Tweet
Exclusive: U.S. mulls transfer of senior Taliban prisoner
By Mark Hosenball, Missy Ryan and Warren Strobel
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Obama administration is considering transferring to Afghan custody a senior Taliban official suspected of major human rights abuses as part of a long-shot bid to improve the prospects of a peace deal in Afghanistan, Reuters has learned.
The potential hand-over of Mohammed Fazl, a 'high-risk detainee' held at the Guantanamo Bay military prison since early 2002, has set off alarms on Capitol Hill and among some U.S. intelligence officials.
As a senior commander of the Taliban army, Fazl is alleged to be responsible for the killing of thousands of Afghanistan's minority Shi'ite Muslims between 1998 and 2001.
According to U.S. military documents made public by WikiLeaks, he was also on the scene of a November 2001 prison riot that killed CIA operative Johnny Micheal Spann, the first American who died in combat in the Afghan war. There is no evidence, however, that Fazl played any direct role in Spann's death.
Senior U.S. officials have said their 10-month-long effort to set up substantive negotiations between the weak government of Afghan President Hamid Karzai and the Taliban has reached a make-or-break moment. Reuters reported earlier this month that they are proposing an exchange of "confidence-building measures," including the transfer of five detainees from Guantanamo and the establishment of a Taliban office outside of Afghanistan.
Now Reuters has learned from U.S. government sources the identity of one of the five detainees in question.
The detainees, the officials emphasized, would not be set free, but remain in some sort of further custody. It is unclear precisely what conditions they would be held under.
In response to inquiries by Reuters, a senior administration official said that the release of Fazl and four other Taliban members had been requested by the Afghan government and Taliban representatives as far back as 2005.
The debate surrounding the White House's consideration of high-profile prisoners such as Fazl illustrates the delicate course it must tread both at home and abroad as it seeks to move the nascent peace process ahead.
One U.S. intelligence official said there had been intense bipartisan opposition in Congress to the proposed transfer.
"I can tell you that the hair on the back of my neck went up when they walked in with this a month ago, and there's been very, very strong letters fired off to the administration," the official said on condition of anonymity.
The senior administration official confirmed that the White House has received letters from lawmakers on the issue. "We will not characterize classified Congressional correspondence, but what is clear is the President's order to us to continue to discuss these important matters with Congress," the official said.
Even supporters of a controversial deal with the Taliban - a fundamentalist group that refers to Americans as infidels and which is still killing U.S., NATO and Afghan soldiers on the battlefield - say the odds of striking an accord are slim.
Critics of Obama's peace initiative remain deeply skeptical of the Taliban's willingness to negotiate, given that the West's intent to pull out most troops after 2014 could give insurgents a chance to reclaim lost territory or push the weak Kabul government toward collapse.
The politically charged nature of the initiative was on display this month when the Karzai government angrily recalled its ambassador from Doha and complained Kabul was being cut out of U.S.-led efforts to establish a Taliban office in Qatar.
U.S. officials appear to have smoothed things over with Karzai since then. Karzai's High Peace Council is signaling it would accept a liaison office for the Taliban office in Qatar - but also warning foreign powers that they cannot keep the Afghan government on the margins.
The detainee transfer may be even more politically explosive for the White House. In discussing the proposal, U.S. officials have stressed the move would be a 'national decision' made in consultation with the U.S. Congress.
Obama is expected to soon sign into law a defense authorization bill whose provisions would broaden the military's power over terrorist detainees and require the Pentagon to certify in most cases that certain security conditions will be met before Guantanamo prisoners can be sent home.
The mere idea of such a transfer is already raising hackles on Capitol Hill, where one key senator last week cautioned the administration against negotiating with "terrorists."
Senator Saxby Chambliss, the top Republican on the Senate Intelligence Committee, said such detainees would "likely continue to pose a threat to the United States" even once they were transferred.
POTENTIAL MAELSTROM
In February, the Afghan High Peace Council named a half-dozen it wanted released as a goodwill gesture. The list included Fazl; senior Taliban military commander Noorullah Noori; former deputy intelligence minister Abdul Haq Wasiq; and Khairullah Khairkhwa, a former interior minister.
All but Khairkhwa were sent to Guantanamo on January 11, 2002, according to the military documents, meaning they were among the first prisoners sent there.
Bruce Riedel, a former CIA and White House official, said Fazl was alleged to have been involved in 'very ugly' violence against Shi'ites, including members of the Hazara ethnic minority, beginning in the late 1990s, and the deaths of Iranian diplomats and journalists at the Iranian consulate in the northern Afghan city of Mazar-i-Sharif in 1998.
Michael Semple, a former UN official with more than two decades of experience in Afghanistan, said Fazl commanded thousands of Taliban soldiers at a time when its army carried out massacres of Shi'ites. "If you're head of an army that carries out a massacre, even if you're not actually there, you are implicated by virtue of command and control responsibility," he said.
He added: "However it does not serve the interests of justice selectively to hold Taliban to account, while so many other figures accused of past crimes are happily reintegrated in Kabul."
Some U.S. military documents - select documents have been released, others were leaked - indicate that Fazl denied being a senior Taliban official and says he only commanded 50 or 60 men. But the overall picture of his role is unclear from the documents which have become public.
Richard Kammen is an Indiana lawyer who has nominally represented Fazl; the detainee did not want an attorney.
"Based upon the public information with which I'm familiar, it would appear his role in things back in 2001 has been significantly exaggerated by the government," Kammen said.
According to the documents, Fazl and Noori surrendered to Abdul Rashid Dostum, now Afghanistan's army chief of staff but at the time a powerful warlord battling against the Taliban, in northern Afghanistan in November 2001.
While the men were being held at the historic Qala-i-Jani fortress in Mazar-i-Sharif, Taliban prisoners revolted against their captors from the Northern Alliance, the anti-Taliban coalition.
"Dostum brought (Fazl and Noori) to the bunker to ask the prisoners to surrender; detainee and (Noori) refused," the detainee assessment from a 2008 document read.
Spann, a one-time Marine captain who was sent to Afghanistan as a CIA operative in the fall of 2001, was trying to locate al Qaeda operatives at the Mazar fortress among a large group of Taliban soldiers who had surrendered, according to the CIA and media reports at the time. When the Taliban prisoners began to riot - many of them were apparently armed - Spann was surrounded and killed. After a bloody, multi-day battle his body was later found booby-trapped.
Even a loose association between Fazl and Spann's death - despite the fact there is nothing to suggest he was directly involved - is likely to increase the temperature of the debate in Washington.
What could be problematic for some Afghans is Fazl's identification with the killing of civilians in central and northern Afghanistan.
"The composition and timing of any release has got to pay attention to Northern Alliance concerns," Semple said.
Buy-in from supporters of that alliance - and from those wary of a resurgent Taliban - will be key in making a peace deal stick, if one can be had.
Despite the congressional concerns that released Taliban will return to the battlefield, Semple said it was unlikely even prisoners like Fazl - who truly was a significant military figure for the Taliban - would alter that equation.
"These people are not going to make a real contribution to the Taliban war effort even if they are able to go over to Quetta and rejoin the fight. It's not risky in battlefield terms; it's only risky in U.S. political terms."
(Additional reporting by Tabassum Zakaria, Patrick Worsnip and Jane Sutton; editing by Claudia Parsons)
Could giving the Taliban a street address bring peace to Afghanistan?
Seeking a negotiated end to the war with the Taliban, US and Afghan officials are considering agreeing to the creation of a Taliban office in Qatar that would provide an avenue for direct talks.
By Tom A. Peter | Christian Science Monitor
With the American-led war in Afghanistan well into its tenth year, Afghan and American officials are laying the foundations for a Taliban office in Qatar, something that could prove a critical step toward negotiating a settlement to the war.
At this point it's just negotiations. But among American and NATO officials, talks with the Taliban have become a major priority in the past year. If Afghan, Western, and Taliban representatives agree and officially establish a political office for the Islamic organization, it will provide a more direct means of communication and serve as a symbol that Afghan and Western officials are serious about negotiations.
Along with creating a physical address for the Taliban, a confidence-building measure of releasing several Taliban leaders from Guantanamo Bay into house arrest is also being considered.
IN PICTURES: Afghanistan in winter
Over the course of the past year, reconciliation efforts with the Taliban and other insurgent groups have seen a number of false starts, setbacks, and outright failures. Most recently, this month American officials who claimed they were near a breakthrough with the Taliban saw negotiations crumble due to objections from Afghan President Hamid Karzai.
Despite difficulties, both Afghan and Western officials have continued to look toward reconciliation as the most likely means of ending the war here. Creating an official headquarters for the Taliban would provide a much clearer conduit for officials to communicate with the Taliban, and help avoid further missteps, such as inadvertently negotiating with imposters, as happened in November 2010.
“If the Taliban intend to operate from an office in Qatar, we could see a development in the peace process,” says Waliullah Rahmani, executive director of the Kabul Center for Strategic Studies. “An office in Qatar for the Taliban would make them more independent of Pakistan and the ISI. It would give them more ground to maneuver in the peace process with the Afghan government and the international community.”
Alternative to Pakistan?
Presently, most of the Taliban leadership is believed to be based in Pakistan. International and Afghan officials hoped Afghanistan’s neighbor would act as an interlocutor in potential talks. Those hopes have faded amid recent tensions, culminating in Pakistan’s boycott of the second Bonn Conference to discuss Afghanistan’s future earlier this month.
Negotiations took another hit this month when Mr. Karzai put an end to talks between the Taliban and the US and Germany, saying he would not support negotiations that excluded the Afghan government. The president pulled his diplomats from Qatar in protest of the Qatari government not consulting Kabul about establishing a Taliban office there.
But Qatar makes sense geographically, with the small emirate a hub of travel to and from Afghanistan. After the brief squabble, talks seem to be moving slowly forward once more, with Karzai saying earlier this week that he would support the creation of a Taliban address in Qatar, but that he would prefer a location in Turkey or Saudi Arabia.
“The Afghan government and Karzai emphasized that they should be included in the process. They’re afraid that if they are left out of this process it won’t work,” says Abdul Ghafoor Liwal, director of the Regional Studies Center of Afghanistan. “The three sides of this political triangle are the Taliban, the Afghan government, and the international community, especially the United States. Therefore, the Afghan government wants to be a part of the process and aware of what’s going on.”
Now that Afghan and Western officials have agreed on the potential creation of a Taliban office, the next major sticking point may prove the release of Taliban prisoners in American custody. Among others, the Taliban has asked for the release of Mohammed Fazl, a senior member of the organization who stands charged with a number of crimes committed against Afghan Shiites during the Taliban’s rule.
Aside from complications getting American congressional approval to release Taliban detainees, particularly as the US turns towards a presidential election, there is also debate whether they would be released to house arrest in Afghanistan or a third country like Qatar near the proposed Taliban headquarters.
French defence minister visits Afghanistan
AFP via Yahoo! News - Dec 30 11:54pm
French defence minister Gerard Longuet arrived in Afghanistan on Saturday for a two-day visit to meet troops ahead of the New Year.
During his trip Longuet will meet Afghan President Hamid Karzai and Defence Minister Abdul Rahim Wardak.
Longuet touched down in Kabul two days after the death of two French Foreign Legion soldiers who were shot dead by a man wearing an Afghan army uniform in eastern Kapisa province.
At the start of the visit he was due to attend a ceremony for the soldiers before their bodies were repatriated to France.
He will also meet briefly with US General John Allen, the commander of the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force, and visit troops in the field.
Thursday's incident took the death toll among French troops since the start of the war in 2001 to 78.
After the withdrawal of 400 troops this year, France now has 3,600 soldiers in Afghanistan serving under ISAF.
The French death toll in 2011 stands at 26, the highest for the country in the 10-year war, and includes five who were killed in a suicide attack in Kapisa in July.
There are about 130,000 international troops in Afghanistan fighting alongside Afghan government forces against a Taliban-led insurgency.
NATO is handing security over to Afghan forces ahead of the withdrawal of all its combat troops by the end of 2014 and the French have been involved in training up the Afghan army.
After the two deaths in the Tagab valley, France said it was committed to helping develop the Afghan military and described the shooting as an isolated incident.
Seven Taliban Leaders Take Families to Qatar
TOLOnews.com Thursday, 29 December 2011
The Afghan High Peace Council on Thursday announced that seven Taliban leaders have taken their families to Qatar while no official letters either from Qatar or US has arrived to the council.
After the government agreed with a Taliban liaison office in Qatar, the practical process has started in Qatar, The council's international advisor said. Afghan government has agreed to opening an office for Taliban in Qatar on condition that the negotiation process is led by Afghans.
The council says that it hasn't received details about the Taliban leaders who have gone to Qatar.
"We have heard through the media about it, but we haven't received any official letter from US, Qatar or the Taliban," Mohammad Ismail Qasimyar, International Advisor of the Afghan High Peace Council said. "We don't know their names and family members. We have heard that six to seven Taliban leaders and their families have gone there."
Meanwhile, the High Peace Council has put in some conditions for talks with the Taliban. But it says it hasn't received any response from the Taliban in this regard.
"We set our conditions, we are waiting for Taliban's response," Mr Qasimi added.
The High Peace Council emphasises on Afghan leadership of the negotiation which is well respected by international community.
The conditions are:
- The office should only be used for negotiations
- The office should be in Afghanistan if the situation suits, if not in one of the Islamic countries preferably in Saudi Arabia or Turkey.
- First arrangements should be made without intervention of the host country.
- War should be stopped in Afghanistan before the start of negotiations
- Armed oppositions should cut all their ties with al-Qaeda and other terrorist networks.
- The achievements of last decade should remain unhurt.
- Afghan constitution must be respected.
- The sovereignty of Afghanistan must be recognised.
- Pakistan must support peace negotiations because the bases of the armed oppositions are there.
- Elected an powerful representatives from both sides should continue the negotiations.
- None of the third parties can interfere without consultation with Afghanistan.
Afghanistan cracks down on contractors
The Washington Post By Ernesto Londoño December 29 , 2011
KABUL - Afghan officials have seized millions of dollars worth of armored vehicles and weapons from private security firms in recent weeks, a move that has exacerbated concerns about the government’s plan to replace the hired guns that protect convoys and installations with an unprepared state-run guard force.
The crackdown is being carried out even though the Afghan Public Protection Force failed to meet any of the six benchmarks that were set out for it when President Hamid Karzai formally announced a plan to ban private security firms by March 20. An assessment team led by the NATO military coalition, which is heavily involved in the creation of the Afghan force, concluded in the fall that the guard force is far from ready to take over.
Diplomats, development experts and company executives worry that the abolition of private security contractors within three months could endanger Afghans and foreigners supporting NATO and its allies, halt reconstruction projects and open new channels for corruption.
The transition is happening at a critical time in the Afghanistan war. As U.S. and allied troops have begun to draw down, there are concerns about how Afghan troops will manage increased security responsibilities. The United Nations recorded an average of 1,995 attacks during the first 11 months of this year, a 21 percent increase compared with the same period last year.
Sediq Sediqqi, a spokesman for the Afghan Interior Ministry, called the transition from private security contractors a “huge task” and acknowledged serious challenges, but he said government officials are committed to meeting the deadline.
“We are working very hard with coalition forces,” he said. “The minister has assured the president we are ready to assume this responsibility.”
Since the ministry began auditing security firms about two months ago, authorities have confiscated nearly 3,200 weapons and at least 35 vehicles, Sediqqi said, describing it as the beginning of an effort that will intensify as the March deadline approaches.
“The companies were given deadlines, and they are giving up all this equipment” to the ministry, he said. “We are very encouraged.”
Sediqqi said the vehicles and weapons are now government property.
“They are being registered properly and will be used for public purpose,” he said.
The government has disbanded 57 security companies. Of the 46 that remain, Sediqqi said, 23 are Afghan-owned and 23 are foreign firms with operations in Afghanistan. The companies provide security to clients ranging from tiny aid organizations to large construction and shipping companies.
Karzai decided last year to disband the companies, saying they fuel corruption and distort the labor market by offering higher wages than the government can pay security forces. The APPF, as the state guard force is known, will be run by the Interior Ministry but will operate independently of the country’s conventional security forces. Taking control of the lucrative private security industry could represent a windfall for the cash-strapped government.
Sediqqi said the government was entitled to seize the firms’ equipment because most companies had imported their vehicles and weapons without following customs regulations.
For years, diplomatic missions and private security firms have complained that importing armored vehicles and weapons into Afghanistan is virtually impossible without paying bribes.
Kimberley Motley, an American lawyer in Kabul who advises security firms, said company executives were taken aback by the crackdown. They had opened their books to the government as a good-faith gesture, she said, in hopes that they could remain involved in the security industry as risk-mitigation consultants under the APPF model.
“A lot of companies are being penalized for trying to transparently run their security companies,” Motley said. The bulk of the equipment being seized, she said, was imported during years when there were “limited laws that dictated how they should operate.”
Since Karzai issued a decree ordering the disbandment of private security companies last year, U.S. military officers and diplomats have been scrambling to create a model that complies with the Afghan government’s vision but does not imperil development. The APPF has a few thousand guards but is expected to grow into a force that could have more than 25,000 on its payroll.
“What they are trying to do is unbelievable,” said Doug Brooks, president of the International Stability Operations Association, an advocacy group that represents security firms in conflict zones. “I think, in private, the recognition is universal, even among people in the Afghan government: All of them privately say this is not going to work the way it’s intended.”
A team of Afghans and Western officials set six goals for the APPF this year. But the team’s latest assessment, issued in September, concluded that the force was meeting none of the benchmarks, according to a Western government official who described the findings on the condition of anonymity because the report has not been publicly released.
A U.N. report to the Security Council noted that the assessment cast doubt about the readiness of the APPF, “particularly in terms of managing large-scale security projects in a fiscally and legally competent manner.”
Col. Daniel McCormick, a U.S. military adviser assigned to the APPF, declined to say whether the assessment team now thinks any of the original goals are being met.
McCormick said he was unaware that the Interior Ministry was confiscating vehicles and weapons from private security firms, noting that the U.S.-led coalition is “not part of that mission.”
Among the entities that have expressed concern about the plan is the Overseas Security Advisory Council, a U.S. government body that promotes security cooperation between the State Department and the private sector, McCormick said.
“The APPF challenge is a great opportunity,” he said. Its establishment, he added, will send a message that “Afghanistan is open for business, has rule of law and can provide security.”
The U.S. Embassy in Kabul said in a statement that diplomats have been in close contact with program managers who get funding from the United States “to address the concerns that have been raised.”
A development expert working on a U.S.-funded project in Afghanistan said people in the field are deeply worried about the transition. Some large companies, the expert said, have begun smuggling heavy weaponry and reclassifying staff members who were nominally security officers as development workers.
Still, said the expert, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to be candid, most in the development community are holding out hope that the deadline will be extended or the plan modified.
“This is not going to happen, otherwise development will come to a stop,” the expert said.
U.S. Military Tests Out Green Tech In Afghanistan
NPR By Quil Lawrence December 29, 2011
The heavy, mine-resistant vehicles that almost all U.S. military personnel use to move about Afghanistan are gas guzzlers. And even though the U.S. military buys that fuel at a reasonable price, the energy it takes to fly it and truck it to remote parts of Afghanistan drives the price into the stratosphere.
There's also a much greater cost, says Ray Mabus, secretary of the U.S. Navy.
"It's expensive in terms of getting us there financially. It's also expensive in the fact that for every 50 convoys, we lose a Marine, either killed or wounded, guarding that convoy," he says.
That cost, in both lives and dollars, is pushing the military to go green.
Practical Benefits Of Green Tech
The Navy has set the goal of using nonfossil fuels for 50 percent of its power by the year 2020. Mabus recently paid a visit to U.S. Marines in the remote Afghan province of Helmand, at the far end of the fuel supply chain, where some innovative green equipment is already in use.
Some of the solutions are incredibly simple: silvery tent liners that increase the efficiency of heaters or air conditioners. More novel are the portable solar-panel blankets, able to power communications gear for a patrol. That means carrying far fewer heavy batteries. There's also a small shipping container connected to a bank of solar panels that is powering flat screens and surveillance equipment.
Marine Capt. Brandon Newell says the troops don't have to be environmentalists to like the new gear.
"If the system works, they don't care. In fact, a Marine will love it if he has to refuel that generator less often. They'll love it. They don't care about the message or anything else; all they want is something that works whenever they need it," he says.
Newell admits that the measures so far are baby steps, and there are plenty of bugs in the system.
But the important thing, says Mabus, is that the U.S. military is starting to test some of the technology in the roughest conditions.
"When the military does something and shows that it works ... in the most critical circumstances, it makes it much easier to commercialize something," he says.
Environmental Impact A Side Benefit
That goes for solar panels, says Mabus, but also for biofuels. This fall, the Navy purchased half a million gallons of fuel made from algae or used cooking oil. In the spring, a huge exercise in the Pacific Rim intends to demonstrate that it works just as well as petroleum-based fuel.
Mabus says the strategic goal is to free the U.S. military from a product that comes from volatile places with unsavory regimes. He points out that during the NATO action in Libya, a spike in the price of oil cost the U.S. military about $1 billion. The environmental impact is a side benefit, he says.
"It really is a question of national security. It may be a side effect on climate change, being better stewards of the environment, but that's not the reason we're doing it," Mabus says.
Still, major environmental groups have reacted positively. And developers of biofuels and solar panels say having the Pentagon — the world's largest consumer of fossil fuel — trying to go green is providing a shot in the arm to their industry.
"It's a signal to investors that there is going to be stability. That is the game changer," says Sean O'Hanlon, president of the American Biofuels Council. "The bottom line is there has to be stable policy for them to invest hundreds of millions of dollars."
Justice, Security Officials Accused of Human Rights Violation
TOLOnews.com Thursday, 29 December 2011
Several civil society members on Thursday said that some provincial governors and officials from justice and security institutions have committed human rights violation.
In a recent report published by Independent Human Rights Commission, several high ranking government officials are accused of human rights violations.
Efforts to disband Human Rights Commission are underway, the members warned.
The civil society members stressed that the government is trying to change the Human Rights Commission into a government entity to let the human rights violators get away and bring Taliban into power.
"In the report, names of several provincial governors, parliament members, justice and security sectors are included. They have committed crimes against humanity and have been introduced to the human rights commission by Afghan people," Ajmal Baluch, a civil society activist, said.
Meanwhile, head of the Afghan Civil Society Forum said that President Karzai is under pressure to assign people who are close to the government as human rights commissioners.
"Is it appropriate to deliver cases of 1.5 million to those who committed crimes, Aren't we responsible to those victims?" Aziz Rafie, head of Afghanistan Civil Society Forum said.
The civil society members said that unqualified people will try to destroy all the documents filed against human rights violators.
This comes as President Karzai recently replaced three human rights commissioners and and said their working periods had ended.
"If the government assigns human rights commission without consultation of the human rights officials, it will be a clear violation of Afghan constitution and even against their commitments to the international community and Bonn conference," Mohammad Naim Nazari, an Afghan human rights activist, said.
Afghan enthusiast realises his dream of flying in homemade microlight
Sabir Shah takes off – after Kabul International declines – in aircraft built from bits of rickshaw and a secondhand Toyota
Guardian.co.uk By Jon Boone Thursday 29 December 2011
Kabul - With its clutter of civilian jets, cargo planes and military flights, Kabul International has one the busiest airspaces in the world. And dangerous: even before take-off pilots are almost a mile above sea level and surrounded by treacherous peaks.
On more than one occasion errant unmanned surveillance drones have caused panic after drifting unannounced into the vicinity of the airport.
For all these reasons, Kabul is not an obvious place for the maiden flight of an aircraft made from bits of rickshaw and a secondhand Toyota Yaris in the garden of a 25-year-old hobbyist. But that was what the enterprising Sabir Shah was set on doing when US air force pilots discovered the bright blue aircraft being assembled next to Kabul's only runway.
Their horror grew when they were told the young enthusiast had never piloted an aircraft or had pilot training. His first flight had been the day before when he caught a lift in an Afghan military helicopter to the capital from his home town of Ghazni in the country's restless southeast.
The Americans told Shah to take his quixotic dream to a quieter runway. Flying his own plane finally happened a few weeks later from an abandoned runway in northern Afghanistan.
Shah remembers moments not of elation but of abject terror. "I didn't believe it would ever take off so I was very frightened when I first flew," he said. "I didn't know what to do so I just put it right back down on the ground."
Video of the microlight, based on a design Shah found on the internet, lumbering into the air for a few seconds is reminiscent of film of the Wright brothers' first flight. Shah's airborne debut lasted seconds, travelling perhaps 50 metres and reaching two storeys high. The only person on hand to offer advice was a former pilot who flew fighter jets for the Soviet-backed regime of the 1980s.
It was an extraordinary achievement for someone with only a high school education and no expert help.
His love of aircraft began as a boy when he saw planes in the sky above his home. A Taliban helicopter landing in Ghazni long before the US-led invasion of 2001 left a lasting impression.
He fixed on the idea of a microlight four years ago after watching a documentary about a man flying round the world in one.
Buying such a craft would have cost tens of thousands of dollars so he set about building one from scratch, basing his design on internet photographs and a technical manual written to help US flight hobbyists assemble microlight kits.
He scavenged for rickshaw tyres and two secondhand engines (the first was not up to the job). He made his own plaster moulds for the aircraft's casing, which he covered in fibreglass.
The most difficult element was the propeller, crafted in wood. This went through five prototypes attached to the electric motor from a roadside juicing machine mounted on a toy car to see if it would drag it along.
The wing, made of nylon cloth stretched over a steel frame, took two attempts before he got the pitch right.
He spent about $8,000 (£5,200) in total, given by family living in Australia. His father runs a small baker's shop to support his family.
"My father never supported me," he said. "They asked why I was wasting all this money and not getting a job."
They think differently now. But as a member of the Hazara ethnic minority, he thinks his triumph has not gained the deserved accolades.
"[Hamid] Karzai went on TV holding a can of Pepsi, saying it was made in Afghanistan and as a nation we should be proud of that," he said. "But he has not told the nation that Afghanistan has made the first airplane in its history."
Although he claims the machine could fly up to 250 miles across country, he has no plans to fly again. On his fourth flight he crashlanded in rough ground off the runway, doing considerable damage to his microlight. "The government needs to train me how to fly or send me abroad for training," he said. "Otherwise it is much too dangerous."
1981 Files: Files hint at Afghan secret war
Evidence of an escalating secret war in Afghanistan is revealed in confidential documents which have been released to the National Archives.
Telegraph.co.uk By Duncan Gardham 30 Dec 2011
The documents detail Britain and America’s contribution to supporting Afghan militants fighting against the Soviets following the invasion of 1979 and an increasing propaganda war around the Moscow Olympics of 1980.
With some of those figures still active in Afghan politics, in places the Foreign Office documents have been censored or pages have been removed.
A “top secret memo” from the Foreign Secretary’s private secretary in September 1980 wrote of training and equipping 26 cameramen to be sent into Afghanistan to “take films of Russian atrocities and military activities in Afghanistan.”
Headed “Publicity for the resistance in Afghanistan”, it added: “The latest cameraman to return came back on 12 September, bloody and tattered having lost everything except his cameras and film after becoming involved in a heavy Soviet attack on a Mujahideen headquarters near Jalalabad,” the memo said.
“They hope for good shots from his film which is now on its way back to the UK.”
Earlier shots included pictures of the Mujahideen flourishing their weapons, moving through rough terrain in guerrilla formation and standing over a wrecked Soviet helicopter and military vehicles that had been knocked out.
The first batch of film was handed to the BBC before the Olympics had closed, but a note said “unfortunately the BBC did not show it until immediately afterwards.”
The clips were also syndicated “indirectly” through a company called Visnews and appeared in North and South America, Western Europe, Japan, Australia and possibly in communist Romania and Poland.
A letter from Downing Street to the Foreign Office on September 23 said the Prime Minister had seen a letter of September 19 “about [redacted] Afghan tribesmen to take films of Russian atrocities and military activities in Afghanistan.”
She has commented “Excellent”, it added.
As the war dragged on, Ahmed Gailani, a royalist member of the Mujahideen who headed a group called the national Islamic Front of Afghanistan, visited Britain in August 1980.
A letter from Lord Carrington to the Cabinet’s Overseas Defence Committee said he had asked for anti-aircraft weapons, anti-tank weapons and .303 ammunition for small arms.
But Lord Carrington said: “From information available to us, I am satisfied that arms are getting through to the Afghan resistance. I do not think therefore that we need or should get into the business of supplying arms to the resistance ourselves, although I would, of course, look at any specific requests in their merits.”
Lord Carrington warned against “the appearance of an East-West confrontation” and a memo from Kabul on August 28 reported that the Soviet Ambassador had warned the supply of weapons to the rebels could “create a dangerous situation.”
Britain did eventually become involved in supplying limpet mines, Blowpipe anti-aircraft weapons and other equipment to the rebels.
It is not clear when that started but the files include a telegram from Mr Gailani to Mrs Thatcher in October 1980.
“We wish you a happy birthday and hope you will have continued success in the years to come. Thanking you for your support in the struggle of the Afghan people,” it said.
Moreover when Alexander Haig, the US Secretary of State, visited Britain in April 1981 a memo by Lord Carrington’s private secretary was headed “Help for the Afghan resistance.”
It said that during the private discussions which preceded the main session of talks, Lord Carrington raised the question of arms for the Afghan resistance “and described our own efforts.”
“Mr Haig signified that he knew what was being done and said that he had briefed President Reagan,” it added.
www.afghanistannewscenter.com
By Mark Hosenball, Missy Ryan and Warren Strobel
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Obama administration is considering transferring to Afghan custody a senior Taliban official suspected of major human rights abuses as part of a long-shot bid to improve the prospects of a peace deal in Afghanistan, Reuters has learned.
The potential hand-over of Mohammed Fazl, a 'high-risk detainee' held at the Guantanamo Bay military prison since early 2002, has set off alarms on Capitol Hill and among some U.S. intelligence officials.
As a senior commander of the Taliban army, Fazl is alleged to be responsible for the killing of thousands of Afghanistan's minority Shi'ite Muslims between 1998 and 2001.
According to U.S. military documents made public by WikiLeaks, he was also on the scene of a November 2001 prison riot that killed CIA operative Johnny Micheal Spann, the first American who died in combat in the Afghan war. There is no evidence, however, that Fazl played any direct role in Spann's death.
Senior U.S. officials have said their 10-month-long effort to set up substantive negotiations between the weak government of Afghan President Hamid Karzai and the Taliban has reached a make-or-break moment. Reuters reported earlier this month that they are proposing an exchange of "confidence-building measures," including the transfer of five detainees from Guantanamo and the establishment of a Taliban office outside of Afghanistan.
Now Reuters has learned from U.S. government sources the identity of one of the five detainees in question.
The detainees, the officials emphasized, would not be set free, but remain in some sort of further custody. It is unclear precisely what conditions they would be held under.
In response to inquiries by Reuters, a senior administration official said that the release of Fazl and four other Taliban members had been requested by the Afghan government and Taliban representatives as far back as 2005.
The debate surrounding the White House's consideration of high-profile prisoners such as Fazl illustrates the delicate course it must tread both at home and abroad as it seeks to move the nascent peace process ahead.
One U.S. intelligence official said there had been intense bipartisan opposition in Congress to the proposed transfer.
"I can tell you that the hair on the back of my neck went up when they walked in with this a month ago, and there's been very, very strong letters fired off to the administration," the official said on condition of anonymity.
The senior administration official confirmed that the White House has received letters from lawmakers on the issue. "We will not characterize classified Congressional correspondence, but what is clear is the President's order to us to continue to discuss these important matters with Congress," the official said.
Even supporters of a controversial deal with the Taliban - a fundamentalist group that refers to Americans as infidels and which is still killing U.S., NATO and Afghan soldiers on the battlefield - say the odds of striking an accord are slim.
Critics of Obama's peace initiative remain deeply skeptical of the Taliban's willingness to negotiate, given that the West's intent to pull out most troops after 2014 could give insurgents a chance to reclaim lost territory or push the weak Kabul government toward collapse.
The politically charged nature of the initiative was on display this month when the Karzai government angrily recalled its ambassador from Doha and complained Kabul was being cut out of U.S.-led efforts to establish a Taliban office in Qatar.
U.S. officials appear to have smoothed things over with Karzai since then. Karzai's High Peace Council is signaling it would accept a liaison office for the Taliban office in Qatar - but also warning foreign powers that they cannot keep the Afghan government on the margins.
The detainee transfer may be even more politically explosive for the White House. In discussing the proposal, U.S. officials have stressed the move would be a 'national decision' made in consultation with the U.S. Congress.
Obama is expected to soon sign into law a defense authorization bill whose provisions would broaden the military's power over terrorist detainees and require the Pentagon to certify in most cases that certain security conditions will be met before Guantanamo prisoners can be sent home.
The mere idea of such a transfer is already raising hackles on Capitol Hill, where one key senator last week cautioned the administration against negotiating with "terrorists."
Senator Saxby Chambliss, the top Republican on the Senate Intelligence Committee, said such detainees would "likely continue to pose a threat to the United States" even once they were transferred.
POTENTIAL MAELSTROM
In February, the Afghan High Peace Council named a half-dozen it wanted released as a goodwill gesture. The list included Fazl; senior Taliban military commander Noorullah Noori; former deputy intelligence minister Abdul Haq Wasiq; and Khairullah Khairkhwa, a former interior minister.
All but Khairkhwa were sent to Guantanamo on January 11, 2002, according to the military documents, meaning they were among the first prisoners sent there.
Bruce Riedel, a former CIA and White House official, said Fazl was alleged to have been involved in 'very ugly' violence against Shi'ites, including members of the Hazara ethnic minority, beginning in the late 1990s, and the deaths of Iranian diplomats and journalists at the Iranian consulate in the northern Afghan city of Mazar-i-Sharif in 1998.
Michael Semple, a former UN official with more than two decades of experience in Afghanistan, said Fazl commanded thousands of Taliban soldiers at a time when its army carried out massacres of Shi'ites. "If you're head of an army that carries out a massacre, even if you're not actually there, you are implicated by virtue of command and control responsibility," he said.
He added: "However it does not serve the interests of justice selectively to hold Taliban to account, while so many other figures accused of past crimes are happily reintegrated in Kabul."
Some U.S. military documents - select documents have been released, others were leaked - indicate that Fazl denied being a senior Taliban official and says he only commanded 50 or 60 men. But the overall picture of his role is unclear from the documents which have become public.
Richard Kammen is an Indiana lawyer who has nominally represented Fazl; the detainee did not want an attorney.
"Based upon the public information with which I'm familiar, it would appear his role in things back in 2001 has been significantly exaggerated by the government," Kammen said.
According to the documents, Fazl and Noori surrendered to Abdul Rashid Dostum, now Afghanistan's army chief of staff but at the time a powerful warlord battling against the Taliban, in northern Afghanistan in November 2001.
While the men were being held at the historic Qala-i-Jani fortress in Mazar-i-Sharif, Taliban prisoners revolted against their captors from the Northern Alliance, the anti-Taliban coalition.
"Dostum brought (Fazl and Noori) to the bunker to ask the prisoners to surrender; detainee and (Noori) refused," the detainee assessment from a 2008 document read.
Spann, a one-time Marine captain who was sent to Afghanistan as a CIA operative in the fall of 2001, was trying to locate al Qaeda operatives at the Mazar fortress among a large group of Taliban soldiers who had surrendered, according to the CIA and media reports at the time. When the Taliban prisoners began to riot - many of them were apparently armed - Spann was surrounded and killed. After a bloody, multi-day battle his body was later found booby-trapped.
Even a loose association between Fazl and Spann's death - despite the fact there is nothing to suggest he was directly involved - is likely to increase the temperature of the debate in Washington.
What could be problematic for some Afghans is Fazl's identification with the killing of civilians in central and northern Afghanistan.
"The composition and timing of any release has got to pay attention to Northern Alliance concerns," Semple said.
Buy-in from supporters of that alliance - and from those wary of a resurgent Taliban - will be key in making a peace deal stick, if one can be had.
Despite the congressional concerns that released Taliban will return to the battlefield, Semple said it was unlikely even prisoners like Fazl - who truly was a significant military figure for the Taliban - would alter that equation.
"These people are not going to make a real contribution to the Taliban war effort even if they are able to go over to Quetta and rejoin the fight. It's not risky in battlefield terms; it's only risky in U.S. political terms."
(Additional reporting by Tabassum Zakaria, Patrick Worsnip and Jane Sutton; editing by Claudia Parsons)
Could giving the Taliban a street address bring peace to Afghanistan?
Seeking a negotiated end to the war with the Taliban, US and Afghan officials are considering agreeing to the creation of a Taliban office in Qatar that would provide an avenue for direct talks.
By Tom A. Peter | Christian Science Monitor
With the American-led war in Afghanistan well into its tenth year, Afghan and American officials are laying the foundations for a Taliban office in Qatar, something that could prove a critical step toward negotiating a settlement to the war.
At this point it's just negotiations. But among American and NATO officials, talks with the Taliban have become a major priority in the past year. If Afghan, Western, and Taliban representatives agree and officially establish a political office for the Islamic organization, it will provide a more direct means of communication and serve as a symbol that Afghan and Western officials are serious about negotiations.
Along with creating a physical address for the Taliban, a confidence-building measure of releasing several Taliban leaders from Guantanamo Bay into house arrest is also being considered.
IN PICTURES: Afghanistan in winter
Over the course of the past year, reconciliation efforts with the Taliban and other insurgent groups have seen a number of false starts, setbacks, and outright failures. Most recently, this month American officials who claimed they were near a breakthrough with the Taliban saw negotiations crumble due to objections from Afghan President Hamid Karzai.
Despite difficulties, both Afghan and Western officials have continued to look toward reconciliation as the most likely means of ending the war here. Creating an official headquarters for the Taliban would provide a much clearer conduit for officials to communicate with the Taliban, and help avoid further missteps, such as inadvertently negotiating with imposters, as happened in November 2010.
“If the Taliban intend to operate from an office in Qatar, we could see a development in the peace process,” says Waliullah Rahmani, executive director of the Kabul Center for Strategic Studies. “An office in Qatar for the Taliban would make them more independent of Pakistan and the ISI. It would give them more ground to maneuver in the peace process with the Afghan government and the international community.”
Alternative to Pakistan?
Presently, most of the Taliban leadership is believed to be based in Pakistan. International and Afghan officials hoped Afghanistan’s neighbor would act as an interlocutor in potential talks. Those hopes have faded amid recent tensions, culminating in Pakistan’s boycott of the second Bonn Conference to discuss Afghanistan’s future earlier this month.
Negotiations took another hit this month when Mr. Karzai put an end to talks between the Taliban and the US and Germany, saying he would not support negotiations that excluded the Afghan government. The president pulled his diplomats from Qatar in protest of the Qatari government not consulting Kabul about establishing a Taliban office there.
But Qatar makes sense geographically, with the small emirate a hub of travel to and from Afghanistan. After the brief squabble, talks seem to be moving slowly forward once more, with Karzai saying earlier this week that he would support the creation of a Taliban address in Qatar, but that he would prefer a location in Turkey or Saudi Arabia.
“The Afghan government and Karzai emphasized that they should be included in the process. They’re afraid that if they are left out of this process it won’t work,” says Abdul Ghafoor Liwal, director of the Regional Studies Center of Afghanistan. “The three sides of this political triangle are the Taliban, the Afghan government, and the international community, especially the United States. Therefore, the Afghan government wants to be a part of the process and aware of what’s going on.”
Now that Afghan and Western officials have agreed on the potential creation of a Taliban office, the next major sticking point may prove the release of Taliban prisoners in American custody. Among others, the Taliban has asked for the release of Mohammed Fazl, a senior member of the organization who stands charged with a number of crimes committed against Afghan Shiites during the Taliban’s rule.
Aside from complications getting American congressional approval to release Taliban detainees, particularly as the US turns towards a presidential election, there is also debate whether they would be released to house arrest in Afghanistan or a third country like Qatar near the proposed Taliban headquarters.
French defence minister visits Afghanistan
AFP via Yahoo! News - Dec 30 11:54pm
French defence minister Gerard Longuet arrived in Afghanistan on Saturday for a two-day visit to meet troops ahead of the New Year.
During his trip Longuet will meet Afghan President Hamid Karzai and Defence Minister Abdul Rahim Wardak.
Longuet touched down in Kabul two days after the death of two French Foreign Legion soldiers who were shot dead by a man wearing an Afghan army uniform in eastern Kapisa province.
At the start of the visit he was due to attend a ceremony for the soldiers before their bodies were repatriated to France.
He will also meet briefly with US General John Allen, the commander of the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force, and visit troops in the field.
Thursday's incident took the death toll among French troops since the start of the war in 2001 to 78.
After the withdrawal of 400 troops this year, France now has 3,600 soldiers in Afghanistan serving under ISAF.
The French death toll in 2011 stands at 26, the highest for the country in the 10-year war, and includes five who were killed in a suicide attack in Kapisa in July.
There are about 130,000 international troops in Afghanistan fighting alongside Afghan government forces against a Taliban-led insurgency.
NATO is handing security over to Afghan forces ahead of the withdrawal of all its combat troops by the end of 2014 and the French have been involved in training up the Afghan army.
After the two deaths in the Tagab valley, France said it was committed to helping develop the Afghan military and described the shooting as an isolated incident.
Seven Taliban Leaders Take Families to Qatar
TOLOnews.com Thursday, 29 December 2011
The Afghan High Peace Council on Thursday announced that seven Taliban leaders have taken their families to Qatar while no official letters either from Qatar or US has arrived to the council.
After the government agreed with a Taliban liaison office in Qatar, the practical process has started in Qatar, The council's international advisor said. Afghan government has agreed to opening an office for Taliban in Qatar on condition that the negotiation process is led by Afghans.
The council says that it hasn't received details about the Taliban leaders who have gone to Qatar.
"We have heard through the media about it, but we haven't received any official letter from US, Qatar or the Taliban," Mohammad Ismail Qasimyar, International Advisor of the Afghan High Peace Council said. "We don't know their names and family members. We have heard that six to seven Taliban leaders and their families have gone there."
Meanwhile, the High Peace Council has put in some conditions for talks with the Taliban. But it says it hasn't received any response from the Taliban in this regard.
"We set our conditions, we are waiting for Taliban's response," Mr Qasimi added.
The High Peace Council emphasises on Afghan leadership of the negotiation which is well respected by international community.
The conditions are:
- The office should only be used for negotiations
- The office should be in Afghanistan if the situation suits, if not in one of the Islamic countries preferably in Saudi Arabia or Turkey.
- First arrangements should be made without intervention of the host country.
- War should be stopped in Afghanistan before the start of negotiations
- Armed oppositions should cut all their ties with al-Qaeda and other terrorist networks.
- The achievements of last decade should remain unhurt.
- Afghan constitution must be respected.
- The sovereignty of Afghanistan must be recognised.
- Pakistan must support peace negotiations because the bases of the armed oppositions are there.
- Elected an powerful representatives from both sides should continue the negotiations.
- None of the third parties can interfere without consultation with Afghanistan.
Afghanistan cracks down on contractors
The Washington Post By Ernesto Londoño December 29 , 2011
KABUL - Afghan officials have seized millions of dollars worth of armored vehicles and weapons from private security firms in recent weeks, a move that has exacerbated concerns about the government’s plan to replace the hired guns that protect convoys and installations with an unprepared state-run guard force.
The crackdown is being carried out even though the Afghan Public Protection Force failed to meet any of the six benchmarks that were set out for it when President Hamid Karzai formally announced a plan to ban private security firms by March 20. An assessment team led by the NATO military coalition, which is heavily involved in the creation of the Afghan force, concluded in the fall that the guard force is far from ready to take over.
Diplomats, development experts and company executives worry that the abolition of private security contractors within three months could endanger Afghans and foreigners supporting NATO and its allies, halt reconstruction projects and open new channels for corruption.
The transition is happening at a critical time in the Afghanistan war. As U.S. and allied troops have begun to draw down, there are concerns about how Afghan troops will manage increased security responsibilities. The United Nations recorded an average of 1,995 attacks during the first 11 months of this year, a 21 percent increase compared with the same period last year.
Sediq Sediqqi, a spokesman for the Afghan Interior Ministry, called the transition from private security contractors a “huge task” and acknowledged serious challenges, but he said government officials are committed to meeting the deadline.
“We are working very hard with coalition forces,” he said. “The minister has assured the president we are ready to assume this responsibility.”
Since the ministry began auditing security firms about two months ago, authorities have confiscated nearly 3,200 weapons and at least 35 vehicles, Sediqqi said, describing it as the beginning of an effort that will intensify as the March deadline approaches.
“The companies were given deadlines, and they are giving up all this equipment” to the ministry, he said. “We are very encouraged.”
Sediqqi said the vehicles and weapons are now government property.
“They are being registered properly and will be used for public purpose,” he said.
The government has disbanded 57 security companies. Of the 46 that remain, Sediqqi said, 23 are Afghan-owned and 23 are foreign firms with operations in Afghanistan. The companies provide security to clients ranging from tiny aid organizations to large construction and shipping companies.
Karzai decided last year to disband the companies, saying they fuel corruption and distort the labor market by offering higher wages than the government can pay security forces. The APPF, as the state guard force is known, will be run by the Interior Ministry but will operate independently of the country’s conventional security forces. Taking control of the lucrative private security industry could represent a windfall for the cash-strapped government.
Sediqqi said the government was entitled to seize the firms’ equipment because most companies had imported their vehicles and weapons without following customs regulations.
For years, diplomatic missions and private security firms have complained that importing armored vehicles and weapons into Afghanistan is virtually impossible without paying bribes.
Kimberley Motley, an American lawyer in Kabul who advises security firms, said company executives were taken aback by the crackdown. They had opened their books to the government as a good-faith gesture, she said, in hopes that they could remain involved in the security industry as risk-mitigation consultants under the APPF model.
“A lot of companies are being penalized for trying to transparently run their security companies,” Motley said. The bulk of the equipment being seized, she said, was imported during years when there were “limited laws that dictated how they should operate.”
Since Karzai issued a decree ordering the disbandment of private security companies last year, U.S. military officers and diplomats have been scrambling to create a model that complies with the Afghan government’s vision but does not imperil development. The APPF has a few thousand guards but is expected to grow into a force that could have more than 25,000 on its payroll.
“What they are trying to do is unbelievable,” said Doug Brooks, president of the International Stability Operations Association, an advocacy group that represents security firms in conflict zones. “I think, in private, the recognition is universal, even among people in the Afghan government: All of them privately say this is not going to work the way it’s intended.”
A team of Afghans and Western officials set six goals for the APPF this year. But the team’s latest assessment, issued in September, concluded that the force was meeting none of the benchmarks, according to a Western government official who described the findings on the condition of anonymity because the report has not been publicly released.
A U.N. report to the Security Council noted that the assessment cast doubt about the readiness of the APPF, “particularly in terms of managing large-scale security projects in a fiscally and legally competent manner.”
Col. Daniel McCormick, a U.S. military adviser assigned to the APPF, declined to say whether the assessment team now thinks any of the original goals are being met.
McCormick said he was unaware that the Interior Ministry was confiscating vehicles and weapons from private security firms, noting that the U.S.-led coalition is “not part of that mission.”
Among the entities that have expressed concern about the plan is the Overseas Security Advisory Council, a U.S. government body that promotes security cooperation between the State Department and the private sector, McCormick said.
“The APPF challenge is a great opportunity,” he said. Its establishment, he added, will send a message that “Afghanistan is open for business, has rule of law and can provide security.”
The U.S. Embassy in Kabul said in a statement that diplomats have been in close contact with program managers who get funding from the United States “to address the concerns that have been raised.”
A development expert working on a U.S.-funded project in Afghanistan said people in the field are deeply worried about the transition. Some large companies, the expert said, have begun smuggling heavy weaponry and reclassifying staff members who were nominally security officers as development workers.
Still, said the expert, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to be candid, most in the development community are holding out hope that the deadline will be extended or the plan modified.
“This is not going to happen, otherwise development will come to a stop,” the expert said.
U.S. Military Tests Out Green Tech In Afghanistan
NPR By Quil Lawrence December 29, 2011
The heavy, mine-resistant vehicles that almost all U.S. military personnel use to move about Afghanistan are gas guzzlers. And even though the U.S. military buys that fuel at a reasonable price, the energy it takes to fly it and truck it to remote parts of Afghanistan drives the price into the stratosphere.
There's also a much greater cost, says Ray Mabus, secretary of the U.S. Navy.
"It's expensive in terms of getting us there financially. It's also expensive in the fact that for every 50 convoys, we lose a Marine, either killed or wounded, guarding that convoy," he says.
That cost, in both lives and dollars, is pushing the military to go green.
Practical Benefits Of Green Tech
The Navy has set the goal of using nonfossil fuels for 50 percent of its power by the year 2020. Mabus recently paid a visit to U.S. Marines in the remote Afghan province of Helmand, at the far end of the fuel supply chain, where some innovative green equipment is already in use.
Some of the solutions are incredibly simple: silvery tent liners that increase the efficiency of heaters or air conditioners. More novel are the portable solar-panel blankets, able to power communications gear for a patrol. That means carrying far fewer heavy batteries. There's also a small shipping container connected to a bank of solar panels that is powering flat screens and surveillance equipment.
Marine Capt. Brandon Newell says the troops don't have to be environmentalists to like the new gear.
"If the system works, they don't care. In fact, a Marine will love it if he has to refuel that generator less often. They'll love it. They don't care about the message or anything else; all they want is something that works whenever they need it," he says.
Newell admits that the measures so far are baby steps, and there are plenty of bugs in the system.
But the important thing, says Mabus, is that the U.S. military is starting to test some of the technology in the roughest conditions.
"When the military does something and shows that it works ... in the most critical circumstances, it makes it much easier to commercialize something," he says.
Environmental Impact A Side Benefit
That goes for solar panels, says Mabus, but also for biofuels. This fall, the Navy purchased half a million gallons of fuel made from algae or used cooking oil. In the spring, a huge exercise in the Pacific Rim intends to demonstrate that it works just as well as petroleum-based fuel.
Mabus says the strategic goal is to free the U.S. military from a product that comes from volatile places with unsavory regimes. He points out that during the NATO action in Libya, a spike in the price of oil cost the U.S. military about $1 billion. The environmental impact is a side benefit, he says.
"It really is a question of national security. It may be a side effect on climate change, being better stewards of the environment, but that's not the reason we're doing it," Mabus says.
Still, major environmental groups have reacted positively. And developers of biofuels and solar panels say having the Pentagon — the world's largest consumer of fossil fuel — trying to go green is providing a shot in the arm to their industry.
"It's a signal to investors that there is going to be stability. That is the game changer," says Sean O'Hanlon, president of the American Biofuels Council. "The bottom line is there has to be stable policy for them to invest hundreds of millions of dollars."
Justice, Security Officials Accused of Human Rights Violation
TOLOnews.com Thursday, 29 December 2011
Several civil society members on Thursday said that some provincial governors and officials from justice and security institutions have committed human rights violation.
In a recent report published by Independent Human Rights Commission, several high ranking government officials are accused of human rights violations.
Efforts to disband Human Rights Commission are underway, the members warned.
The civil society members stressed that the government is trying to change the Human Rights Commission into a government entity to let the human rights violators get away and bring Taliban into power.
"In the report, names of several provincial governors, parliament members, justice and security sectors are included. They have committed crimes against humanity and have been introduced to the human rights commission by Afghan people," Ajmal Baluch, a civil society activist, said.
Meanwhile, head of the Afghan Civil Society Forum said that President Karzai is under pressure to assign people who are close to the government as human rights commissioners.
"Is it appropriate to deliver cases of 1.5 million to those who committed crimes, Aren't we responsible to those victims?" Aziz Rafie, head of Afghanistan Civil Society Forum said.
The civil society members said that unqualified people will try to destroy all the documents filed against human rights violators.
This comes as President Karzai recently replaced three human rights commissioners and and said their working periods had ended.
"If the government assigns human rights commission without consultation of the human rights officials, it will be a clear violation of Afghan constitution and even against their commitments to the international community and Bonn conference," Mohammad Naim Nazari, an Afghan human rights activist, said.
Afghan enthusiast realises his dream of flying in homemade microlight
Sabir Shah takes off – after Kabul International declines – in aircraft built from bits of rickshaw and a secondhand Toyota
Guardian.co.uk By Jon Boone Thursday 29 December 2011
Kabul - With its clutter of civilian jets, cargo planes and military flights, Kabul International has one the busiest airspaces in the world. And dangerous: even before take-off pilots are almost a mile above sea level and surrounded by treacherous peaks.
On more than one occasion errant unmanned surveillance drones have caused panic after drifting unannounced into the vicinity of the airport.
For all these reasons, Kabul is not an obvious place for the maiden flight of an aircraft made from bits of rickshaw and a secondhand Toyota Yaris in the garden of a 25-year-old hobbyist. But that was what the enterprising Sabir Shah was set on doing when US air force pilots discovered the bright blue aircraft being assembled next to Kabul's only runway.
Their horror grew when they were told the young enthusiast had never piloted an aircraft or had pilot training. His first flight had been the day before when he caught a lift in an Afghan military helicopter to the capital from his home town of Ghazni in the country's restless southeast.
The Americans told Shah to take his quixotic dream to a quieter runway. Flying his own plane finally happened a few weeks later from an abandoned runway in northern Afghanistan.
Shah remembers moments not of elation but of abject terror. "I didn't believe it would ever take off so I was very frightened when I first flew," he said. "I didn't know what to do so I just put it right back down on the ground."
Video of the microlight, based on a design Shah found on the internet, lumbering into the air for a few seconds is reminiscent of film of the Wright brothers' first flight. Shah's airborne debut lasted seconds, travelling perhaps 50 metres and reaching two storeys high. The only person on hand to offer advice was a former pilot who flew fighter jets for the Soviet-backed regime of the 1980s.
It was an extraordinary achievement for someone with only a high school education and no expert help.
His love of aircraft began as a boy when he saw planes in the sky above his home. A Taliban helicopter landing in Ghazni long before the US-led invasion of 2001 left a lasting impression.
He fixed on the idea of a microlight four years ago after watching a documentary about a man flying round the world in one.
Buying such a craft would have cost tens of thousands of dollars so he set about building one from scratch, basing his design on internet photographs and a technical manual written to help US flight hobbyists assemble microlight kits.
He scavenged for rickshaw tyres and two secondhand engines (the first was not up to the job). He made his own plaster moulds for the aircraft's casing, which he covered in fibreglass.
The most difficult element was the propeller, crafted in wood. This went through five prototypes attached to the electric motor from a roadside juicing machine mounted on a toy car to see if it would drag it along.
The wing, made of nylon cloth stretched over a steel frame, took two attempts before he got the pitch right.
He spent about $8,000 (£5,200) in total, given by family living in Australia. His father runs a small baker's shop to support his family.
"My father never supported me," he said. "They asked why I was wasting all this money and not getting a job."
They think differently now. But as a member of the Hazara ethnic minority, he thinks his triumph has not gained the deserved accolades.
"[Hamid] Karzai went on TV holding a can of Pepsi, saying it was made in Afghanistan and as a nation we should be proud of that," he said. "But he has not told the nation that Afghanistan has made the first airplane in its history."
Although he claims the machine could fly up to 250 miles across country, he has no plans to fly again. On his fourth flight he crashlanded in rough ground off the runway, doing considerable damage to his microlight. "The government needs to train me how to fly or send me abroad for training," he said. "Otherwise it is much too dangerous."
1981 Files: Files hint at Afghan secret war
Evidence of an escalating secret war in Afghanistan is revealed in confidential documents which have been released to the National Archives.
Telegraph.co.uk By Duncan Gardham 30 Dec 2011
The documents detail Britain and America’s contribution to supporting Afghan militants fighting against the Soviets following the invasion of 1979 and an increasing propaganda war around the Moscow Olympics of 1980.
With some of those figures still active in Afghan politics, in places the Foreign Office documents have been censored or pages have been removed.
A “top secret memo” from the Foreign Secretary’s private secretary in September 1980 wrote of training and equipping 26 cameramen to be sent into Afghanistan to “take films of Russian atrocities and military activities in Afghanistan.”
Headed “Publicity for the resistance in Afghanistan”, it added: “The latest cameraman to return came back on 12 September, bloody and tattered having lost everything except his cameras and film after becoming involved in a heavy Soviet attack on a Mujahideen headquarters near Jalalabad,” the memo said.
“They hope for good shots from his film which is now on its way back to the UK.”
Earlier shots included pictures of the Mujahideen flourishing their weapons, moving through rough terrain in guerrilla formation and standing over a wrecked Soviet helicopter and military vehicles that had been knocked out.
The first batch of film was handed to the BBC before the Olympics had closed, but a note said “unfortunately the BBC did not show it until immediately afterwards.”
The clips were also syndicated “indirectly” through a company called Visnews and appeared in North and South America, Western Europe, Japan, Australia and possibly in communist Romania and Poland.
A letter from Downing Street to the Foreign Office on September 23 said the Prime Minister had seen a letter of September 19 “about [redacted] Afghan tribesmen to take films of Russian atrocities and military activities in Afghanistan.”
She has commented “Excellent”, it added.
As the war dragged on, Ahmed Gailani, a royalist member of the Mujahideen who headed a group called the national Islamic Front of Afghanistan, visited Britain in August 1980.
A letter from Lord Carrington to the Cabinet’s Overseas Defence Committee said he had asked for anti-aircraft weapons, anti-tank weapons and .303 ammunition for small arms.
But Lord Carrington said: “From information available to us, I am satisfied that arms are getting through to the Afghan resistance. I do not think therefore that we need or should get into the business of supplying arms to the resistance ourselves, although I would, of course, look at any specific requests in their merits.”
Lord Carrington warned against “the appearance of an East-West confrontation” and a memo from Kabul on August 28 reported that the Soviet Ambassador had warned the supply of weapons to the rebels could “create a dangerous situation.”
Britain did eventually become involved in supplying limpet mines, Blowpipe anti-aircraft weapons and other equipment to the rebels.
It is not clear when that started but the files include a telegram from Mr Gailani to Mrs Thatcher in October 1980.
“We wish you a happy birthday and hope you will have continued success in the years to come. Thanking you for your support in the struggle of the Afghan people,” it said.
Moreover when Alexander Haig, the US Secretary of State, visited Britain in April 1981 a memo by Lord Carrington’s private secretary was headed “Help for the Afghan resistance.”
It said that during the private discussions which preceded the main session of talks, Lord Carrington raised the question of arms for the Afghan resistance “and described our own efforts.”
“Mr Haig signified that he knew what was being done and said that he had briefed President Reagan,” it added.
www.afghanistannewscenter.com