On National and Homeland Security
June 20, 2007
8:05 AM ET
Blog.WashingtonPost
Are U.S. forces employing a new weapon in the war against terrorism? And if so, why are they keeping it a secret?
A huge explosion yesterday in Pakistan's North Waziristan tribal area bordering Afghanistan reportedly killed numerous foreign fighters and civilians. On Sunday, seven children were reported killed in an attack in eastern Afghanistan in an unsuccessful attack on an Al Qaeda commander.
In both attacks, U.S. military spokesmen have either denied U.S. involvement or demurred in providing details. I think I know why.
NBC News reported Sunday that U.S. special operations forces attacked a compound in eastern Afghanistan, an attack intended to kill the Al Qaeda commander in Afghanistan. Seven children were reportedly killed in the attack, and NBC reported that the decision was made to attack the compound despite the presence of children because of the value of the target.
Then, on Tuesday morning, a massive blast at a compound in North Waziristan, in Pakistan near the Afghanistan border, killed as many as 30 alleged Al Qaeda fighters. Pakistani officials say the compound, which included a madrassa, was being used as a training camp and bomb factory.
Press reports say civilians were also killed in the attack.
Officially, the Pakistani government says that the blast was the result of explosives at the site, not from "outside" forces. A U.S. military spokesmen told The Post that "We were not involved with any strike into Pakistan... U.S. forces did not fire into Pakistan with missiles or airstrikes or anything else." On the ground, though, eyewitnesses says that up to three "missiles" came from Afghanistan.
The link between these two strikes may be the deployment of a new weapon, one that gives the United States much more flexibility in going after distant compounds.
What makes these attacks different from the usual attacks in the perpetual head-hunting effort against Al Qaeda is this: Consistent reports from intelligence and military sources that special operations forces employed a new ground rocket system.
The system, called High Mobility Artillery Rockets, or HIMARS is reportedly a complement to Predator drones, particularly when weather prevents the high-altitude strikes, and are the new favorite when significant firepower is desired. The truck-mounted artillery rocket system (hence the "high mobility" moniker) first entered service in June 2005 at Fort Bragg, N.C., to complement the venerable MLRS rocket, which is heavier and more constrained in its movements and flexibility.
HIMARS carries a single six-pack of rockets on a standard Army 6x6 all-wheel drive (MLRS carries 18 rockets). The six-pack can be configured to shoot a wide array of rockets and missiles, from cluster bombs to a single missile system with a range up to 300 kilometers. HIMARS can fire a variety of non-cluster bomb rockets from the standard MLRS range of 32 kilometers to 300 kilometers.
The HIMARS launcher can also aim at a target in just 16 seconds. A crew of three operates the launcher, and it is possible for the crew to select preprogrammed targets stored in a fire control computer to increase flexibility.
With HIMARS, the United States certainly has the ability to fire deep into Pakistan from Afghanistan, and with GPS-aided precision, the missiles have a greater ability to hit the target (with the MLRS, accuracy is to within about 1,000 feet).
There have also been reports of laser-guided rockets and missiles available on HIMARS, further improving accuracy.
It has become routine for the Pakistani government to lie about U.S. strikes taking place on their soil, and for U.S. spokesmen to follow suit to protect operations that are only allowed on the basis of strictest secrecy.
And in Afghanistan, head-hunting operations by U.S. special operations forces are inherently secret, regardless of allegations of civilian casualties -- hence the secrecy surrounding the Sunday strike.
Now comes the prospect that a new weapon, possibly with some new missile capabilities and employed by special operations forces, has been added to the terror-fighting arsenal, useful when air or drone strikes aren't possible or desirable.
So why is the Bush administration, and the U.S. military, keeping quiet about its development?
I don't know for sure.
But if I had to guess, I'd say the administration's reasons have to do with protecting the U.S. relationship with Pakistan, and the military's stem from the habitual secrecy on the part of special operations forces.
Previous:
Expertise Can Help Win the War, Too
Next: On Iraq, (Partial) Agreement From an Unexpected Source
No comments:
Post a Comment