Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Bhutto 'blocked from hiring US bodyguards'(Blackwater)
The SundayTelegraph,U.K ^ | 31/12/2007 | Philip Sherwell

Posted on 12/30/2007 8:53:39 PM PST by sukhoi-30mki

Bhutto 'blocked from hiring US bodyguards'

By Philip Sherwell in New York

Last Updated: 12:46am GMT 31/12/2007

Benazir Bhutto was so fearful for her life that she tried to hire British and American security experts to protect her, The Sunday Telegraph can reveal.

But the plans collapsed because President Pervez Musharraf refused to allow the foreign contractors to operate in Pakistan, according to senior aides.

"She asked to bring in trained security personnel from abroad," said Mark Siegel, her US representative. "In fact she and her husband repeatedly tried to get visas for such protection, but they were denied by the government of Pakistan."

advertisementMs Bhutto's entourage discussed deals with the American Blackwater operation, this newspaper has learnt. Sources within the British private security industry said that she also had negotiations with the London-based firm Armor Group, which guards UK diplomats in the Middle East - last night the company said that it had no knowledge of any talks.

A Blackwater spokesman confirmed the negotiations. "We were approached to provide prime minister Bhutto's security, but an agreement was unfortunately never reached," she said. She declined to go into the precise details.

Ms Bhutto contacted officials, diplomats and friends in America, Europe and the Gulf to urge Gen Musharraf to improve her security following the suicide bomb attacks that killed more than 140 during her homecoming parade on Oct 19.

Indeed, US diplomats took the highly unusual step of providing her directly with confidential US intelligence about militant threats to her life.

Pakistan's interior ministry also passed on details of plots against her and aides said that letters containing death threats had been smuggled into her home.

Husain Haqqani, a US-based Bhutto adviser, confirmed that she wanted to use private international security contractors but said that the Musharraf regime would not approve the plan.

He added that America, which has arranged for private contractors to guard the Afghan president, Hamid Karzai, and leaders in Iraq, was reluctant to press Gen Musharraf, its ally, to change his mind. This was despite Washington seeing Ms Bhutto as a lynchpin in its crucial diplomatic attempt to encourage Pakistan to return to democracy.

Mr Siegel's comments will add to the long-running controversy over Ms Bhutto's security arrangements, which were widely regarded as woefully inadequate given the seriousness of the threats against her from al-Qaeda, the Taliban and others.

She relied largely on using a "human shield" of loyal followers who would form a ring around her, but as Thursday's attack proved, it was little real protection against a determined assailant.

Some security industry specialists have suggested, however, that there may have been other reasons why the help of foreign security firms was not enlisted.

Being surrounded by foreign bodyguards would have added to criticisms that Ms Bhutto was in the pocket of the West - an accusation levelled at President Karzai - and might not have been welcomed by her own Pakistani security staff. But the companies could have taken a back role as consultants and trained locals in bodyguard techniques to maintain a Pakistani face to her entourage.

"It's odd and disturbing that the Pakistan government did not do a better job of protecting her and that the US apparently could not do more to persuade them," said Bruce Riedel, a former CIA officer and former National Security Council director for South Asia. "She made it very clear privately and publicly that she did not have enough security. That was abundantly clear after the attack on her return.

"I can't explain why the Bush administration didn't pressure Musharraf to do more. Her death leaves the US with a Pakistan policy that is completely bankrupt."


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: bhutto; blackwater; musharraf; pakistan; privatesecurity
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-88 next last
To: LibFreeOrDie

Strobe Talbott, president of the Brookings Institution

Alice Rivlin, a distinguished Brookings economist

Bruce Riedel argues that al-Qaeda is trying to lure the United States into a war with Iran and that Osama Bin Laden’s group now has more bases, more partners, and more followers today than it did on the eve of 9/11.

By rushing into Iraq instead of finishing off the hunt for Osama bin Laden, Washington has unwittingly helped its enemies.


21 posted on 12/30/2007 9:41:00 PM PST by kcvl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: originalbuckeye
She should have tried to bring them in anyway. Musharraf would have buckled.

Sure!

22 posted on 12/30/2007 9:43:08 PM PST by org.whodat (What's the difference between a Democrat and a republican????)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Cicero

Unfortunately any obviously foreign security would work against Bhutto’s political goals, Blackwater or other.


23 posted on 12/30/2007 9:44:11 PM PST by Anti-Bubba182
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: LibFreeOrDie

Somebody should ask Reidel if the USA should have insisted that Blackwater protect Bhutto - they have a perfect record in Iraq of protecting their clients. Reidel is POS, trying to spin this against Bush.


24 posted on 12/30/2007 9:44:51 PM PST by Steve_Seattle (|)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki
"She made it very clear privately and publicly that she did not have enough security. That was abundantly clear after the attack on her return."

It didn't take a company like Blackwater to see that her security was weak, nor did it take a genius to see that although she said she needed more security, she did not take any other possible steps to improve her safety.

As wealthy as she was, she could have hired qualified people.

And campaigning or not, she needlessly exposed herself, and her supporters to attack by continuing to make public appearances without making improvements to her personal security force.

She made several preventable mistakes, and paid for it with her life.

25 posted on 12/30/2007 9:45:23 PM PST by airborne (Proud to be a conservative! Proud to support Duncan Hunter for President!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: airborne

IF there were qualified people in Pakistan,she wouldn’t have asked foreign ones.The fact is that in most countries outside the west,private security companies are primitive & limited in their range of services.

About whether she could have taken more precautions-she could have.But then she was fighting an election.


26 posted on 12/30/2007 9:47:18 PM PST by sukhoi-30mki
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: The Mayor
The more we learn the more we see who is to blame for this.

Al-Quada and/or Taliban are to blame for the hit.

Bhutto's failure to increase her own security, while also refusing to change her habits in making personal appearances, can also be considered contributing factors.

She knew that she needed better protection, and could have easily made improvements on her own, but did nothing, choosing to blame Musarraf instead, saying that if she was killed, it was his fault.

Not a very smart security plan, IMO.

27 posted on 12/30/2007 9:55:32 PM PST by airborne (Proud to be a conservative! Proud to support Duncan Hunter for President!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: airborne; sukhoi-30mki
She made it very clear privately and publicly that she did not have enough security. That was abundantly clear after the attack on her return.

Having been well-educated and familiar with the threat, she had to know that she was putting her life at risk by sticking her head out of that sun-roof. Her calculated risk was just plain negligent - and she paid with her life. That said, the blame for her death falls squarely upon the jihadist that pulled the trigger/detonator and those who planned it.

The people around her are fools. The latest evidence is making her 19 year old son the head of the party. I call B.S.

28 posted on 12/30/2007 9:59:49 PM PST by RochesterFan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: RochesterFan

For the unitiated,welcome to Electioneering in the subcontinent.


29 posted on 12/30/2007 10:01:28 PM PST by sukhoi-30mki
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki
IF there were qualified people in Pakistan,she wouldn’t have asked foreign ones.

She could simply hire one unarmed, retired Secret Service agent as a consultant, and I am sure Bush would be glad to recommend some. Such a consultant would be invisible to the campaign; in fact, he'd only need to live in a hotel, follow her campaign around and periodically call her security chief on the phone and report what gaps in the protection he sees.

30 posted on 12/30/2007 10:02:12 PM PST by Greysard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki
IF there were qualified people in Pakistan,she wouldn’t have asked foreign ones.

You don't know that.

As wealthy as the family is, I'm confident that there would be no problem finding qualified security.

Blaming it on Musharraf and then doing nothing to improve the situation some other way is just foolish. Knowing you're a target and standing up in public, in a crowd of unknowns, was just foolish.

31 posted on 12/30/2007 10:02:17 PM PST by airborne (Proud to be a conservative! Proud to support Duncan Hunter for President!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: airborne

I wouldn’t say that if I did’nt have a clue about it-In Non-western countries,there are STRICT Governmental restrictions on the scale & deployment of private security solutions-The only private ones in operation in such countries offer only close proximity protection with little sophisticated communication/defensive technology.These are almost always dependent on the state if they seek to be effective.The reason why she asked for foreign ones & got refused is explained by this.

If you think Benazir was so careless,why did she ask for a foreign company??& Why did Musharraf’s government not act on several requests(faulty jammers,communication equipment,inadequate Intelligence Bureau coordination).


32 posted on 12/30/2007 10:06:54 PM PST by sukhoi-30mki
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Greysard

-all that would still be subject to the Pakistani government clearing it.

If they didn’t clear Blackwater,would they clear this?Asking for Blackwater doesn’t necessarily mean sending non-Pakistanis to the scene.Blackwater or any other contractor could have trained private contractors in Pakistan for the job.


33 posted on 12/30/2007 10:08:47 PM PST by sukhoi-30mki
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki
IF there were qualified people in Pakistan,she wouldn’t have asked foreign ones.

The United States helped her negotiate her terms for returning to Pakistan. This obviously included a pardon for her past crimes. One would think it would have been prudent for her to negotiate her personal protection when making the deal. Apparently the US was planning on having Musharraf protect her, but she put so much pressure on him that he had to resign from running the Military. Obviously his ability to protect her was compromised by his resignation. Her return and political posturing were not very well thought out.

34 posted on 12/30/2007 10:12:47 PM PST by justa-hairyape
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: justa-hairyape

& you assume that the military has nothing to do with Musharraf once he has retired?????

Buddy,Musharraf is not the first Pakistani general to ‘retire’ from the uniform & solely look after the presidency.He’s the 3rd.It’s a very handy arrangement where the Army go back to barracks’,while ‘democracy’ returns & Uncle Sam & everyone else who provides money to Pakistan stays happy.Musharraf was slated to hang up his uniform at the end of this year as per his own army’s procedures.Benazir had little to do with that arrangement.


35 posted on 12/30/2007 10:16:45 PM PST by sukhoi-30mki
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki
Why are you not blaming the person who was actually running the military at the time of her assassination ?
36 posted on 12/30/2007 10:24:06 PM PST by justa-hairyape
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki
If you think Benazir was so careless,why did she ask for a foreign company?

Because she wanted the best.

It doesn't change the fact that she did make careless mistakes.

Why did Musharraf’s government not act on several requests...?

She was his political adversary. If she had gone and hired private security, my guess is she could have made a publisdisplay over it, much the same as she did about her problems, and allowances would have been made.

Instead she chose to make no changes to improve a situation she knew was unsafe. And to make matters worse, she made herself an easy target by not changing her habits in public.

IMO, Musharraf was partly to blame for the security situation, but some of the blame has to go to whoever decided not to add people and equipment, and not to modify her public behavior.

37 posted on 12/30/2007 10:25:39 PM PST by airborne (Proud to be a conservative! Proud to support Duncan Hunter for President!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: justa-hairyape

Well is there any proof that either Musharraf or the current army chief Ashfaq Khan had anything to do with this at all???Other than negligence.


38 posted on 12/30/2007 10:25:50 PM PST by sukhoi-30mki
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: airborne

On that I would agree.


39 posted on 12/30/2007 10:26:43 PM PST by sukhoi-30mki
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki

Bhutto didn’t do a very good job protecting her own brother when she was PM now did she?


40 posted on 12/30/2007 10:27:54 PM PST by BARLF
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-88 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson