[Peace-discuss] Assassins' Creed

[C. G. Estabrook]

[What does it mean that the regime-friendly NYT is spotlighting the terrorist 
behavior of the the US - throughout the Mideast?  Convincing the US public that 
- however filthy the behavior of the US military - it's necessary and 
acceptable? Some Americans are beginning to point out that this sort of murder 
and assassination by the US government is not only contrary to international 
law, it's unconstitutional.  And no one believes Obama's lies that we're 
"stopping terrorism."]

	U.S. Is Said to Order Further Clandestine Military Action
	By MARK MAZZETTI
	Published: May 24, 2010

WASHINGTON — The top American commander in the Middle East has ordered a broad 
expansion of clandestine military activity in an effort to disrupt militant 
groups or counter threats in Iran, Saudi Arabia, Somalia and other countries in 
the region, according to defense officials and military documents.

The secret directive, signed in September by Gen. David H. Petraeus, authorizes 
the sending of American Special Operations troops to both friendly and hostile 
nations in the Middle East, Central Asia and the Horn of Africa to gather 
intelligence and build ties with local forces. Officials said the order also 
permits reconnaissance that could pave the way for possible military strikes in 
Iran if tensions over its nuclear ambitions escalate.

While the Bush administration had approved some clandestine military activities 
far from designated war zones, the new order is intended to make such efforts 
more systematic and long term, officials said. Its goals are to build networks 
that could “penetrate, disrupt, defeat or destroy” Al Qaeda and other militant 
groups, as well as to “prepare the environment” for future attacks by American 
or local military forces, the document said. The order, however, does not appear 
to authorize offensive strikes in any specific countries.

In broadening its secret activities, the United States military has also sought 
in recent years to break its dependence on the Central Intelligence Agency and 
other spy agencies for information in countries without a significant American 
troop presence.

General Petraeus’s order is meant for use of small teams of American troops to 
fill intelligence gaps about terror organizations and other threats in the 
Middle East and beyond, especially emerging groups plotting attacks against the 
United States.

But some Pentagon officials worry that the expanded role carries risks. The 
authorized activities could strain relationships with friendly governments like 
Saudi Arabia or Yemen, or incite the anger of hostile nations like Iran and 
Syria. Many in the military are also concerned that as American troops assume 
roles far from traditional combat, they would be at risk of being treated as 
spies if captured and denied the Geneva Convention protections afforded military 
detainees.

The precise operations that the directive authorizes are unclear, and what the 
military has done to follow through on the order is uncertain. The document, a 
copy of which was viewed by The New York Times, provides few details about 
continuing missions or intelligence-gathering operations.

Several government officials who described the impetus for the order would speak 
only on condition of anonymity because the document is classified. Spokesmen for 
the White House and the Pentagon declined to comment for this article. The 
Times, responding to concerns about troop safety raised by an official at United 
States Central Command, the military headquarters run by General Petraeus, 
withheld some details about how troops could be deployed in certain countries.

The seven-page directive appears to authorize specific operations in Iran, most 
likely to gather intelligence about the country’s nuclear program or identify 
dissident groups that might be useful for a future military offensive. The Obama 
administration insists that for the moment, it is committed to penalizing Iran 
for its nuclear activities only with diplomatic and economic sanctions. 
Nevertheless, the Pentagon has to draw up detailed war plans to be prepared in 
advance, in the event that President Obama ever authorizes a strike.

“The Defense Department can’t be caught flat-footed,” said one Pentagon official 
with knowledge of General Petraeus’s order.

The directive, the Joint Unconventional Warfare Task Force Execute Order, signed 
Sept. 30, may also have helped lay a foundation for the surge of American 
military activity in Yemen that began three months later.

Special Operations troops began working with Yemen’s military to try to 
dismantle Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, an affiliate of Osama bin Laden’s 
terror network based in Yemen. The Pentagon has also carried out missile strikes 
from Navy ships into suspected militant hideouts and plans to spend more than 
$155 million equipping Yemeni troops with armored vehicles, helicopters and 
small arms.

Officials said that many top commanders, General Petraeus among them, have 
advocated an expansive interpretation of the military’s role around the world, 
arguing that troops need to operate beyond Iraq and Afghanistan to better fight 
militant groups.

The order, which an official said was drafted in close coordination with Adm. 
Eric T. Olson, the officer in charge of the United States Special Operations 
Command, calls for clandestine activities that “cannot or will not be 
accomplished” by conventional military operations or “interagency activities,” a 
reference to American spy agencies.

While the C.I.A. and the Pentagon have often been at odds over expansion of 
clandestine military activity, most recently over intelligence gathering by 
Pentagon contractors in Pakistan and Afghanistan, there does not appear to have 
been a significant dispute over the September order.

A spokesman for the C.I.A. declined to confirm the existence of General 
Petraeus’s order, but said that the spy agency and the Pentagon had a “close 
relationship” and generally coordinate operations in the field.

“There’s more than enough work to go around,” said the spokesman, Paul 
Gimigliano. “The real key is coordination. That typically works well, and if 
problems arise, they get settled.”

During the Bush administration, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld endorsed 
clandestine military operations, arguing that Special Operations troops could be 
as effective as traditional spies, if not more so.

Unlike covert actions undertaken by the C.I.A., such clandestine activity does 
not require the president’s approval or regular reports to Congress, although 
Pentagon officials have said that any significant ventures are cleared through 
the National Security Council. Special Operations troops have already been sent 
into a small number of countries to carry out limited surveillance and 
reconnaissance missions, including operations to gather intelligence about 
airstrips, bridges and beaches that might be needed for an offensive.

Some of Mr. Rumsfeld’s initiatives were controversial, and met with resistance 
by some at the State Department and C.I.A. who saw the troops as a backdoor 
attempt by the Pentagon to assert influence outside of war zones. In 2004, one 
of the first groups sent overseas was pulled out of Paraguay after killing a 
pistol-waving robber who had attacked them as they stepped out of a taxi.

A Pentagon order that year gave the military authority for offensive strikes in 
more than a dozen countries, and Special Operations troops carried them out in 
Syria, Pakistan and Somalia.

In contrast, General Petraeus’s September order is focused on intelligence 
gathering — by American troops, foreign businesspeople, academics or others — to 
identify militants and provide “persistent situational awareness,” while forging 
ties to local indigenous groups.

Thom Shanker and Eric Schmitt contributed reporting.

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.