谁可以提供一段最近新闻的英文版~

谁可以提供一段最近新闻的英文版~
谁可以提供一段最近新闻的英文版~

谁可以提供一段最近新闻的英文版~
Pakistan Changes Rules After NATO Strike
Commanders will return fire without permission if attacked along Afghan border
December 2, 2011 RSS Feed Print ISLAMABAD (Reuters) — Pakistan's commanders in the wild Afghan border region can return fire if attacked without waiting for permission, the army chief said, a change in rules of engagement that could stoke tension after Saturday's NATO strike killed 24 Pakistani troops.
The attack sparked fury in Pakistan and further complicated U.S.-led efforts to ease a crisis in relations with Islamabad, still seething at a secret U.S. raid in May which killed al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden, and stabilize the region before foreign combat troops leave Afghanistan in 2014.
[See the latest political cartoons.]
"I do not want there to be any doubt in the minds of any commander at any level about the rules of engagement," Chief of Army Staff General Ashfaq Kayani said in a communique on Friday.
"In case of any attack, you have complete liberty to respond forcefully using all available resources. You do not need any permission for this."
A military source explained that this amounted to a change in the rules for Pakistani forces guarding the Western border against militant movements to and from Afghanistan.
"In the past, we were only guarding ourselves or reacting against militants," said the source, who requested anonymity because he is not authorized to speak to the media.
"We have given our posts some more space to respond. If they are under attack, they should not wait for orders from above on whether to return fire or not."
The increase in autonomy for local commanders is likely to raise tensions in the unruly and mountainous border region, which is porous and poorly marked. Militants and tribespeople alike move back and forth daily.
[See a collection of political cartoons on Afghanistan.]
"There are certain inherent risks in the delegation of authority," said defense analyst and retired general Talat Masood. "There could be unintended consequences."
Exactly what happened at the Pakistani posts along an unruly and poorly defined border is still unclear.
Pakistan said the attack was unprovoked, with officials calling it an act of blatant aggression.
U.S. officials, quoted in the Wall Street Journal, said Pakistani officials cleared the air strike unaware they had troops in the area.
The U.S. officials, giving their first detailed explanation of the worst friendly-fire incident of the 10-year-old war, said an Afghan-led assault force that included U.S. commandos was hunting Taliban militants when it came under fire from an encampment along the border with Pakistan, the Journal said in an online report.
The commandos thought they were being fired on by militants but the attackers turned out to be Pakistani military personnel, they were quoted as saying.
A Pakistani military official categorically denied the Journal's account, saying the aircraft had already engaged when Pakistan was contacted.
[Debate Club: Is Pakistan a reliable ally?]
"Wrong information about the area of operation was provided to Pakistani officials a few minutes before the strike," said the official, who was not authorized to speak to the media.
"Without getting clearance from the Pakistan side, the post had already been engaged by U.S. helicopters and fighter jets. Pakistan did not have any prior information about any operation in the area."
In a statement on its public relations website, Pakistan's military said that its response to the NATO strike was hampered by an inability to scramble its aircraft in time.
"The response could have been more effective if PAF (Pakistan Air Force) had also joined in. However, it was no fault of PAF," the statement said.
"The timely decision could not be taken due to breakdown of communication with the affected posts and, therefore, lack of clarity of situation, at various levels, including the Corps Headquarters and GHQ (General Headquarters)."

闻的英文版~