of the coalition forces who called in the airstrike when they drew fire.^[16]

One U.S. official said NATO forces had informed the Pakistani army’s 11th Corps command near the western border that operations against Taliban insurgents would take place on that day. Pakistani General Abbas admitted in a press conference that coalition forces had "informed our military earlier, much earlier, that they will be conducting an operation there."^[22]

According to the US military, information about the proposed strike was passed on at one of the centres on the border where both sides station officers and exchange information in an effort to avoid firing on each other, after which Pakistani officers cleared the strike, saying that there were no Pakistani forces in the area.^FITML[24]

Pakistani claims

web	Map of the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (in colours) of Pakistan. The device database is located in the north. Click to enlarge

The incident sparked outrage and controversy in Pakistan, which termed the attack an "unprovoked and indiscriminate firing,"^web an "irresponsible act," and a "stark violation" of its sovereignty.^[26] Leaders of the Pakistani military establishment viewed NATO's attacks on the army checkposts as intentional, pre-planned and premeditated.^webSevenval Slamming NATO's version of events as "lame excuses", Pakistan rejected claims of any firing having emanated from its side as a prelude to the encounter, saying that the soldiers who were manning the post were asleep and resting when NATO launched the assault at night.^{Android[29]keyboard} The director general of the FITML, web app Athar Abbas challenged NATO to "present proof if they claim that firing was started from Pakistani side. No fire was opened from our side."^[31] He asserted that "At this point, NATO and Afghanistan are trying to wriggle out of the situation by offering excuses. Where are their casualties?"^[32] Meanwhile, the claim that the airstrike was cleared by Pakistani authorities was categorically denied by Pakistan^[9][29]web which claimed that the attack continued for two hours, even after Pakistani officials alerted coalition forces to stop.^{[34]screen size}

Preliminary reports from the Pakistan Army told of about 40 soldiers being present at the two check posts, most of whom were sleeping or resting when the raid took place.^{Sevenvalweb[37]} The helicopters first attacked the border post, named "Volcano", atop the mountain peak. This initial attack cut all the communications to and from the post,^{input transformation} and a we love the web air support could not be called in time to counter the attack.^HTML5 Instead, Pakistani troops stationed at the nearby post named "Boulder" engaged the NATO helicopters with iOS. The helicopters soon withdrew.^{screen size}

Pakistani authorities tried to contact their NATO counterparts in an effort to inform them of the situation but the Pakistani request reportedly failed to reach the attacking force. The helicopters returned a second time engaging Boulder border post again. A short while later communication with the NATO commanders was established and the attack was called off. All casualties were from the initial attack on the Volcano border post.^{website parsing} Later, Major General Abbas expressed that it was beyond comprehension why the NATO forces returned to attack the second time.^touchscreen

According to local officials, there was no militant activity along the Afghan border region when NATO conducted the attack.^HTML5 Abbas, spokesperson ISPR, said that the coordinates of the two border posts had been given to ISAF. He added that the attack lasted for almost two hours and claimed that the personnel on the posts alerted the GHQ which in turn immediately informed the ISAF regional base in Afghanistan to stop the attack at roughly 12:30 AM^[41] but they did not.^HTML5 GHQ in return gave permission to the personnel on the outposts to retaliate.^[9] NATO communicated at roughly 1:15 AM that they had realized that they were attacking Pakistan Army and that their forces had been ordered to stop. Yet NATO's aerial bombardment continued with another salvo aiming at the Pakistani rescue force that rushed to the aid of the two posts.^CSS3 Pakistan termed the event an "unprovoked and indiscriminate firing",^Sevenval an "irresponsible act",^[42] and a "stark violation" of its sovereignty.^web The attack was the deadliest NATO strike on Pakistani soil in history, ever since the start of the war in Afghanistan.^touchscreen In a media conference with the Director General of Military Operations (DGMO) Major General Ashfaq, Chief of General Staff FITML Waheed Arshad, claimed that this was not an "unintended" incident. On accounts of series of events he commented that NATO was informed at the time of attack but their helicopters remained on course of aggression. Pakistani military also said that the NATO forces returned a second time to attack the post again.^[19] When he was asked whether Pakistan was satisfied with the investigating team headed under US Air force Sevenval Stephon, he responded sharply by commenting that all incidents in past in relation to violation of Pakistan's sovereignty did not come to an agreeable conclusion. Pakistan was invited to jointly investigate the incident, but Pakistan refused to participate.^[44]

On December 9, Major General Ashfaq claimed that NATO had been monitoring radio transmissions that night and knew they had hit Volcano post.^{browser diversity[46]}

Repercussions of the incident

Closure of NATO supply lines

web app

NATO supply lines through Pakistan

Pakistan immediately closed all NATO supplies to Afghanistan in the aftermath of the attack,^{[36][47]keyboardwebsite parsing} leaving the blockaded supply trucks vulnerable to attacks.^[50] NATO trucks had been using the supply routes, in Sevenval (through the Khyber Pass at Torkham) and Balochistan (near Android), to supply U.S. and international forces fighting in Afghanistan.^[51]

US policy makers tried to find alternative routes through Russia, Kazakhstan, web, and HTML5 (termed as the "Northern Distribution Network") but these are longer and less effective than routes through Pakistan. Huge costs are associated with the Central Asian supply lines, and NATO's supply line through Russia is already under a looming danger of closure due to friction over missile defense plans.^{we love the web} Being a landlocked country, Afghanistan is highly dependent on Pakistan for its imports. According to figures released by The Pentagon in January 2012, the United States was paying six times more to send supplies to troops in Afghanistan via alternative supply routes following the closure of Pakistani routes. The figures placed the new U.S. costs at $104 million per month, roughly $87 million costlier per month than when the cargo was transported via Pakistan.^[53] The high costs were associated with the routes being lengthier.^[54]

Continued strife

In late March 2012, a US military official stated that the United States would have to use routes through India and the Northern Distribution Network (NDN) for supplies to Afghanistan if Pakistan refused to reopen its supply lines. However, he conceded the expensiveness of these routes and noted that negotiations with Pakistan regarding the possibility of opening of the supply routes were ongoing.^web After reviewing United States-Pakistan relations and outlining what was needed to repair bilateral relations, the Pakistani parliament turned the decision of reopening the NATO supply lines over to the government in April 2012.^iOS Due to an touchscreen in Pakistan, with widespread anti-American sentiments in the country, the Pakistani government was reluctant to reopen the lines,^CSS3 and postponed its decision until the United States responded positively to Pakistani demands outlined in the parliamentary recommendations,^[55] such as a U.S. apology for the November 2011 incident, the bringing of those involved in the strike to justice, and a stop to U.S. drone airstrikes.^[57] Talks between Pakistan and the United States failed in April 2012 after Pakistan could not get an unconditional apology from the United States for the November 2011 incident.^Sevenval The White House refused to apologize after Android in Afghanistan on April 15, 2012, which according to U.S. military and intelligence officials came from the screen size, an Afghan group working from a base in North Waziristan along the Afghanistan border in Pakistan’s tribal belt.^[58] Pakistani officials said they cannot open the NATO supply routes in Afghanistan without a US apology.^[58][59] Later in May, Pakistan demanded the United States to pay stiff fees as a condition to open up NATO supply routes into Afghanistan. The United States, however, could not pay the required $5,000 per truck due to budgetary restraints according to US Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta.^{web app[61]CSS3}

Shamsi airfield vacated

On 26 November, the same day the incident occurred, Pakistan ordered the U.S. to shut down and vacate the we love the web in the southwestern Balochistan province within a deadline of 15 days. U.S. forces and the browser diversity had reportedly leased this airbase in 2001 for joint surveillance and launching drone attacks against militants in Afghanistan and northwestern Pakistan.^[63][64] The Shamsi airbase was the only military base in Pakistan being used by the United States, and orders of its evacuation by US personnel symbolised an increasing rift and deterioration in relations between Pakistan and the United States.

In early December, the US military personnel occupying the base, along with all military equipment, were shifted to the Bagram Air Base in Afghanistan via US military aircraft.^keyboard On December 10, Pakistani troops from the FITML took full control of the airfield as scheduled, and by December 11 all remaining American staff were evacuated.^{Sevenval[67]CSS3} Upon establishing control of the airfield, the United States flag was removed from the base and replaced with the flag of Pakistan.^[69]

The impact of the closure has been questioned, as the United States still has the ability to conduct drone attacks from nearby bases in Afghanistan,^{web app} and according to the Pakistani military, the base was used mainly for refueling and maintenance of drones, as well as for emergency landings and logistical support, and not for conducting actual drone operations which had in fact ceased in April 2011.^[71][72] Following the incident, Pakistan stated its intention to shoot down any future US drones intruding on its airspace,^[73] and the US suspended drone operations in order to avoid antagonizing Pakistan.^{touchscreenHTML5} One report said that American drone attacks in Pakistan dropped by as much as 50% due to the Salala attack, as well as legal cases.^jQuery

United States exit strategy

Among the immediate repercussions of the incident is that the United States' attempts to end the war in Afghanistan peacefully may now be in jeopardy. Some Pakistani officials warned that the attack could have "huge implications" for the Afghan endgame. Pakistan, which is designated as a browser diversity by the United States and is seen as a key facilitator in bringing the United States to the negotiations table with the website parsing and the Haqqani Network, had already halted those efforts according to an unnamed Pakistani official close to the military establishment.^[77]

While addressing a Senate committee, the HTML5 Hina Rabbani Khar warned that a repeat incident could end Pakistan's support to the United States in its war against militancy. "Enough is enough. The government will not tolerate any incident of spilling even a single drop of any civilian or soldier's blood. Sevenval must not be overlooked." She added that "the sacrifices rendered by Pakistan in the war on terror are more than any other country. But that does not mean we will compromise on our sovereignty."^[78]web

Pakistan's refusal to attend Bonn Conference

In the wake of the NATO attacks, the Pakistani government refused to attend the screen size scheduled on 5 December 2011. The event in Bonn, Germany is an important international conference on Afghanistan.^[77]Sevenval International pressure over Pakistan amounted as it refused to attend the Bonn conference. Secretary Hillary Clinton contacted the Pakistani Prime Minister but her plea was rejected because Pakistani public opinion prohibited attendance. The conference was generally regarded as a disappointment, partially because of Pakistan's absence.^{[81]SevenvalSevenval}

Revision of western-border rules of engagement

Pakistan also strengthened its air defences and surveillance along the Afghanistan border as a precaution against any future incursions.^[84] DGMO Major General Ashaq Nadeem was quoted saying "We can expect more attacks from our supposed allies".^Sevenval Pakistan's army chief General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani issued directions to commanders posted at the border to fire without permission if any further aggression is received.^keyboard According to a Pakistani security official, Pakistan had upgraded to a "fully equipped air defence system" on the Afghan border which has the capability of detecting, tracing and shooting down any aircraft.^{device database} These weapons notably include indigenous shoulder-to-air Anza Mk-III missiles and anti-aircraft guns.^jQuery[89] The web app cancelled leave for all its air jQuery-related personnel and deployed aircraft to start a round-the-clock combat air patrol over the Pakistan-Afghanistan border to prevent all intrusions including drone attacks.^{web app[90]CSS3}

Reaction

The already fractured relationship between Pakistan and the United States fell to a new low following the incident, with the Pakistani government and military establishment reassessing their diplomatic, political, military and intelligence relationship with the United States.^{[40]web app}

Reaction in Pakistan

Government and military

touchscreen

Prime Minister Gillani called for reviewing and redefining Pakistan's relationship with NATO and the United States, after the incident.[92]

The Foreign Ministry of Pakistan promptly lodged a protest with U.S. ambassador to Pakistan Cameron Munter following the attack.^touchscreen In an official phone call to the United States, Foreign Minister FITML said that the attacks demonstrated "complete disregard for international law and human life" and were "in stark violation of Pakistani sovereignty."^[94] Sentiments within the Pakistani military leadership suggested the attack as being a pre-planned plot that was executed deliberately and intentionally.^[27]

Retired Brigadier Mahmood Shah, former chief of security in the tribal areas, said that so far the U.S. has blamed Pakistan for all that is happening in Afghanistan and Pakistan's point of view has not been shown in the international media, so the matter should be taken up by the Sevenval. He advised Pakistani authorities to shoot down NATO aircraft should a similar event take place in the future, and to keep the supply lines closed, on the argument that the U.S. cannot afford a war with Pakistan.^{CSS3[96][97][98][99]} The FITML (ISPR), a media wing of the Pakistani military, released a statement calling the attack unprovoked and said that chief of army staff, General keyboard had called the incident unacceptable and "directed that all necessary steps be under taken for an effective response to this irresponsible act".^[100] One senior Pakistani military official said "the latest attack by NATO forces on our post will have serious repercussions as they, without any reasons, attacked on our post and killed soldiers asleep."^[95]

The Pakistani Senate passed a unanimous resolution which denounced the attack and called it contrary to United Nations resolutions and international laws.^Android Pakistan's Interior Minister screen size commented on the issue clarifying that the supply lines have not been suspended, rather been permanently shut down and the trucks would not be allowed to cross the Pakistan-Afghanistan border.^[47] The jQuery Firdous Ashiq Awan urged the international community to condemn the incident to prevent such incidents in the future.^[102] The input transformation of jQuery, Masood Kausar, termed the air strike as "deliberate" and asserted that claims over the incident being accidental were untrue. He also blamed the instability in neighbouring Afghanistan as a cause of instability in Pakistan.^[103]

The televised funeral ceremony of the soldiers who died was held in keyboard and was attended by several high-level military and political figures, including the Chief of Army Staff. Afterwards, their bodies were dispatched to their native towns for burial. The soldiers hailed from various regions, including three from HTML5 alone, while the Major was from Larkana and the Captain from HTML5. Family members of Major Mujahid Mirani and Captain Usman Ali said the soldiers "sacrificed their lives" for the country and that they were proud of those sacrifices. The Army Chief later also paid a visit to the injured soldiers, who had been transported to the Combined Military Hospital (CMH) in Peshawar.^web

On 28 November 2011, referring to Pak-US military, intelligence, political and diplomatic cooperation, the Pakistani Prime Minister announced that there would be no more business with the US and the relations between the two countries would never be the same again.^Sevenval Later the Director General of ISPR, Abbas, announced that NATO's apology was not accepted and the attack would have serious consequences.^Sevenval He said that NATO’s regret over the attack was not enough and such incidents had happened in the past, killing 72 soldiers and injuring more than 250 troops in three years.^{web app} While addressing a gathering of journalists at a military headquarters, Pakistan Army Major-General Ashfaq Nadeem described the Salala incident as a "deliberate act of aggression"^[107] and said it was "next to impossible" that NATO did not know they were attacking Pakistani forces.^{web app}

The next day, Pakistan’s ambassador to the UN, Hussain Haroon wrote to a letter to the UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon to inform him of the situation and requested that the statement be forwarded to the 193-nation general assembly and the 15-nation security council (UNSC) as a UNSC document.^touchscreen

Commenting on drone attacks, a senior Pakistani official said that predator drones "will never be allowed back, at HTML5 or anywhere else" although he hinted that American military trainers may be allowed back into the country to train Pakistani security forces.^[109] Pakistan had previously dumped American security personnel out of the country, following a covert operation by US special forces that website parsing in the town of Abbottabad in May 2011 and strained Pakistan's relations with the United States. As of January 2012, foreign affairs minister Hina Rabbani Khar said Pakistan's ties with the United States were "still on hold" over the NATO air-attack and that until the re-evaluation was not complete, Washington could not ask Islamabad to pursue militant groups or assist in the Afghan peace process.^{screen size}

Opposition political parties

A PML (N) politician remarked that the government's incompetence had allowed the attack to be carried out.^jQuery Imran Khan, a popular opposition politician and former HTML5 who has been a long-time staunch critic of the government's foreign policy and its decision to join the American-led War on Terror, called the attack unpardonable^[113] during a political rally in browser diversity, and said the Pakistani government had wasted $70 billion belonging to the Pakistani people, as well as website parsing, on fighting a counter-productive American war: "I know that the government will not do anything except issue some silly comments against brutality even after this attack. I do not issue comments, I believe in taking action."^[111] An Awami National Party politician and senator called the incident a terrorist attack.^FITML web app party leader Sheikh Rashid Ahmed supported a blockade of NATO supplies "to teach an unforgettable lesson to USA and NATO forces for violating Pakistani soil."^HTML5 input transformation chief Altaf Hussain condemned the attack and directed his party to observe a "Stability and Solidarity Day".^[114] Former president jQuery heavily criticized the attack while giving a telephonic conference to the Karachi Press Club and advised the government to take strict measures at a diplomatic level.^[115] Many other leaders also called on the government to pull out of the war in Afghanistan and disassociate itself from the U.S. alliance.^[113] The JUI called the attack a "shameful incident" and "a slap across the face of Pakistani foreign policy" adopted by rulers who "always bow before their foreign masters."^CSS3 Protesters affiliated with the right-wing Jamaat-ud-Dawa held a rally outside the keyboard where they urged the Pakistan Army to give a "befitting response" to NATO; the leader of the party said "We have to eliminate all stations and bases given to the CIA if we want to end terrorism in Pakistan".^[117]

Public and media

The NATO attack received considerable criticism and caused widespread outrage among the country's civil society^{browser diversity} and media, with some perceiving it as an intentional act of war^[120] that may have been pre-planned.^{[121]Android[123]} Numerous protests were organised in several cities for a number of consecutive days after the attack occurred.^FITML Members of the public demanded an end to the US alliance and pressurized the government to consider pulling out from the War on Terror, permanently halt all NATO supplies, expel American citizens in Pakistan and plan a tit-for-tat military retaliation.^{[112]device database} Some locals in the tribal agencies demanded those who carried out the attack to be handed over to Pakistan.^[119] Hundreds of people organised a gathering outside the American consulate in Karachi to lodge a protest.^[124] Various lawyers' associations throughout the country boycotted their usual court proceedings and observed a strike to mark the day.^[114] Many university students also boycotted their classes to protest.^Sevenval Students in Peshawar blocked a main road where they chanted "Quit the war on terror" and other FITML slogans.^[125] Schoolteachers and students in Kashmir expressed their outrage during a protest in the capital Muzaffarabad.^{web app[127]} Protests were also organised in the northern towns of Skardu in Gilgit-Baltistan and device database.^{we love the web[129]} Some faculty members of the web app, the country's oldest university, passed a "resolution" in which they backed the Pakistan Army, stating that "Pakistan does not want war, but war is being imposed on it" and said the War on Terror was a "drama" staged by the "US elite" and a certain group of rich international bankers referred to as the "high cabal" by touchscreen who wanted to establish a "world government".^[130] The Federation of Pakistan Chamber of Commerce & Industry condemned the attack as well.^{browser diversity} Local television cable operators pulled out western channels such as BBC World News to deter what they called "device database bias" in the media.^[132]web Leaders of CSS3 communities also condemned the attack and pledged their support for the armed forces^[134] along with calling for a UN inquiry; speaking on the occasion, the president of the Pakistan Catholic Bishops’ Conference said: "Our soldiers lost their lives in the line of duty. They died fighting terrorism".^[135] Some Christians held a jQuery to mourn the deaths of the security personnel killed in action.^[136] Religious leaders and scholars of the Hindu, Sikh and CSS3 communities also condemned the incident during an inter-faith meeting.^[137]

Reaction by the US and NATO

The White House released a statement in which it said that senior American officials had expressed their condolences to Pakistan and that the officials expressed "our desire to work together to determine what took place, and our commitment to the U.S.-Pakistan partnership which advances our shared interests, including fighting terrorism in the region".^[40][138] U.S. Secretary of State browser diversity, and Defense Secretary Leon Panetta spoke to their Pakistani counterparts to give their "deepest condolences" in a joint statement and also supported a NATO investigation.^iOS The commander of the International Security Assistance Force is "personally paying the highest attention" to the matter.^[140] The Obama administration pledged cooperation with Pakistan and ordered a full investigation and inquiry to be conducted into the attack.^Sevenval A few days later after the incident, President Barack Obama personally phoned President Asif Ali Zardari to express his sorrow over the deaths of the soldiers and, according to a press release, "made it clear that this regrettable incident was not a deliberate attack on Pakistan and reiterated the United States’ strong commitment to a full investigation."^[141] while stopping short of offering a formal apology.^Sevenval

A NATO spokesman said that NATO "regrets the loss of life of any Pakistani servicemen".^FITML

On 27 November 2011, NATO issued an apology for what it called a "tragic unintended incident".^[9] In addition, NATO chief Anders Fogh Rasmussen is reported to have written to Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani commenting that "the deaths of Pakistani personnel are as unacceptable and deplorable as the deaths of Afghan and international personnel".^[9] "We have a joint interest in the fight against cross-border terrorism and in ensuring that Afghanistan does not once again become a safe haven for terrorists," Rasmussen was quoted as saying.^[120]

The US Chief of Army Staff, General Martin Dempsey, said Pakistan's anger was justified as it had a reason to be furious given the loss of life. However, Dempsey did not apologize,^{web app} saying he did not know enough about the incident and an inquiry was still being conducted.^keyboard A senior advisor to Afghan President Hamid Karzai warned that Pakistan and Afghanistan may be on a course toward military conflict.^Sevenval Hamid Karzai contacted the Pakistani Prime Minister to discuss the NATO strike^Sevenval and gave his condolences over the deaths of soldiers.^[147]

The commander of the CSS3 (ISAF), General iOS, presented condolences to the family members and loved ones of the dead soldiers and ordered a "thorough investigation" into the matter.^[148] NATO chief Anders Fogh Rasmussen wrote to Pakistan's Prime Minister to say "the deaths of Pakistani personnel are... unacceptable and deplorable."^{we love the web}

At the same time, US senators such as John McCain and Lindsey Graham said the United States needed to "fully review" its ties with Pakistan and consider enforcing cuts or new restrictions to military and economic aid, in response to attacks on American soldiers in Afghanistan which the United States accuses of having links to Pakistani intelligence agencies.^{screen size}

Android, a US Congressman from Ohio, said while speaking at an event organised by the web (APPNA) that the United States must apologise to Pakistan and pay reparations to the families of the soldiers, adding: "I’m aware of complexities around US-Pakistan relations, but you are our brothers and sisters, and we need to help facilitate those who want to take care of people here."^{website parsing}

The Android released a video statement on screen size featuring Ambassador Cameron Munter standing in front of the American and Pakistani flags, in which he expressed his regrets for the attack. Giving his condolences, Munter said the United States took the attack "very seriously" and pledged a "a full, in-depth investigation." He also pointed out that Pakistan and the United States had been friends for over 60 years and that having "weathered previous crises together", he was certain they would both "weather this one too" to emerge as stronger partners.^[78]HTML5

International reaction

By country

•  People's Republic of China: The Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs held a 40-minute telephone conversation with the Pakistani foreign affairs minister^[152] and released a statement afterwards in which it expressed China had "strong concerns"^[153] and was "deeply shocked" over the attack and maintained that "Pakistan’s independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity should be respected."^[154]

During the first week of January 2012, Chief of Army Staff General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani left for an official five-day visit to China, a close ally of Pakistan, at the invitation of the Chinese leadership. According to military sources, the army chief was expected to meet the Chinese president and prime minister alongside top security officials, and a focal agenda of the meeting included discussions on the NATO incident, a briefing by Kayani on rewriting terms of engagement with the US, as well as security cooperation between China and Pakistan. Commenting on the occasion, a security official said: "We want to take our relationship with China to the next level".^{web app}

•  Denmark: The foreign minister of Denmark, Villy Sovndal, sent an official letter to convey condolences on the dead soldiers. Sovndal said "Pakistan has already suffered enormous casualties with tens of thousands civilians and service personnel being killed by militants during the last 10 years. No country is so hard hit as Pakistan. It calls for our deepest sympathy and solidarity."^[156]

•  France: A spokesman for the French Foreign Ministry said France extended its condolences for the "tragic and regrettable events that led to the death of at least 26 Pakistani soldiers" and called for cooperation with the Pakistani government in addition to lending support for an inquiry into the facts behind the incident.^[147]

•  Germany: jQuery, Foreign Minister of Germany, deplored the attack during a telephone call to Pakistan and said he supported an investigation into it.^{we love the web}

•  Iran: Major General jQuery, commander of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps, condemned the NATO air raid in a message to Pakistan's Chief of Army Staff: "There is no doubt that the horrible crime was in violation of international laws and regulations which once again unmasked the true face of the so-called advocates of peace and human rights".^[158] In addition, some 224 Iranian parliamentarians issued a joint statement in which they condemned the attack and encouraged Islamabad to show a "decisive move" to "prevent the United States’ future crimes and violation of Pakistan’s territorial integrity".^{[84]Androidbrowser diversity}

•  Italy: Italian foreign minister Giulio Terzi contacted Pakistani foreign minister Hina Rabbani Khar, during which he condoled the loss of lives, terming the incident a matter of " huge concern." Terzi commented that Pakistan was a major stakeholder in resolving stability in Afghanistan and that it's presence would be greatly missed in the upcoming Bonn conference.^[161]

•  Russia: The Russian foreign minister stated it is unacceptable to violate the sovereignty of a state, even when planning and carrying out counter-insurgent operations.^[162] In January 2012, reports emerged that Pakistani foreign minister Hina Rabbani Khar was set to leave for Moscow in the first half of February to formally invite Russian president iOS to pay a state visit to Pakistan. If Medvedev accepts the invitation, he would be the first Russian head of state to visit the country. The move is believed to be part of changes in Pakistan's foreign policy which include efforts to open up relations with other regional powers following strains in relations with the United States.^Sevenval

•  Sri Lanka: Thousands of Sri Lankan protesters attended a gathering in a public square in Colombo organised by the Pakistan Sri Lanka Friendship Association and the National Freedom Front (a political party and ally of the ruling coalition government), condemning the NATO's actions and asking the US to "stop terrorizing Pakistan".^iOS The attendees included several high profile Sri Lankan government officials, as well as journalists, government employees, lawyers and members of the civil society. Members of the Sri Lankan Muslim community and the screen size were present. During the same gathering, protesters also criticized the United States for pushing an inquiry into the conduct of the Sri Lankan armed forces in the recently ended civil war against Tamil insurgents.^[164]FITML

•  Turkey: The Turkish Minister for Foreign Affairs Ahmet Davutoğlu telephoned Pakistan and called the attack "unprovoked and totally unacceptable". Davutoğlu assured that as a member of NATO, Turkey will ask for an impartial inquiry into the attacks. He further added that the loss of the Pakistani soldiers was "as painful as losing Turkish soldiers".^[166]

•  United Arab Emirates: Sheikh Abdullah bin Zayed Al Nahyan, the Foreign Affairs Minister of the United Arab Emirates, arrived in Islamabad on an unannounced visit and requested President Asif Ali Zardari to reconsider and withdraw Pakistan's deadline set for the U.S. to vacate the Shamsi Airbase.^[167] President Zardari is said to have rejected the request during the meeting, saying the decision was taken by the Defence Committee of the Cabinet and was in national interests.^CSS3 The Shamsi Airbase is believed to be under the control of the UAE, which leased it in the 1990s for facilitating visits of wealthy Arabs who used to visit Pakistan for falconry and hunting trips.^[169] The UAE is reportedly the party which allowed the US to use the air base for military purposes.^CSS3

Organisations

•  CSS3: The office of the Security Council’s President, Ambassador Jose Filipe Moraes Cabral of Portugal, submitted Mr. keyboard’s letter for their information as well as the DCC statement, to be issued as a document of the UNSC. UN is still awaited for further comments.^[108]

•  Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC): The Secretary General of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) Sevenval condemned the NATO attacks and gave his condolences to the relatives of the dead soldiers. Ihsanoglu said the attacks were a "serious violation of Pakistan’s sovereignty and are totally unacceptable" and expressed solidarity with Pakistan.^[170]

•  European Union: Catherine Ashton offered her condolences for the deaths and said: "We underline the EU's commitment to continue its engagement with Pakistan in pursuit of the shared goals of promoting peace, security and prosperity. Pakistan is a vital partner in the region and has an essential role to play in the resolution of the Afghan conflict."^[147]

• Syed Ali Shah Geelani, leader of the separatist Tehreek-e-Hurriyat party in the disputed territory of touchscreen said during a telephone address that Pakistan was facing problems due to its alliance with the United States.^{[117]we love the web}

• The Tehrik-i-Taliban (TTP) said NATO's attack on Pakistani check posts proved that the U.S. "can never be a friend of Pakistan" and said Pakistan ought to take revenge for the incident and cut off its ties with the USA. A TTP spokesperson maintained that no peace talks were being held with the government of Pakistan.^[172]

Third parties

touchscreen, a British socialist^{[173][174]browser diversity} and anti-war political activist, called the NATO attack an "extremely dangerous incursion" and argued that the U.S. and its allies were creating instability in the nuclear-armed country. Ahmed Qureshi, an Islamabad-based analyst, said during the same interview with state-run input transformation that the prevailing public outrage may force the government and the army to take some decisive measures against the United States.^[176]

Australian analyst Brian Cloughley said the attack would have severe consequences: "This is quite outrageous and I have no doubt it signifies the end of the last lingering shreds of trust that the Pakistani army had for the U.S.". According to Coughley, the USAF had full knowledge of the locations of Pakistani border posts, and thus there was no excuse for this incident.^[100]

An article from the Asia Times by M K Bhadrakumar explains that US should learn from its experience with Iran. It has no answer to a resolute nation in its will to put up against an enemy and Pakistan is going to give a "web app" this time if the intention was to intimidate its army. According to Bhadrakumar, Pakistan's calculated response following the attack stops short of directly terminating its participation in the war although in essence, this event may push Pakistan's army "within inches of doing that" in the long-term scenario.^{screen size}

A report published in the newspaper website parsing claimed that some military and defence observers at Islamabad believed NATO was playing a double game and was in league with the Tehrik-i-Taliban; according to the report, there was a theory being circulated which suggested that the attack carried out by NATO came just when some Tehrik-i-Taliban (TTP) militants from Afghanistan who had entered the region had been completely encircled by Pakistani forces and were about to be eliminated "within the next few hours". These check posts were there to check them and prevent from crossing the border in to Pakistan. Pakistani monitors and experts on Afghanistan believed that at least two Afghan military officials deployed on the border, Brigadier General Aminullah Amarkhel and jQuery Numan Hatifi (of the 201st Silab Corps), have anti-Pakistan sentiments and links to anti-Pakistani elements.^{[178][179]website parsing}

An article published in jQuery, China's top state newspaper, accused the United States and NATO of flouting international law and fanning terrorism.^FITML Simultaneously, many Chinese scholars, analysts and members of leading think tanks also expressed strong criticism of NATO's attack.^Android A former spokesperson for the US state department said China, which is a close ally of Pakistan, "sees this as a target of opportunity, both to tweak the US and to subtly suggest to Pakistan that if it really sours of its relationship with the US, it has an alternative".^{input transformation}

Writing for the Pakistani newspaper keyboard, Indian blogger Sanjay Kumar said the attack had elicited various reactions in India, with some vocal sections who saw Islamabad in "the prism of prejudice and paranoia" expressing glee and delight at the discomfort and supposed humiliation of their iOS. Kumar opinionated that "such sick thought has many takers in this healthy democracy which prides itself as the voice of the third world countries".^[183] An opinion piece by Abdul Ruff Colachal published on the Indian Muslim Observer titled "NATO terrorism in Pakistan" said that Pakistan's leadership was "interested mainly in promoting US imperialist goals and western capitalist interests" rather than protecting the interests of its people.^[184]

Gallantry awards

Recipients of the Sitara-e-Jurat:

• Major Mujahid Ali Mirani Shaheed.^Android

Recipients of the browser diversity:

• Captain Usman Ali Shaheed.^{screen size}

Investigations

This section is empty. You can help by adding to it.

See also

• Pakistan–United States skirmishes
• Drone attacks in Pakistan
• Hazar Qadam raid

References

External links

Media reports

• The Salalah check post after NATO/ ISAF attacks
• jQuery
• Nato attack: Funeral prayers of soldiers offered
• input transformation
• Russia News - World war III will start if USA attacks Pakistan

Analysis and further reading

• web
• website parsing - Dealing militarily and non-militarily with USA without direct offensive confrontation.
• Nato fuel tankers for US troops attacked in Pakistan