Tweet
Karzai Aide Says U.S. Isn’t Providing Enough Details About Taliban Talks
By ROD NORDLAND and GRAHAM BOWLEY The New York Times January 19, 2012
KABUL, Afghanistan — President Hamid Karzai’s chief of staff expressed concern on Thursday about the American role in starting talks with the Taliban, complaining that Afghan officials were not being kept well informed and worrying about the possibility that the Taliban might make “a secret deal” with the United States.
The chief of staff, Abdul Karim Khurram, expressed his views in a rare interview a day after Pakistan canceled a visit by a top American envoy, Marc Grossman, throwing into disarray his efforts to hold talks on peace efforts with regional leaders.
“We have been briefed regularly by the Americans, but we don’t know all the details,” Mr. Khurram said. “We demand more clarity.”
Afghan officials have been smarting over the American effort to allow the Taliban to open an office in the Persian Gulf state of Qatar, as a place where talks could begin. At first, the Afghans rejected the idea, but last month they agreed; the Taliban also accepted the initiative.
“We wanted the office to be in Afghanistan, or if not, in Saudi Arabia or Turkey,” Mr. Khurram said Thursday. “But if the Taliban and America are happy about it, and if it puts an end to the war, and if it puts an end to the killing of Afghans, then we have agreed with Qatar as well.”
Five times during the 45-minute interview in the presidential palace, Mr. Khurram expressed concern about the possibility of “une affaire cachée,” as he put it in French at one point, or some sort of secret or separate deal between the Americans and the Taliban.
“We think if it’s not Afghan-led, the peace process will not be fruitful,” he said. “In case there were a secret deal, we would be concerned about it. If it’s about the peace process, then we are not worried.”
Mr. Khurram said he and Mr. Karzai would express these concerns to Mr. Grossman during his visit to Afghanistan next week.
His comments came on the second of two days of insurgent attacks that killed more than two dozen people in southern Afghanistan. At least seven civilians were killed, including two children who died when a suicide car bomber detonated his explosives on Thursday morning outside a gate at Kandahar air base, one of the largest coalition bases in Afghanistan, American and Afghan officials said. Eight more Afghan civilians were wounded, and the death toll could rise, said Zalmai Ayoubi, a spokesman for the governor of Kandahar.
A Taliban spokesman, Qari Yousaf Ahmadi, said the insurgents were behind the attack.
Taliban fighters also attacked a police checkpoint in Now Zad district, in Helmand Province, on Thursday afternoon. At least 2 police officers and 12 Taliban fighters, including a local commander identified as Mullah Abdul Baqi, were killed in the ensuing gun battle, said Dawoud Ahmadi, a spokesman for the provincial governor.
Mr. Grossman, the United States special representative to Afghanistan and Pakistan, was denied a visa to visit Pakistan and canceled his trip there on Wednesday and went to India instead, a stop that was not previously on his two-week itinerary in the region, according to State Department officials.
He will also visit Qatar next week, according to the State Department spokeswoman, Victoria Nuland. “All of these meetings are focused on the support these countries give to Afghanistan and talking through the process of Afghan-led reconciliation and how we can support the aspirations of Afghans,” Ms. Nuland said at her daily news briefing on Wednesday.
Mr. Khurram said Pakistan’s refusal to receive Mr. Grossman raised questions about how the process could move forward. “Pakistan’s role is important in the peace process and in particular about this Qatar office issue; I don’t know, when he can’t go there, how it will affect the process.”
Because the Taliban’s top leaders live in Pakistan, their travel to Qatar would have to be facilitated by Pakistani officials.
“We asked the Americans whether Pakistan will share in this process,” Mr. Khurram said. “They didn’t give us a meaningful answer.”
Despite those concerns, Mr. Khurram said he was hopeful that the peace process could eventually show results. After the assassination in September of Burhanuddin Rabbani, a former president who led Afghanistan’s High Peace Council, by a suicide bomber posing as a Taliban representative, talks came to a halt. The agreement for the Taliban to open an office in Qatar, meant to serve as an “address” where they could reliably be contacted for talks, was the first sign of any progress.
American officials, too, have insisted that any peace process would have to be Afghan-led, but Taliban intermediaries are known to be insisting on talks with the Americans rather than with the Afghan government, which they have rejected as a “puppet regime.”
The Qatar deal was brokered last year in direct and indirect American talks with Tayeb Agha, a former secretary to the Taliban leader, Mullah Muhammad Omar. When the Taliban announced their acceptance of opening an office, they insisted that a precondition would be the release of Taliban prisoners from the American detention center at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba.
Mr. Khurram said he had information that the Taliban’s Qatar office had already started functioning with Taliban officials present, even though it had not been formally inaugurated. The next step, he said, would be the release of prisoners from Guantánamo, which Afghan officials have long favored, although he said he did not know when that step might take place.
Matthew Rosenberg contributed reporting from Kabul, Taimoor Shah from Kandahar, Afghanistan, and an Afghan employee of The New York Times from Helmand Province.
Suicide Bomber Attacks Airfield in Southern Afghanistan
VOA News January 19, 2012
Afghan officials say a suicide car bomber has killed seven civilians near the entrance to the Kandahar Airfield, the latest in a series of attacks in southern Afghanistan.
The Taliban claimed responsibility for Thursday's attack, saying they were targeting NATO vehicles. NATO said there were no coalition casualties.
Provincial officials say the attacker detonated a vehicle full of explosives near the gate of the airfield, which is used by foreign and Afghan forces and is located on the grounds of the Kandahar International Airport.
Officials say two children were among the seven civilians killed in the suicide bombing, and that women and children were also among the eight people wounded in the attack.
On Wednesday, two bomb attacks in neighboring Helmand province killed at least 16 people.
In the first attack Wednesday, a suicide bomber on a motorcycle killed 10 civilians and two police officers in the Kajaki district. More than 20 people were wounded in the blast.
Another attack took place hours later in the Nad Ali district. A provincial spokesman said an Afghan intelligence official, two of his bodyguards, and a fourth person were killed by a remote-controlled bomb.
The Taliban claimed responsibility for the second attack.
Afghan President Hamid Karzai strongly condemned the suicide bombing in the Kajaki district and called on the Taliban to “stop killing innocent people.”
The commander of International Security Assistance Force, U.S. General John Allen said the attacks will “further isolate the Taliban from the process of peace negotiation.”
Separately Thursday, President Karzai ordered a probe into reports that six civilians were killed during a recent NATO night operation in the Sauki district of eastern Kunar province. A woman, four children, and a man were reportedly killed in the coalition raid.
20 killed, 26 injured in single day in Afghanistan
by Farid Behbud
KABUL, Jan. 19 (Xinhua) -- Taliban-linked activities have left 20 people, mostly insurgents, dead in a single day Thursday in Afghanistan. In the latest wave of violent attacks, the armed outfit carried out a suicide car bombing in southern Kandahar province Thursday afternoon killing eight people including seven civilians and the bomber on the spot, Kandahar's provincial government said in a press release.
"A total of seven civilians including five men and two children were killed in a suicide bombing in Kandahar city this afternoon," it said in the release.
Eight more civilians including a woman and two children were also wounded in the attack that occurred at around 01:30 p.m. local time when the suicide bomber rammed his explosive-laden vehicle into the entrance gate of the Kandahar's international airport, it said.
The powerful blast which occurred in the main road from the city to Spin Boldak district also damaged six civilians' vehicles, it said.
However, Taliban insurgents claimed of responsibility for the attack. A purported Taliban spokesman Qari Yousuf Ahmadi told local media via phone from undisclosed location that a Taliban fighter targeted an armored vehicle with NATO-led forces by a car bomb in Kandahar airport.
However, the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force ( ISAF) in a statement confirmed that "Insurgents detonated a vehicle borne Improvised Explosive Device (IED) outside an entry control point of Kandahar Airfield today."
The attack resulted in the deaths and injuries of a number of civilians, the ISAF said in the statement.
"Currently, there are no confirmed reports of injuries to ISAF or Afghan National Security Forces (ANSF)."
"There is no other information available at this time. ISAF in conjunction with ANSF, are gathering more facts and will release more information as appropriate. ISAF's immediate concerns are for those killed or injured and their families. ISAF, along with our ANSF partners, continue to go to all lengths possible to prevent these types of incidents from occurring," it further said.
In neighbouring Helmand province, 12 Taliban insurgents and two policemen were killed in a clash earlier Thursday, said a spokesman for provincial government.
"A group of armed militants stormed a police checkpoint in at around 04:00 local time on Thursday in Jazi area of Naw Zad district but the Afghan National Police repelled the attack," the spokesman Daud Ahmadi told Xinhua.
The clash triggered a gunfight that lasted for four hours. As a result 12 armed militants including their commander Mullah Abdul Baqi were killed.
He said the militants used small rifle and rocket propelled grenades to attack the security checkpoint, adding that two policemen were also killed and three others were injured in the fighting.
In a separate incident, 15 civilians were injured when their car ran over a roadside bomb in western Farah province also Thursday noon.
"The incident occurred in Bala Buluk District at around noon time Thursday while a convoy of civilian vehicles was traveling along a road to take part in a funeral ceremony which was underway in Daulat Abad area of the district," deputy to provincial police chief Mohammad Ghaus Malyar said.
The police official told Xinhua that a vehicle, sandwiched in the convoy, was touched off a roadside bomb triggering a blast that left all 15 male passengers injured, adding that some of the injured were in critical conditions.
He blamed Taliban insurgents for the attack in the province, 695 km west of capital city of Kabul. Civilian casualties have been on rise in insurgency-hit Afghanistan.
Ten civilians, three Afghan policemen and a NATO soldier were killed and 22 others including 20 civilians were injured when a suicide bomber detonated his explosive-packed motorbike in Kajaki district of Helmand province on Wednesday afternoon, according to Ahmadi.
A total of 1,462 Afghan civilians were killed in the first half of 2011, a 15 percent rise over the same period of 2010, according to the United Nations mid-year report released in Kabul in July, 2011.
15 civilians injured in roadside bombing in W Afghanistan
FARAH, Afghanistan, Jan. 19 (Xinhua) -- A total of 15 civilians were injured Thursday in a roadside bombing in western Afghanistan 's Farah province, police said.
"The incident occurred in Bala Buluk District at around noon time Thursday while a convoy of civilian vehicles was traveling along a road to take part in a funeral ceremony which was underway in Daulat Abad area of the district," deputy to provincial police chief Mohammad Ghaus Malyar told Xinhua.
He said a vehicle, sandwiched in the convoy, was touched off a roadside bomb triggering a blast that left all 15 male passengers injured, adding that some of the injured were in critical conditions.
He blamed Taliban insurgents for the attack in the province, 695 km west of capital city of Kabul.
Civilian casualties have been on rise in insurgency-hit Afghanistan.
Seven civilians including two children were killed and eight others injured when a suicide bomb car, targeting the entrance gate of an international airport, went off in the southern Kandahar province Thursday afternoon.
A total of 1,462 Afghan civilians were killed in the first half of 2011, a 15 percent rise over the same period of 2010, according to the United Nations mid-year report released in Kabul in July, 2011.
Pakistan denies reports of reopening NATO supply routes to Afghanistan
ISLAMABAD, Jan. 19 (Xinhua) -- Pakistani Foreign Office Thursday denied reports of reopening the NATO supply routes to Afghanistan and said that there is no ultimate decision about the reopening of supply routes so far.
Addressing a weekly press briefing in Islamabad on Thursday afternoon, the Foreign Office spokesperson Abdul Basit said that the conditions of reopening supply routes have not been decided yet.
The supply routes were closed in November last year following a cross-border attack by the NATO which killed 24 soldiers of the Pakistan Army.
The spokesman said that Pakistan has asked the United States that the special envoy Marc Grossman should put off his visit to Pakistan until the parliamentary review of bilateral relations is completed because the government wants to finish its homework before the arrival of the envoy.
"We don't hope that Grossman's visit to Pakistan remains futile," he said.
Commenting on Pakistani-U.S. relations, the spokesman said that Pakistan wants to develop its relations with the United States on the basis of mutual respect and mutual interests. He said that Pakistan is trying to put relations with the United States on a track that is in the interests of both countries.
The spokesperson also told that the U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has called in Pakistani Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar and discussed various aspects of bilateral relations.
Pakistan urgently needs stability
Financial Times By Ahmed Rashid 17 January 2012
Pakistan’s deepening political crisis has escalated dramatically, with the Supreme Court initiating contempt proceedings against Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani. The judgement could lead to the dismissal of Mr Gilani and eventually President Asif Ali Zardari, as the army appears to be giving full backing to the courts.
Since the 1950s every political crisis Pakistan has faced has been a result of civilians trying to wrest power and control from the military. This crisis is no different except for one important aspect – the military has no intention of seizing power. Instead it has allied with the Supreme Court in an attempt to get rid of a government that is widely perceived to be corrupt and irresponsible.
But in an era when hope of democracy is spreading through the Arab Muslim world and powerful armies in countries such as Thailand and Turkey have learnt to live under civilian control, Pakistan is an ongoing tragedy. Its military refuses to give up power, its huge stake in the economy and its privileges, while its politicians refuse to govern wisely or honestly and decline to carry out basic economic reforms such as taxing themselves.
The crisis would be more manageable if Pakistan was not so important. But for the fifth largest nuclear power to be tipping into economic and political disarray, just as the US and Nato needs Islamabad’s help in extracting itself from Afghanistan and be supportive in dealing with Iran is clearly troubling the world.
In the past, friends such as the US, the UK or Saudi Arabia have been able to mediate between political factions and the army, but this time nobody is trying to play such a role. No country wants to back a military that continues to sponsor Islamic extremism, but no country can afford to support a government that is so inept.
Pakistanis face a similar dilemma. One reason the military is so wary of a coup is that it knows that having staged four coups and messed up the country’s political progress so completely, a large section of the population would never support another military takeover.
In the past year Pakistan has become more and more isolated even in its own neighbourhood while a 60-year-long relationship with the US collapsed – for which both sides are to blame. The killing of 24 Pakistani troops by US helicopters in November on the border with Afghanistan was the last straw for Islamabad.
To the frustration of Nato forces, Pakistan has continued to support the Afghan Taliban even while the government called for talks between the Taliban, the US and Kabul. These talks are finally underway but the three sides have effectively bypassed Pakistan, thus further infuriating the military.
For weeks now the army and the prime minister have been engaged in an escalating war of words, with Mr Gilani insisting there cannot be a state within a state run by the military and that the army is breaking the law. The army in turn has accused Mr Gilani of violating the constitution and telling lies. A separate battle has ensued between the courts and the government, with Mr Gilani insisting that parliament is supreme and should decide all issues and the courts should not interfere with how he runs the country or the constitution.
Meanwhile the country is paralysed with huge energy shortages, the shut down of industry, the near collapse of the railways and the national airline as well. It comes against the backdrop of a continuing war against the Pakistani Taliban and Sunni sectarian extremists. Every week dozens of people are killed in suicide attacks, bombings, shootings and sectarian massacres. Unsurprisingly, all this has made the government extremely unpopular.
The government, which rules through a coalition, is also facing loss of support from some of its coalition partners thus weakening its position. Smaller regional parties are reluctant to oppose the wishes of the all-powerful army, while others have had enough of the misrule of Mr Zardari’s Pakistan People’s Party.
The military cannot afford a coup nor do they need one. Once the courts order the expected dismissal of Mr Gilani and perhaps Mr Zardari, the army and opposition politicians can mount relentless pressure on the two leaders to accept the court’s verdicts and resign.
What would follow would be an interim government followed by general elections within three months. That may not be such a bad thing. The tragedy is that nothing is in place to prevent such a crisis occurring again and again.
The writer is author of books about Afghanistan, Pakistan and Central Asia, most recently ‘Descent into Chaos’
Romney needs to be careful about his ‘facts’ about the Afghanistan war
Washington Post By Walter Pincus Thursday, January 19, 2012
A presidential candidate should be careful about foreign policy declarations made on the campaign trail and particularly during a heated televised debate.
I am not talking about Texas Gov. Rick Perry’s ignorant remarks Monday night about cutting off aid to Turkey’s ruling government of “Islamic terrorists,” since he has little chance of getting the nomination.
My focus is on Republican front-runner Mitt Romney and his statements about the Taliban and the war in Afghanistan.
One question to him was: “Governor Romney, should the United States negotiate with the Taliban to end the fighting in Afghanistan?”
Romney’s answer: “These people have declared war on us. They’ve killed Americans. We go anywhere they are and we kill them.”
Facts: After long negotiations with aides to Taliban leader Mohammad Omar, there is agreement for a Taliban political office to be opened in Qatar. Afghan President Hamid Karzai has given tentative assent. Obama administration officials insist that talks, when they begin, are only for confidence-building and that real negotiations over Afghanistan’s future must occur between the insurgents and the Karzai government.
Meanwhile, as Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton put it on Jan. 11, you don’t have the luxury of talking about ending a war with friends.
“We are prepared to support an Afghan-led process of reconciliation, and we will participate in that in support of the Afghans if we believe it holds promise for an end to the conflict,” she said.
But Clinton also said, “We have to continue fighting against those who take up arms against Afghans, and against NATO-ISAF [the U.S.-led Afghan coalition].”
At Monday’s debate, Romney went on to say President Obama now “wants to negotiate from a position of extraordinary weakness? You don’t negotiate from — with your enemy from a position of weakness, as this president has done.”
Facts: The latest National Intelligence Estimate on Afghanistan, briefed to Congress last month, noted recent gains had been made against the Taliban that showed a new level of strength in the coalition position. Still, there was no end in sight for the fighting because of the Kabul government’s corruption and incompetence and the insurgent sanctuaries in Pakistan. The overall assessment was that both military and diplomatic success were unlikely before December 2014, when all U.S. combat forces are to be gone.
Romney on Monday also said: “This president has done an extraordinary thing. He announced the date of our withdrawal. He announced the date of the withdrawal of our surge forces based upon a political calendar, not the calendar that the commanders on the ground said it was based for our mission. [Applause.] That was wrong. And then he announced the day that we’re going to pull out of the — of the country altogether.”
Facts: In June, Obama said 33,000 troops, the same number he ordered surged to Afghanistan in December 2009, would be withdrawn from Afghanistan by September 2012. It was not the number that commanders originally recommended, nor did they agree with the timing.
But on Dec. 11, Gen. John Allen, commander of U.S. forces in Afghanistan, told Washington Post columnist David Ignatius that there would be 68,000 combat troops left after September and he understood the president’s policy was for a “strategy-based drawdown” — thereafter driven by the situation on the ground through 2014.
The U.S. plan is to keep a residual force of about 10,000 to 30,000 troops in Afghanistan after 2014, primarily at the Bagram air base. An agreement for trainers and special forces is under negotiation with the Karzai government.
Another Romney statement Monday: “The right course for America is to recognize we’re under attack. [Applause.] We’re under attack by people, whether they’re al-Qaeda or other radical violent jihadists around the world, and we’re going to have to take action around the world to protect ourselves. And hopefully we could do it as we did with Osama bin Laden, as opposed to going to war, as we had to do in — in the case of — of Iraq.”
Facts: Romney is repeating a preemption policy initiated under George W. Bush, which should not be a surprise because many of Romney’s advisers on foreign policy and national security served in the Bush administration.
Ironically, Romney also is reflecting a section of Obama’s recently revised strategic guidance released on Jan. 5. It reads: “For the foreseeable future, the United States will continue to take an active approach to countering these [terrorist] threats by monitoring the activities of non-state threats worldwide, working with allies and partners to establish control over ungoverned territories, and directly striking the most dangerous groups and individuals when necessary.”
Why take Romney’s campaign remarks seriously?
Because I believe when he became president, Obama felt bound by his often-repeated statements as a candidate that Iraq was the “wrong war” and that the United States should shift to the “right war” in Afghanistan. Those campaign remarks, made to prove he was tough, led him in early 2009 to overstate that we had not only to defeat the Taliban, but also nation-build a democratic Afghanistan.
Fortunately, today, our goal is less expansive and a bit more realistic.
As Clinton put it recently, “We have to continue to try to build Afghanistan for the future.”
For more Fine Print columns, go to washingtonpost.com/fedpage.
Afghans wage anti-US rally in Kunar
Press TV January 19, 2012
Hundreds of Afghan people have waged a protest rally in northeastern Kunar province, condemning US-led nighttime attacks that have killed many civilians in Afghanistan, Press TV reports.
Shouting anti-American slogans, protesters in the northeastern city of Kunar on Thursday also called for an end to such deadly US assaults that have sparked extreme anger among the Afghan population, a Press TV correspondent reported.
Afghan lawmakers in the Afghan capital of Kabul expressed outrage as well over a US raid that left five civilians, including a woman and a child, dead in Chawkay district of Kunar province.
Sayed Fazelullah Wahidi, the governor of Kunar province, said the raid occurred Monday night when US helicopters fired projectiles into a compound.
The nighttime raid is said to have been part of the US “kill-and-capture” operations in Afghanistan.
NATO has confirmed the operation, claiming that it is investigating reports of civilian casualties.
Authorities, including President Hamid Karzai, have repeatedly slammed foreign forces' night raids, saying they lead to civilian loss of life on most occasions.
Afghanistan needs £165 million a year from Britain after troops leave
Britain will have to provide Afghanistan with £165 million a year after troops leave to ensure the country does not collapse, according to a report by an influential think tank.
Telegraph.co.uk By Thomas Harding, Defence Correspondent 18 Jan 2012
Without the cash the fledgling democracy in Afghanistan will be "in serious doubt" with the re-emergence of the Taliban inevitable, the report by the Royal United Services Institute said.
The price of supporting the Kabul government and paying wages to the Afghan National Army could cost Britain £5 billion if, as expected, it continues to assist the country for another three decades.
There was "an urgent requirement" to decide very soon what measures needed to be taken to shore up stability after the majority of Western troops withdraw in 2014.
"The very fact that the Taliban remain active and potent raises concern: the fear is that the withdrawal of ISAF (International Security Assistance Force) will provide the Taliban with an opportunity to re-establish their influence over large swathes of territory in Afghanistan,"
said the report jointly written by the Indian-based Vivekananda International Foundation.
"Unless the capacity of the Afghan state is built to withstand a Taliban offensive, and external intervention, its survival will remain in serious doubt."
To prevent Taliban resurgence Britain will need to contribute £100 million to support development and £65 million to Afghan forces "well beyond" 2014.
Large contributions are also expected from America and India.
To date Britain has spend more than £3 billion on aid as well as more than £20 billion spent on military operations and has suffered 395 military fatalities.
The RUSI report warned that political and ethnic divisions were obstructing stability which could be further undermined in the 2014 presidential elections.
"Poor governance, weak administrative structures, poor enforcement of law, narcotics trafficking and a weak economy are weighing too heavily on the ANSF, adding to stakeholders' apprehensions about the viability of the Afghan state beyond 2014."
US report on Afghan rampage raises questions about NATO’s exit
Last April, an Afghan officer in a highly secure facility killed eight US troops. Overall, Afghan national security forces are the key to America’s exit strategy in the war.
Christian Science Monitor By Anna Mulrine, Staff writer January 18, 2012
Washington A new Air Force report on the murder of eight US troops by an Afghan officer last April paints a disturbing picture of their last moments. During the chaos that ensued, some people jumped out of windows and dived for corners to avoid the AK-47-wielding gunman, who was roaming freely in a highly secure facility.
As US troops ramp up their training of Afghan national security forces – the key to America’s exit strategy in the war – the Air Force investigation has prompted some policy changes. These include stepped-up security measures and more weapons training so that airmen will be able to more quickly “neutralize” a hostile shooter.
But the report also raises some questions about the stalled progress of training to date, as well as the effectiveness of earlier steps taken by NATO trainers, meant to combat corruption within the Afghan Air Force. Some interviewed for the investigation said they feared the new measures would anger Afghans who would lose a lucrative, if illicit, source of income that came from Air Force flights.
RECOMMENDED: Three officials who will carry out Obama's Afghanistan exit plan
The report has sparked charges, too, that NATO officials are now withholding information on the number of allied troops killed by Afghan soldiers and police.
Ultimately, the investigation concluded that the rampage, which began on the morning of April 27, was the act of a lone shooter, Col. Ahmed Gul, rather than a Taliban conspiracy.
But a number of those interviewed for the investigation testified that Gul had become increasingly religious after the Taliban came to power in Afghanistan. Relatives told investigators that Gul lived in Pakistan for a year and a half, beginning in 2006, because “foreigners had invaded his country.” He returned to Afghanistan, according to those interviewed in the Air Force report, because he “wanted to kill Americans.”
Gul would often criticize the religious laxity of his colleagues, warned a colonel with whom he had served at the Afghan Air Force Military Academy. The colonel, whose name was redacted in the report, told investigators that in the prior 10 months he had noticed “drastic changes” in Gul’s way of life. Specifically, Gul had become more religious, with Islamic views that “were boiling over and extreme,” the colonel said.
Gul was also attending a mosque led by a mullah who was “extremely anti-American and pro-Pakistan,” the colonel added. He said he had phoned the Afghan Air Force’s internal affairs office “on multiple occasions, informing them that [Gul] was mentally and financially unstable.”
Though it was not customary for an Afghan Air Force officer to receive a pistol immediately upon taking a new post, according to the colonel, Gul received one within four months of his arrival. In his job, he was prone to bouts of anger “if things were not going his way.” He was also “irresponsible” and frequently late.
For these reasons, the colonel told investigators that he suspected Gul had “ ‘top cover’ from a higher-ranking officer in the [Afghan] MOD [Ministry of Defense].”
The investigation also uncovers a common source of concern among the allies they interviewed – namely, that Afghan Air Force officials make money on the side by using Air Force planes for deliveries and transportation for cronies. But they feared that efforts to tamp down these practices would be met with resentment among Afghan counterparts.
There was some discussion, too, that Gul was in a financially precarious state. At the time of the shooting, he had sold his house to pay off debts and was living in his car.
Gul shot himself in the chest after killing eight US troops and one US contractor, many of whom he shot in the back of the head at point-blank range.
The propensity of other Afghan officers to do similar harm to US troops has been an ongoing source of concern for NATO forces in Afghanistan. According to data compiled by USA Today, more than 50 troops have been killed and an equal number wounded by Afghan security forces since 2005. In 2011, Afghan troops killed at least 13 NATO troops.
But these figures may be increasingly hard to come by. On the heels of the Air Force investigation came charges from USA Today that NATO forces are no longer releasing specific data about troops killed by Afghan soldiers and police.
An International Security Assistance Force spokesman, US Navy Lt. Cmdr. Brian Badura, tells the Monitor that perhaps reporters could get such information in the past, but current policy is not to “aggregate” data.
“We don’t have the capacity to track over time, nor the personnel resources to run a data bank,” Badura said in an e-mail.
Boom time for Afghanistan's people smugglers
The tide of Afghans leaving for Europe is fuelling a lucrative business in fake passports and Taliban death threats
Guardian.co.uk By Jon Boone and Nooruddin Bakhshi Wednesday 18 January 2012
Kabul - For citizens going into battle against Afghanistan's officialdom, the warren-like building across the road from the headquarters of Kabul's police chief is a one-stop shop for every document they could need.
From their tiny cubbyhole offices, an army of typists can run up everything from marriage certificates to CVs and job application letters. Also available, for several hundred dollars more: Taliban death threats, the special chits also known as "night letters" that can be a passport to a new life in the west.
"We can write whatever you need; it depends," said one young clerk. "For example, we will mention you work in a government department, your job title and salary. It will say, 'If you don't leave your job by this date, we will come and kill you or put a bomb in your house'.
"Or we can say you are working with US forces," he added.
For a large number of Afghans such a purchase is just the first of many expensive outlays on the high-risk road to a new life in the west. Buyers hope the document will persuade immigration officers many thousands of miles away to give them asylum in Europe or Australia. The document is one part of a growing and lucrative business in smuggling a tide of mostly young, unaccompanied Afghan males overseas.
One people smuggler was happy to talk business after a perfunctory introduction in a car next to a police checkpoint in Kabul. He said two factors were driving a boom in his business: the rising fear among some Afghans for the future of their country and the existence of a class of well-off professionals who can afford his huge fees.
"Every day I am helping more people from all corners of Afghanistan to get out of the country," he said. "If everyone had money, then everyone would leave."
The Afghan government recently reported that around 50,000 Afghans cross illegally into Greece each year, a country which is both on the outer reaches of the Schengen zone and relatively easily reached from Turkey.
Smugglers offer different packages depending on what people can afford. By far the most expensive option, often in excess of $20,000 (£13,000), involves the elaborate forgery of European passports, or tinkering with legitimate ones, which allows his wealthiest clients to fly directly to their target country. "Eighty per cent of my customers go on a fake passport to Britain," confides a smuggler working in the eastern city of Jalalabad. "If you have money, everything is possible because we have contacts in western countries who make them for us."
A high proportion of his customers choose to fly from Islamabad and travel under fake Pakistani passports. "We have people at the airport who make sure they will get through customs," he said. "The deal we have is that once the customer is successfully on the plane, he has to pay. When they get to the UK they are on their own. We tell them to lose their documents when they arrive and go to the police at the airport."
He oversees the departure of around 15 people a month by plane. He also assists around 100 people each month who can only afford to travel by land, a figure that quadruples in the summer when the mountain paths between Iran and Turkey are less treacherous.
That was the route tried by Mohammad Nasim, a 21-year-old from a well-off family who decided to try and leave his country after his brother was killed by a bomb at the Indian embassy in Kabul.
His ultimate destination was the UK, but he only got as far as the Greek border after walking over the mountains from Iran into south-east Turkey. Around 40 other Afghans were in the group walking under cover of darkness along mountain tracks. With fake passports they then travelled by car to Istanbul, but the expensively acquired documents failed him when he tried to cross into Greece.
"I'd agreed to pay $18,000 if I got to England, but I only had to give them $5,000 in advance," said Nasim. "I was just unlucky when they checked my document on the computer."
He was deported back to Iran where he was kidnapped by a criminal gang before being allowed to return to Kabul after his family paid a ransom.
Becoming victims of such criminality and exploitation is a constant risk. The situation for marooned Afghans in Greece is so bad that the Afghan government plans to open an embassy in Athens to help deal with tens of thousands whose dreams of moving deeper into Europe have turned into a nightmare of limbo with no money or papers. Their plight is often made all the worse by smugglers who keep their passports until they are paid in full.
"It is a lot more difficult to get asylum protection in Greece so it is just a transit point," said Jean-Philippe Chauzy, a spokesman from the International Organisation of Migration. "There is a lot of resentment against migrants in Greece, especially with the economic crisis, which makes it very hard to make money and continue their journeys."
Others are robbed before they get very far at all. One man who had a decent case for asylum, having worked as a translator for Australian forces in his home province of Uruzgan, is now stuck in Quetta after paying $40,000 to smugglers, who took him to Karachi then abandoned him.
The huge fees mean that most would-be emigrants are rich by Afghan standards, many having done well in post-Taliban Afghanistan. "I have people from all corners of Afghanistan, but most of them come from Kabul because they are rich," said the Jalalabad-based smuggler.
For a passage to Australia, another popular destination, the smuggler offered an all-expenses-included trip for $11,500. Like others in his trade he recommended Australia, promising it was a soft touch on granting asylum.
"Australia gives citizenship if you have a good story," he said. "I am 100% sure that after spending six months in a [processing centre] in Australia you will get citizenship if you do not lose your temper and have warning documents from the Taliban saying you can't live in Kabul."
He also trains his clients to stick to their story: "They will know you are lying, but as long as you say the same thing whatever they ask you, you will be fine."But the route to Australia is one of the most treacherous. After flying to Malaysia legally, the migrants move across the porous border into Indonesia from where they try to sail to Australia, if they are not caught by the Indonesian authorities and put in grim detention centres where they can remain for years.
Half of the migrants in limbo in Indonesia are Afghans, the UN says, with the flow increasing in recent years. Around half of those who get caught on the way eventually opt to go home rather than endure years in an Indonesian detention centre.
If they avoid getting caught they will try to travel on small, often overloaded, boats to Christmas Island, an Australian territory just 200 miles south of Jakarta.
One Quetta-based smuggler, Abdul Khaliq Karbalay, is currently advising would-be clients to wait as the route has become unusable in the wake of the sinking of a boat full of migrants off Java's east coast in December. Around 250 people were aboard but only 47 survived. Of them, only one asked to be repatriated back to Afghanistan. "Try again in 10 days," the smuggler suggests.
For Mohammad, a 30-year-old mechanic from Parwan province, finding the cash to travel is almost impossible. But he wants to leave because he thinks he will escape poverty if only he could work in Australia.But as an ethnic Hazara he is also concerned the future my see the return of the Taliban. The movement orchestrated the slaughter of Hazara men in the northern city of Mazar-e-Sharif in 1998. "I only survived by hiding in a house that the Taliban thought had been searched," he said. "I believe that when the Taliban come again they will start killing Hazaras.""I am worried about the future of Afghanistan," he said, pointing off into the distance at the wall of snow-capped peaks that surround the Afghan capital. "The Taliban are behind those mountains; they can come tomorrow or the day after."
www.afghanistannewscenter.com
By ROD NORDLAND and GRAHAM BOWLEY The New York Times January 19, 2012
KABUL, Afghanistan — President Hamid Karzai’s chief of staff expressed concern on Thursday about the American role in starting talks with the Taliban, complaining that Afghan officials were not being kept well informed and worrying about the possibility that the Taliban might make “a secret deal” with the United States.
The chief of staff, Abdul Karim Khurram, expressed his views in a rare interview a day after Pakistan canceled a visit by a top American envoy, Marc Grossman, throwing into disarray his efforts to hold talks on peace efforts with regional leaders.
“We have been briefed regularly by the Americans, but we don’t know all the details,” Mr. Khurram said. “We demand more clarity.”
Afghan officials have been smarting over the American effort to allow the Taliban to open an office in the Persian Gulf state of Qatar, as a place where talks could begin. At first, the Afghans rejected the idea, but last month they agreed; the Taliban also accepted the initiative.
“We wanted the office to be in Afghanistan, or if not, in Saudi Arabia or Turkey,” Mr. Khurram said Thursday. “But if the Taliban and America are happy about it, and if it puts an end to the war, and if it puts an end to the killing of Afghans, then we have agreed with Qatar as well.”
Five times during the 45-minute interview in the presidential palace, Mr. Khurram expressed concern about the possibility of “une affaire cachée,” as he put it in French at one point, or some sort of secret or separate deal between the Americans and the Taliban.
“We think if it’s not Afghan-led, the peace process will not be fruitful,” he said. “In case there were a secret deal, we would be concerned about it. If it’s about the peace process, then we are not worried.”
Mr. Khurram said he and Mr. Karzai would express these concerns to Mr. Grossman during his visit to Afghanistan next week.
His comments came on the second of two days of insurgent attacks that killed more than two dozen people in southern Afghanistan. At least seven civilians were killed, including two children who died when a suicide car bomber detonated his explosives on Thursday morning outside a gate at Kandahar air base, one of the largest coalition bases in Afghanistan, American and Afghan officials said. Eight more Afghan civilians were wounded, and the death toll could rise, said Zalmai Ayoubi, a spokesman for the governor of Kandahar.
A Taliban spokesman, Qari Yousaf Ahmadi, said the insurgents were behind the attack.
Taliban fighters also attacked a police checkpoint in Now Zad district, in Helmand Province, on Thursday afternoon. At least 2 police officers and 12 Taliban fighters, including a local commander identified as Mullah Abdul Baqi, were killed in the ensuing gun battle, said Dawoud Ahmadi, a spokesman for the provincial governor.
Mr. Grossman, the United States special representative to Afghanistan and Pakistan, was denied a visa to visit Pakistan and canceled his trip there on Wednesday and went to India instead, a stop that was not previously on his two-week itinerary in the region, according to State Department officials.
He will also visit Qatar next week, according to the State Department spokeswoman, Victoria Nuland. “All of these meetings are focused on the support these countries give to Afghanistan and talking through the process of Afghan-led reconciliation and how we can support the aspirations of Afghans,” Ms. Nuland said at her daily news briefing on Wednesday.
Mr. Khurram said Pakistan’s refusal to receive Mr. Grossman raised questions about how the process could move forward. “Pakistan’s role is important in the peace process and in particular about this Qatar office issue; I don’t know, when he can’t go there, how it will affect the process.”
Because the Taliban’s top leaders live in Pakistan, their travel to Qatar would have to be facilitated by Pakistani officials.
“We asked the Americans whether Pakistan will share in this process,” Mr. Khurram said. “They didn’t give us a meaningful answer.”
Despite those concerns, Mr. Khurram said he was hopeful that the peace process could eventually show results. After the assassination in September of Burhanuddin Rabbani, a former president who led Afghanistan’s High Peace Council, by a suicide bomber posing as a Taliban representative, talks came to a halt. The agreement for the Taliban to open an office in Qatar, meant to serve as an “address” where they could reliably be contacted for talks, was the first sign of any progress.
American officials, too, have insisted that any peace process would have to be Afghan-led, but Taliban intermediaries are known to be insisting on talks with the Americans rather than with the Afghan government, which they have rejected as a “puppet regime.”
The Qatar deal was brokered last year in direct and indirect American talks with Tayeb Agha, a former secretary to the Taliban leader, Mullah Muhammad Omar. When the Taliban announced their acceptance of opening an office, they insisted that a precondition would be the release of Taliban prisoners from the American detention center at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba.
Mr. Khurram said he had information that the Taliban’s Qatar office had already started functioning with Taliban officials present, even though it had not been formally inaugurated. The next step, he said, would be the release of prisoners from Guantánamo, which Afghan officials have long favored, although he said he did not know when that step might take place.
Matthew Rosenberg contributed reporting from Kabul, Taimoor Shah from Kandahar, Afghanistan, and an Afghan employee of The New York Times from Helmand Province.
Suicide Bomber Attacks Airfield in Southern Afghanistan
VOA News January 19, 2012
Afghan officials say a suicide car bomber has killed seven civilians near the entrance to the Kandahar Airfield, the latest in a series of attacks in southern Afghanistan.
The Taliban claimed responsibility for Thursday's attack, saying they were targeting NATO vehicles. NATO said there were no coalition casualties.
Provincial officials say the attacker detonated a vehicle full of explosives near the gate of the airfield, which is used by foreign and Afghan forces and is located on the grounds of the Kandahar International Airport.
Officials say two children were among the seven civilians killed in the suicide bombing, and that women and children were also among the eight people wounded in the attack.
On Wednesday, two bomb attacks in neighboring Helmand province killed at least 16 people.
In the first attack Wednesday, a suicide bomber on a motorcycle killed 10 civilians and two police officers in the Kajaki district. More than 20 people were wounded in the blast.
Another attack took place hours later in the Nad Ali district. A provincial spokesman said an Afghan intelligence official, two of his bodyguards, and a fourth person were killed by a remote-controlled bomb.
The Taliban claimed responsibility for the second attack.
Afghan President Hamid Karzai strongly condemned the suicide bombing in the Kajaki district and called on the Taliban to “stop killing innocent people.”
The commander of International Security Assistance Force, U.S. General John Allen said the attacks will “further isolate the Taliban from the process of peace negotiation.”
Separately Thursday, President Karzai ordered a probe into reports that six civilians were killed during a recent NATO night operation in the Sauki district of eastern Kunar province. A woman, four children, and a man were reportedly killed in the coalition raid.
20 killed, 26 injured in single day in Afghanistan
by Farid Behbud
KABUL, Jan. 19 (Xinhua) -- Taliban-linked activities have left 20 people, mostly insurgents, dead in a single day Thursday in Afghanistan. In the latest wave of violent attacks, the armed outfit carried out a suicide car bombing in southern Kandahar province Thursday afternoon killing eight people including seven civilians and the bomber on the spot, Kandahar's provincial government said in a press release.
"A total of seven civilians including five men and two children were killed in a suicide bombing in Kandahar city this afternoon," it said in the release.
Eight more civilians including a woman and two children were also wounded in the attack that occurred at around 01:30 p.m. local time when the suicide bomber rammed his explosive-laden vehicle into the entrance gate of the Kandahar's international airport, it said.
The powerful blast which occurred in the main road from the city to Spin Boldak district also damaged six civilians' vehicles, it said.
However, Taliban insurgents claimed of responsibility for the attack. A purported Taliban spokesman Qari Yousuf Ahmadi told local media via phone from undisclosed location that a Taliban fighter targeted an armored vehicle with NATO-led forces by a car bomb in Kandahar airport.
However, the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force ( ISAF) in a statement confirmed that "Insurgents detonated a vehicle borne Improvised Explosive Device (IED) outside an entry control point of Kandahar Airfield today."
The attack resulted in the deaths and injuries of a number of civilians, the ISAF said in the statement.
"Currently, there are no confirmed reports of injuries to ISAF or Afghan National Security Forces (ANSF)."
"There is no other information available at this time. ISAF in conjunction with ANSF, are gathering more facts and will release more information as appropriate. ISAF's immediate concerns are for those killed or injured and their families. ISAF, along with our ANSF partners, continue to go to all lengths possible to prevent these types of incidents from occurring," it further said.
In neighbouring Helmand province, 12 Taliban insurgents and two policemen were killed in a clash earlier Thursday, said a spokesman for provincial government.
"A group of armed militants stormed a police checkpoint in at around 04:00 local time on Thursday in Jazi area of Naw Zad district but the Afghan National Police repelled the attack," the spokesman Daud Ahmadi told Xinhua.
The clash triggered a gunfight that lasted for four hours. As a result 12 armed militants including their commander Mullah Abdul Baqi were killed.
He said the militants used small rifle and rocket propelled grenades to attack the security checkpoint, adding that two policemen were also killed and three others were injured in the fighting.
In a separate incident, 15 civilians were injured when their car ran over a roadside bomb in western Farah province also Thursday noon.
"The incident occurred in Bala Buluk District at around noon time Thursday while a convoy of civilian vehicles was traveling along a road to take part in a funeral ceremony which was underway in Daulat Abad area of the district," deputy to provincial police chief Mohammad Ghaus Malyar said.
The police official told Xinhua that a vehicle, sandwiched in the convoy, was touched off a roadside bomb triggering a blast that left all 15 male passengers injured, adding that some of the injured were in critical conditions.
He blamed Taliban insurgents for the attack in the province, 695 km west of capital city of Kabul. Civilian casualties have been on rise in insurgency-hit Afghanistan.
Ten civilians, three Afghan policemen and a NATO soldier were killed and 22 others including 20 civilians were injured when a suicide bomber detonated his explosive-packed motorbike in Kajaki district of Helmand province on Wednesday afternoon, according to Ahmadi.
A total of 1,462 Afghan civilians were killed in the first half of 2011, a 15 percent rise over the same period of 2010, according to the United Nations mid-year report released in Kabul in July, 2011.
15 civilians injured in roadside bombing in W Afghanistan
FARAH, Afghanistan, Jan. 19 (Xinhua) -- A total of 15 civilians were injured Thursday in a roadside bombing in western Afghanistan 's Farah province, police said.
"The incident occurred in Bala Buluk District at around noon time Thursday while a convoy of civilian vehicles was traveling along a road to take part in a funeral ceremony which was underway in Daulat Abad area of the district," deputy to provincial police chief Mohammad Ghaus Malyar told Xinhua.
He said a vehicle, sandwiched in the convoy, was touched off a roadside bomb triggering a blast that left all 15 male passengers injured, adding that some of the injured were in critical conditions.
He blamed Taliban insurgents for the attack in the province, 695 km west of capital city of Kabul.
Civilian casualties have been on rise in insurgency-hit Afghanistan.
Seven civilians including two children were killed and eight others injured when a suicide bomb car, targeting the entrance gate of an international airport, went off in the southern Kandahar province Thursday afternoon.
A total of 1,462 Afghan civilians were killed in the first half of 2011, a 15 percent rise over the same period of 2010, according to the United Nations mid-year report released in Kabul in July, 2011.
Pakistan denies reports of reopening NATO supply routes to Afghanistan
ISLAMABAD, Jan. 19 (Xinhua) -- Pakistani Foreign Office Thursday denied reports of reopening the NATO supply routes to Afghanistan and said that there is no ultimate decision about the reopening of supply routes so far.
Addressing a weekly press briefing in Islamabad on Thursday afternoon, the Foreign Office spokesperson Abdul Basit said that the conditions of reopening supply routes have not been decided yet.
The supply routes were closed in November last year following a cross-border attack by the NATO which killed 24 soldiers of the Pakistan Army.
The spokesman said that Pakistan has asked the United States that the special envoy Marc Grossman should put off his visit to Pakistan until the parliamentary review of bilateral relations is completed because the government wants to finish its homework before the arrival of the envoy.
"We don't hope that Grossman's visit to Pakistan remains futile," he said.
Commenting on Pakistani-U.S. relations, the spokesman said that Pakistan wants to develop its relations with the United States on the basis of mutual respect and mutual interests. He said that Pakistan is trying to put relations with the United States on a track that is in the interests of both countries.
The spokesperson also told that the U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has called in Pakistani Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar and discussed various aspects of bilateral relations.
Pakistan urgently needs stability
Financial Times By Ahmed Rashid 17 January 2012
Pakistan’s deepening political crisis has escalated dramatically, with the Supreme Court initiating contempt proceedings against Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani. The judgement could lead to the dismissal of Mr Gilani and eventually President Asif Ali Zardari, as the army appears to be giving full backing to the courts.
Since the 1950s every political crisis Pakistan has faced has been a result of civilians trying to wrest power and control from the military. This crisis is no different except for one important aspect – the military has no intention of seizing power. Instead it has allied with the Supreme Court in an attempt to get rid of a government that is widely perceived to be corrupt and irresponsible.
But in an era when hope of democracy is spreading through the Arab Muslim world and powerful armies in countries such as Thailand and Turkey have learnt to live under civilian control, Pakistan is an ongoing tragedy. Its military refuses to give up power, its huge stake in the economy and its privileges, while its politicians refuse to govern wisely or honestly and decline to carry out basic economic reforms such as taxing themselves.
The crisis would be more manageable if Pakistan was not so important. But for the fifth largest nuclear power to be tipping into economic and political disarray, just as the US and Nato needs Islamabad’s help in extracting itself from Afghanistan and be supportive in dealing with Iran is clearly troubling the world.
In the past, friends such as the US, the UK or Saudi Arabia have been able to mediate between political factions and the army, but this time nobody is trying to play such a role. No country wants to back a military that continues to sponsor Islamic extremism, but no country can afford to support a government that is so inept.
Pakistanis face a similar dilemma. One reason the military is so wary of a coup is that it knows that having staged four coups and messed up the country’s political progress so completely, a large section of the population would never support another military takeover.
In the past year Pakistan has become more and more isolated even in its own neighbourhood while a 60-year-long relationship with the US collapsed – for which both sides are to blame. The killing of 24 Pakistani troops by US helicopters in November on the border with Afghanistan was the last straw for Islamabad.
To the frustration of Nato forces, Pakistan has continued to support the Afghan Taliban even while the government called for talks between the Taliban, the US and Kabul. These talks are finally underway but the three sides have effectively bypassed Pakistan, thus further infuriating the military.
For weeks now the army and the prime minister have been engaged in an escalating war of words, with Mr Gilani insisting there cannot be a state within a state run by the military and that the army is breaking the law. The army in turn has accused Mr Gilani of violating the constitution and telling lies. A separate battle has ensued between the courts and the government, with Mr Gilani insisting that parliament is supreme and should decide all issues and the courts should not interfere with how he runs the country or the constitution.
Meanwhile the country is paralysed with huge energy shortages, the shut down of industry, the near collapse of the railways and the national airline as well. It comes against the backdrop of a continuing war against the Pakistani Taliban and Sunni sectarian extremists. Every week dozens of people are killed in suicide attacks, bombings, shootings and sectarian massacres. Unsurprisingly, all this has made the government extremely unpopular.
The government, which rules through a coalition, is also facing loss of support from some of its coalition partners thus weakening its position. Smaller regional parties are reluctant to oppose the wishes of the all-powerful army, while others have had enough of the misrule of Mr Zardari’s Pakistan People’s Party.
The military cannot afford a coup nor do they need one. Once the courts order the expected dismissal of Mr Gilani and perhaps Mr Zardari, the army and opposition politicians can mount relentless pressure on the two leaders to accept the court’s verdicts and resign.
What would follow would be an interim government followed by general elections within three months. That may not be such a bad thing. The tragedy is that nothing is in place to prevent such a crisis occurring again and again.
The writer is author of books about Afghanistan, Pakistan and Central Asia, most recently ‘Descent into Chaos’
Romney needs to be careful about his ‘facts’ about the Afghanistan war
Washington Post By Walter Pincus Thursday, January 19, 2012
A presidential candidate should be careful about foreign policy declarations made on the campaign trail and particularly during a heated televised debate.
I am not talking about Texas Gov. Rick Perry’s ignorant remarks Monday night about cutting off aid to Turkey’s ruling government of “Islamic terrorists,” since he has little chance of getting the nomination.
My focus is on Republican front-runner Mitt Romney and his statements about the Taliban and the war in Afghanistan.
One question to him was: “Governor Romney, should the United States negotiate with the Taliban to end the fighting in Afghanistan?”
Romney’s answer: “These people have declared war on us. They’ve killed Americans. We go anywhere they are and we kill them.”
Facts: After long negotiations with aides to Taliban leader Mohammad Omar, there is agreement for a Taliban political office to be opened in Qatar. Afghan President Hamid Karzai has given tentative assent. Obama administration officials insist that talks, when they begin, are only for confidence-building and that real negotiations over Afghanistan’s future must occur between the insurgents and the Karzai government.
Meanwhile, as Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton put it on Jan. 11, you don’t have the luxury of talking about ending a war with friends.
“We are prepared to support an Afghan-led process of reconciliation, and we will participate in that in support of the Afghans if we believe it holds promise for an end to the conflict,” she said.
But Clinton also said, “We have to continue fighting against those who take up arms against Afghans, and against NATO-ISAF [the U.S.-led Afghan coalition].”
At Monday’s debate, Romney went on to say President Obama now “wants to negotiate from a position of extraordinary weakness? You don’t negotiate from — with your enemy from a position of weakness, as this president has done.”
Facts: The latest National Intelligence Estimate on Afghanistan, briefed to Congress last month, noted recent gains had been made against the Taliban that showed a new level of strength in the coalition position. Still, there was no end in sight for the fighting because of the Kabul government’s corruption and incompetence and the insurgent sanctuaries in Pakistan. The overall assessment was that both military and diplomatic success were unlikely before December 2014, when all U.S. combat forces are to be gone.
Romney on Monday also said: “This president has done an extraordinary thing. He announced the date of our withdrawal. He announced the date of the withdrawal of our surge forces based upon a political calendar, not the calendar that the commanders on the ground said it was based for our mission. [Applause.] That was wrong. And then he announced the day that we’re going to pull out of the — of the country altogether.”
Facts: In June, Obama said 33,000 troops, the same number he ordered surged to Afghanistan in December 2009, would be withdrawn from Afghanistan by September 2012. It was not the number that commanders originally recommended, nor did they agree with the timing.
But on Dec. 11, Gen. John Allen, commander of U.S. forces in Afghanistan, told Washington Post columnist David Ignatius that there would be 68,000 combat troops left after September and he understood the president’s policy was for a “strategy-based drawdown” — thereafter driven by the situation on the ground through 2014.
The U.S. plan is to keep a residual force of about 10,000 to 30,000 troops in Afghanistan after 2014, primarily at the Bagram air base. An agreement for trainers and special forces is under negotiation with the Karzai government.
Another Romney statement Monday: “The right course for America is to recognize we’re under attack. [Applause.] We’re under attack by people, whether they’re al-Qaeda or other radical violent jihadists around the world, and we’re going to have to take action around the world to protect ourselves. And hopefully we could do it as we did with Osama bin Laden, as opposed to going to war, as we had to do in — in the case of — of Iraq.”
Facts: Romney is repeating a preemption policy initiated under George W. Bush, which should not be a surprise because many of Romney’s advisers on foreign policy and national security served in the Bush administration.
Ironically, Romney also is reflecting a section of Obama’s recently revised strategic guidance released on Jan. 5. It reads: “For the foreseeable future, the United States will continue to take an active approach to countering these [terrorist] threats by monitoring the activities of non-state threats worldwide, working with allies and partners to establish control over ungoverned territories, and directly striking the most dangerous groups and individuals when necessary.”
Why take Romney’s campaign remarks seriously?
Because I believe when he became president, Obama felt bound by his often-repeated statements as a candidate that Iraq was the “wrong war” and that the United States should shift to the “right war” in Afghanistan. Those campaign remarks, made to prove he was tough, led him in early 2009 to overstate that we had not only to defeat the Taliban, but also nation-build a democratic Afghanistan.
Fortunately, today, our goal is less expansive and a bit more realistic.
As Clinton put it recently, “We have to continue to try to build Afghanistan for the future.”
For more Fine Print columns, go to washingtonpost.com/fedpage.
Afghans wage anti-US rally in Kunar
Press TV January 19, 2012
Hundreds of Afghan people have waged a protest rally in northeastern Kunar province, condemning US-led nighttime attacks that have killed many civilians in Afghanistan, Press TV reports.
Shouting anti-American slogans, protesters in the northeastern city of Kunar on Thursday also called for an end to such deadly US assaults that have sparked extreme anger among the Afghan population, a Press TV correspondent reported.
Afghan lawmakers in the Afghan capital of Kabul expressed outrage as well over a US raid that left five civilians, including a woman and a child, dead in Chawkay district of Kunar province.
Sayed Fazelullah Wahidi, the governor of Kunar province, said the raid occurred Monday night when US helicopters fired projectiles into a compound.
The nighttime raid is said to have been part of the US “kill-and-capture” operations in Afghanistan.
NATO has confirmed the operation, claiming that it is investigating reports of civilian casualties.
Authorities, including President Hamid Karzai, have repeatedly slammed foreign forces' night raids, saying they lead to civilian loss of life on most occasions.
Afghanistan needs £165 million a year from Britain after troops leave
Britain will have to provide Afghanistan with £165 million a year after troops leave to ensure the country does not collapse, according to a report by an influential think tank.
Telegraph.co.uk By Thomas Harding, Defence Correspondent 18 Jan 2012
Without the cash the fledgling democracy in Afghanistan will be "in serious doubt" with the re-emergence of the Taliban inevitable, the report by the Royal United Services Institute said.
The price of supporting the Kabul government and paying wages to the Afghan National Army could cost Britain £5 billion if, as expected, it continues to assist the country for another three decades.
There was "an urgent requirement" to decide very soon what measures needed to be taken to shore up stability after the majority of Western troops withdraw in 2014.
"The very fact that the Taliban remain active and potent raises concern: the fear is that the withdrawal of ISAF (International Security Assistance Force) will provide the Taliban with an opportunity to re-establish their influence over large swathes of territory in Afghanistan,"
said the report jointly written by the Indian-based Vivekananda International Foundation.
"Unless the capacity of the Afghan state is built to withstand a Taliban offensive, and external intervention, its survival will remain in serious doubt."
To prevent Taliban resurgence Britain will need to contribute £100 million to support development and £65 million to Afghan forces "well beyond" 2014.
Large contributions are also expected from America and India.
To date Britain has spend more than £3 billion on aid as well as more than £20 billion spent on military operations and has suffered 395 military fatalities.
The RUSI report warned that political and ethnic divisions were obstructing stability which could be further undermined in the 2014 presidential elections.
"Poor governance, weak administrative structures, poor enforcement of law, narcotics trafficking and a weak economy are weighing too heavily on the ANSF, adding to stakeholders' apprehensions about the viability of the Afghan state beyond 2014."
US report on Afghan rampage raises questions about NATO’s exit
Last April, an Afghan officer in a highly secure facility killed eight US troops. Overall, Afghan national security forces are the key to America’s exit strategy in the war.
Christian Science Monitor By Anna Mulrine, Staff writer January 18, 2012
Washington A new Air Force report on the murder of eight US troops by an Afghan officer last April paints a disturbing picture of their last moments. During the chaos that ensued, some people jumped out of windows and dived for corners to avoid the AK-47-wielding gunman, who was roaming freely in a highly secure facility.
As US troops ramp up their training of Afghan national security forces – the key to America’s exit strategy in the war – the Air Force investigation has prompted some policy changes. These include stepped-up security measures and more weapons training so that airmen will be able to more quickly “neutralize” a hostile shooter.
But the report also raises some questions about the stalled progress of training to date, as well as the effectiveness of earlier steps taken by NATO trainers, meant to combat corruption within the Afghan Air Force. Some interviewed for the investigation said they feared the new measures would anger Afghans who would lose a lucrative, if illicit, source of income that came from Air Force flights.
RECOMMENDED: Three officials who will carry out Obama's Afghanistan exit plan
The report has sparked charges, too, that NATO officials are now withholding information on the number of allied troops killed by Afghan soldiers and police.
Ultimately, the investigation concluded that the rampage, which began on the morning of April 27, was the act of a lone shooter, Col. Ahmed Gul, rather than a Taliban conspiracy.
But a number of those interviewed for the investigation testified that Gul had become increasingly religious after the Taliban came to power in Afghanistan. Relatives told investigators that Gul lived in Pakistan for a year and a half, beginning in 2006, because “foreigners had invaded his country.” He returned to Afghanistan, according to those interviewed in the Air Force report, because he “wanted to kill Americans.”
Gul would often criticize the religious laxity of his colleagues, warned a colonel with whom he had served at the Afghan Air Force Military Academy. The colonel, whose name was redacted in the report, told investigators that in the prior 10 months he had noticed “drastic changes” in Gul’s way of life. Specifically, Gul had become more religious, with Islamic views that “were boiling over and extreme,” the colonel said.
Gul was also attending a mosque led by a mullah who was “extremely anti-American and pro-Pakistan,” the colonel added. He said he had phoned the Afghan Air Force’s internal affairs office “on multiple occasions, informing them that [Gul] was mentally and financially unstable.”
Though it was not customary for an Afghan Air Force officer to receive a pistol immediately upon taking a new post, according to the colonel, Gul received one within four months of his arrival. In his job, he was prone to bouts of anger “if things were not going his way.” He was also “irresponsible” and frequently late.
For these reasons, the colonel told investigators that he suspected Gul had “ ‘top cover’ from a higher-ranking officer in the [Afghan] MOD [Ministry of Defense].”
The investigation also uncovers a common source of concern among the allies they interviewed – namely, that Afghan Air Force officials make money on the side by using Air Force planes for deliveries and transportation for cronies. But they feared that efforts to tamp down these practices would be met with resentment among Afghan counterparts.
There was some discussion, too, that Gul was in a financially precarious state. At the time of the shooting, he had sold his house to pay off debts and was living in his car.
Gul shot himself in the chest after killing eight US troops and one US contractor, many of whom he shot in the back of the head at point-blank range.
The propensity of other Afghan officers to do similar harm to US troops has been an ongoing source of concern for NATO forces in Afghanistan. According to data compiled by USA Today, more than 50 troops have been killed and an equal number wounded by Afghan security forces since 2005. In 2011, Afghan troops killed at least 13 NATO troops.
But these figures may be increasingly hard to come by. On the heels of the Air Force investigation came charges from USA Today that NATO forces are no longer releasing specific data about troops killed by Afghan soldiers and police.
An International Security Assistance Force spokesman, US Navy Lt. Cmdr. Brian Badura, tells the Monitor that perhaps reporters could get such information in the past, but current policy is not to “aggregate” data.
“We don’t have the capacity to track over time, nor the personnel resources to run a data bank,” Badura said in an e-mail.
Boom time for Afghanistan's people smugglers
The tide of Afghans leaving for Europe is fuelling a lucrative business in fake passports and Taliban death threats
Guardian.co.uk By Jon Boone and Nooruddin Bakhshi Wednesday 18 January 2012
Kabul - For citizens going into battle against Afghanistan's officialdom, the warren-like building across the road from the headquarters of Kabul's police chief is a one-stop shop for every document they could need.
From their tiny cubbyhole offices, an army of typists can run up everything from marriage certificates to CVs and job application letters. Also available, for several hundred dollars more: Taliban death threats, the special chits also known as "night letters" that can be a passport to a new life in the west.
"We can write whatever you need; it depends," said one young clerk. "For example, we will mention you work in a government department, your job title and salary. It will say, 'If you don't leave your job by this date, we will come and kill you or put a bomb in your house'.
"Or we can say you are working with US forces," he added.
For a large number of Afghans such a purchase is just the first of many expensive outlays on the high-risk road to a new life in the west. Buyers hope the document will persuade immigration officers many thousands of miles away to give them asylum in Europe or Australia. The document is one part of a growing and lucrative business in smuggling a tide of mostly young, unaccompanied Afghan males overseas.
One people smuggler was happy to talk business after a perfunctory introduction in a car next to a police checkpoint in Kabul. He said two factors were driving a boom in his business: the rising fear among some Afghans for the future of their country and the existence of a class of well-off professionals who can afford his huge fees.
"Every day I am helping more people from all corners of Afghanistan to get out of the country," he said. "If everyone had money, then everyone would leave."
The Afghan government recently reported that around 50,000 Afghans cross illegally into Greece each year, a country which is both on the outer reaches of the Schengen zone and relatively easily reached from Turkey.
Smugglers offer different packages depending on what people can afford. By far the most expensive option, often in excess of $20,000 (£13,000), involves the elaborate forgery of European passports, or tinkering with legitimate ones, which allows his wealthiest clients to fly directly to their target country. "Eighty per cent of my customers go on a fake passport to Britain," confides a smuggler working in the eastern city of Jalalabad. "If you have money, everything is possible because we have contacts in western countries who make them for us."
A high proportion of his customers choose to fly from Islamabad and travel under fake Pakistani passports. "We have people at the airport who make sure they will get through customs," he said. "The deal we have is that once the customer is successfully on the plane, he has to pay. When they get to the UK they are on their own. We tell them to lose their documents when they arrive and go to the police at the airport."
He oversees the departure of around 15 people a month by plane. He also assists around 100 people each month who can only afford to travel by land, a figure that quadruples in the summer when the mountain paths between Iran and Turkey are less treacherous.
That was the route tried by Mohammad Nasim, a 21-year-old from a well-off family who decided to try and leave his country after his brother was killed by a bomb at the Indian embassy in Kabul.
His ultimate destination was the UK, but he only got as far as the Greek border after walking over the mountains from Iran into south-east Turkey. Around 40 other Afghans were in the group walking under cover of darkness along mountain tracks. With fake passports they then travelled by car to Istanbul, but the expensively acquired documents failed him when he tried to cross into Greece.
"I'd agreed to pay $18,000 if I got to England, but I only had to give them $5,000 in advance," said Nasim. "I was just unlucky when they checked my document on the computer."
He was deported back to Iran where he was kidnapped by a criminal gang before being allowed to return to Kabul after his family paid a ransom.
Becoming victims of such criminality and exploitation is a constant risk. The situation for marooned Afghans in Greece is so bad that the Afghan government plans to open an embassy in Athens to help deal with tens of thousands whose dreams of moving deeper into Europe have turned into a nightmare of limbo with no money or papers. Their plight is often made all the worse by smugglers who keep their passports until they are paid in full.
"It is a lot more difficult to get asylum protection in Greece so it is just a transit point," said Jean-Philippe Chauzy, a spokesman from the International Organisation of Migration. "There is a lot of resentment against migrants in Greece, especially with the economic crisis, which makes it very hard to make money and continue their journeys."
Others are robbed before they get very far at all. One man who had a decent case for asylum, having worked as a translator for Australian forces in his home province of Uruzgan, is now stuck in Quetta after paying $40,000 to smugglers, who took him to Karachi then abandoned him.
The huge fees mean that most would-be emigrants are rich by Afghan standards, many having done well in post-Taliban Afghanistan. "I have people from all corners of Afghanistan, but most of them come from Kabul because they are rich," said the Jalalabad-based smuggler.
For a passage to Australia, another popular destination, the smuggler offered an all-expenses-included trip for $11,500. Like others in his trade he recommended Australia, promising it was a soft touch on granting asylum.
"Australia gives citizenship if you have a good story," he said. "I am 100% sure that after spending six months in a [processing centre] in Australia you will get citizenship if you do not lose your temper and have warning documents from the Taliban saying you can't live in Kabul."
He also trains his clients to stick to their story: "They will know you are lying, but as long as you say the same thing whatever they ask you, you will be fine."But the route to Australia is one of the most treacherous. After flying to Malaysia legally, the migrants move across the porous border into Indonesia from where they try to sail to Australia, if they are not caught by the Indonesian authorities and put in grim detention centres where they can remain for years.
Half of the migrants in limbo in Indonesia are Afghans, the UN says, with the flow increasing in recent years. Around half of those who get caught on the way eventually opt to go home rather than endure years in an Indonesian detention centre.
If they avoid getting caught they will try to travel on small, often overloaded, boats to Christmas Island, an Australian territory just 200 miles south of Jakarta.
One Quetta-based smuggler, Abdul Khaliq Karbalay, is currently advising would-be clients to wait as the route has become unusable in the wake of the sinking of a boat full of migrants off Java's east coast in December. Around 250 people were aboard but only 47 survived. Of them, only one asked to be repatriated back to Afghanistan. "Try again in 10 days," the smuggler suggests.
For Mohammad, a 30-year-old mechanic from Parwan province, finding the cash to travel is almost impossible. But he wants to leave because he thinks he will escape poverty if only he could work in Australia.But as an ethnic Hazara he is also concerned the future my see the return of the Taliban. The movement orchestrated the slaughter of Hazara men in the northern city of Mazar-e-Sharif in 1998. "I only survived by hiding in a house that the Taliban thought had been searched," he said. "I believe that when the Taliban come again they will start killing Hazaras.""I am worried about the future of Afghanistan," he said, pointing off into the distance at the wall of snow-capped peaks that surround the Afghan capital. "The Taliban are behind those mountains; they can come tomorrow or the day after."
www.afghanistannewscenter.com