Tweet
Taliban vows to retake Afghanistan: report
By Hamid Shalizi and Mirwais Harooni
KABUL (Reuters) - The Taliban, backed by Pakistan, remains confident despite a decade of NATO efforts that it will retake control of Afghanistan, NATO said in a new classified report that raises more questions about Afghanistan's future as foreign forces withdraw.
"Taliban commanders, along with rank and file members, increasingly believe their control of Afghanistan is inevitable. Though the Taliban suffered severely in 2011, its strength, motivation, funding and tactical proficiency remains intact," according to an excerpt of the report, published by the Times of London and the BBC.
"While they are weary of war, they see little hope for a negotiated peace. Despite numerous tactical setbacks, surrender is far from their collective mindset. For the moment, they believe that continuing the fight and expanding Taliban governance are their only viable courses of action," the published excerpts said.
Lieutenant Colonel Jimmie Cummings, a spokesman for the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force, confirmed the existence of the document, but military officials downplayed it as a depiction of the views of thousands of Taliban detainees who were interviewed by NATO officials.
"The classified document in question is a compilation of Taliban detainee opinions," Cummings said. "It's not an analysis, nor is it meant to be considered an analysis."
Still, the published excerpts paint a troubling picture of the Afghan war more than 10 years after the Taliban government was toppled, and as foreign forces begin to go home in earnest.
U.S. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta said on Wednesday the United States was aiming to complete its combat role in Afghanistan by mid- to late 2013, shifting to a training role.
The report's findings - including assertions that the Taliban had not formally split from international extremists - could also reinforce the view of Taliban hard-liners that they should not negotiate with the United States and President Hamid Karzai's unpopular government while in a position of strength.
Hours after the Times report, the Afghan Taliban said that no peace negotiation process had been agreed to with the international community, "particularly the Americans."
Taliban spokesman Zabihullah Mujahid said in a statement that before any negotiations, confidence-building measures must be completed, putting pressure on Washington to meet demands for the release of five Taliban in U.S. custody.
The hard-line Islamist movement also said it had no plans to hold preliminary peace talks with Afghanistan's government in Saudi Arabia, dismissing media reports of talks in the kingdom.
Britain's Kabul ambassador, William Patey, wrote on his Twitter feed that "if elements of the Taliban think that in 2015 they can take control of Afghanistan they will be in for a shock." He did not say if he was referring to the NATO report.
"We really do believe that militarily we are making an impact on the Taliban," said Captain John Kirby, a Pentagon spokesman.
PAKISTAN LINK
The published excerpts of the report also gave further indication of the Taliban's reliance on neighboring Pakistan, where elements of the Inter-Services Intelligence agency has long had links to the Taliban.
"Reflections from detainees indicate that Pakistan's manipulation of Taliban senior leadership continues unabated. The Taliban themselves do not trust Pakistan, yet there is a widespread acceptance of the status quo in lieu of realistic alternatives," another excerpt published by the Times read.
The report overshadowed a visit to Kabul by Pakistani Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar designed to repair ties and raise the issue with Karzai of peace talks with the Taliban.
"I can disregard this as a potentially strategic leak. ... This is old wine in an even older bottle," she told reporters, repeating Pakistan's denials it backs militant groups.
Khar, whose visit was the first high-level meeting in months between officials from both countries, added the neighbors should stop blaming each other for strained cross-border ties.
The Times said the "highly classified" report was put together by the U.S. military at Bagram air base, near Kabul, for top NATO officers last month. It was based on interrogations of more than 4,000 Taliban and al Qaeda detainees, it said.
Kirby declined to comment on the specifics of the report, but did acknowledge "long-standing concerns about the ties between elements of the ISI and the Taliban. This is not a new notion."
Large swathes of Afghanistan have been handed back to Afghan security forces, with the last foreign combat troops due to leave by the end of 2014. While some foreign soldiers will stay, likely to conduct counterterrorism operations, many Afghans doubt their security forces can stave off insurgents.
NATO spokeswoman Oana Lungescu, speaking in Brussels, played down the implications and said a surge offensive had seen the Taliban suffer "tremendous setbacks."
"We know that they have lost a lot of ground and a lot of leaders, and we also know that support for the Taliban is at an all-time low," she said.
As of January 1, 889 U.S. soldiers had been killed in a conflict that was launched after the September 11, 2001, attacks and has drained almost half a trillion dollars from U.S. coffers.
'WRONG POLICIES'
New accusations of Pakistani collusion with the Taliban could further strain ties between Western powers and Islamabad.
Critics say Pakistan uses militants as proxies to counter the growing influence of India in Afghanistan. The belief that Pakistan supports the insurgents is widely held in Afghanistan.
"It would be a mistake now for the international community to leave Afghanistan, and drop us in a dark ocean," said Afghan telecommunications worker Farid Ahmad Totakhil.
Pakistan is reviewing ties with the United States, which have suffered a series of setbacks since a U.S. raid that killed Osama bin Laden on Pakistani soil in May last year humiliated Pakistan's powerful generals.
A November 26 cross-border NATO air attack that killed 24 Pakistani soldiers deepened the crisis, prompting Pakistan to close supply routes to NATO forces in Afghanistan.
Pakistan is seen as critical to U.S. efforts to stabilize Afghanistan. Yet Islamabad has resisted U.S. pressure to go after insurgent groups like the Taliban, and argues Washington's approach overlooks complex realities on the ground.
Pakistan says the United States should attempt to bring all militant groups into a peace process and fears a 2014 combat troop exit could be hasty, plunging the region into the kind of chaos seen after the Soviet exit in 1989.
"They don't need any backing," Tariq Azim, of the Pakistani Senate's Defence Committee, told Reuters, referring to the Taliban. "Everybody knows that after 10 years, they (NATO) have not been able to control a single province in Afghanistan because of the wrong policies they have been following."
The Taliban announced this month it would open a political office in Qatar to support possible reconciliation talks. There has been talk of efforts to hold separate talks in Saudi Arabia.
U.S. lawmakers also pressed the Pentagon on Wednesday to step up measures to ensure Western soldiers are not attacked by Afghan forces or employees of security firms working with NATO.
France said it would withdraw its troops completely by the end of 2013 after four of its soldiers were killed by a rogue Afghan soldier, the latest such "insider" attack.
The U.S. Defense Department said that over 40 similar attacks on foreign personnel had taken place since mid-2007, some of them by people working with private security contractors.
"We ... owe it to our military personnel to do everything we can to reduce this sort of risk," said Representative Adam Smith, the senior Democrat on the House Armed Services Committee.
Pentagon officials said NATO took extensive steps to vet Afghans working with foreign troops and was exploring ways to prevent future attacks.
(Additional reporting by Dan Magnowski, Rob Taylor and Amie Ferris-Rotman in KABUL, David Brunnstrom in BRUSSELS, Qasim Nauman in ISLAMABAD, Missy Ryan in WASHINGTON; Writing by Michael Georgy and Rob Taylor; Editing by Robert Birsel and Peter Cooney)
Leaked NATO Report Shows Pakistan Support For Taliban
February 1, 2012 Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty
A classified NATO military report obtained in Afghanistan by news organizations says Pakistan's secret services are helping Taliban in directing attacks against foreign troops in Afghanistan.
The BBC and "The Times" newspaper in London quote the report as saying Pakistan's ISI intelligence agency is "intimately involved" with the Afghan insurgency.
The document alleges that Pakistan knows the locations of senior Taliban leaders and that "Pakistan's manipulation of the Taliban senior leadership continues unabatedly."
It also says the Taliban assume they will be able to retake control of Afghanistan after NATO-led forces withdraw from the country -- a move scheduled to take place by the end of 2014.
The leaked report was prepared by the U.S. military at Bagram Air Base near Kabul and given to top NATO officers in December.
The BBC says it was based on materials obtained in 27,000 interrogations of more than 4,000 captured Taliban and Al-Qaeda operatives.
The BBC says the report quotes one senior Al-Qaeda detainee as saying "Pakistan knows everything. They control everything. I can't [expletive] on a tree in Kunar [Province in Afghanistan] without them watching. The Taliban are not Islam. The Taliban are Islamabad."
Claim Is 'Nothing New'
Pakistan's Foreign Ministry has rejected the report as "frivolous," saying Islamabad "is committed to noninterference in Afghanistan."
But Pakistani journalist Ahmed Rashid -- a noted author on Taliban and Al-Qaeda militancy in the region -- told RFE/RL that there is nothing surprising in the claim that Taliban and other militants receive support from elements within Pakistan's intelligence services.
"It's very well known amongst NATO militaries [and] amongst the U.S. military," he said. "I was told by senior American generals that they approached [former U.S.] President [George W.] Bush and Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld back in 2005 about the support that the Taliban were getting from Pakistan.
"But it was ignored by Bush at that time. So this is nothing new, I think, for anyone. But the fact that it should be leaked and that it should come in such language, I suppose, is going to create quite a furor."
U.S. Pentagon spokesman John Kirby said the United States has long been concerned about "ties between elements of the ISI and some extremist networks."
But Kirby said the U.S. Defense Department had not yet seen the document reported by the BBC and "The Times."
Lieutenant Colonel Jimmie Cummings, a spokesman for the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan, confirmed the existence of the document. Nonetheless, Cummings said it was "a compilation of Taliban detainee opinions" -- and not a strategic assessment.
'A New Phase' In Cooperation
The U.S. Embassy in Kabul declined immediate comment on the report. But the accusations are expected to further strain ties between Western powers and Islamabad, which has long denied backing militant groups that seek to topple the U.S.-backed government in Kabul.
Pakistan's Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar, who arrived in Kabul on February 1 for a previously planned one-day visit, said Pakistan "can disregard this as a potentially strategic leak." She described the report as "old wine in an even older bottle."
Before the news reports about the leaked document, Afghan Foreign Ministry spokesman Janan Mosazai said Khar's visit was aimed at opening a "new phase" in cooperation between the two countries.
Kabul has long accused Pakistan of interfering in Afghanistan's internal affairs by helping Taliban insurgents.
But relations have been particularly poor since last September, when Aghan peace envoy and former President Burhanuddin Rabbani was assassinated -- a killing that Kabul blamed on Pakistani spies.
Kabul says the bomber who killed Rabbani was a Pakistani and has accused Islamabad of hindering the investigation.
But Kabul also is seeking Pakistan's help to convince the Taliban's senior leadership -- known as the Quetta Shura -- to join peace talks in Saudi Arabia with members of the Afghan government.
On February 1, the Taliban denied reports that its leadership would soon meet in Saudi Arabia with Karzai's envoys.
Spokesman Zabihullah Mujahid said the Taliban is "in the process of creating an understanding with the international community" through a liaison office in Qatar.
But he said the Taliban "has not reached the actual process of negotiation" with the United States or its allies. He said confidence measures must first be completed.
A senior official in Karzai's government said on January 30 that a meeting was planned in Saudi Arabia with "some" factions willing to join peace talks.
Saudi officials are reluctant to host the talks unless the Taliban renounces ties to Al-Qaeda.
Taliban Fighters Killed
News of the alleged leaked report came as Pakistan's military said warplanes killed up to 31 Taliban fighters in an attack on hideouts in the country's northwestern tribal area.
Political administrators Wajid Khan and Amir Gul said bombing operations had taken place early on the morning morning of February 1 in the Orakzai and Kurram tribal areas.
A military official speaking under condition of anonymity said four hideouts in the Orakzai district used by supporters of Taliban commanders Mullah Tufan and Moheyuddin were destroyed.
The same official said Moheyuddin might have been killed in the bombing also.
The attacks come after fierce fighting in the Kurram district where Pakistani government troops and militants fought over a strategic mountaintop overlooking routes in Afghanistan.
Some 60 combatants were killed in that battle.
Compiled from agency reports
Pakistan Dismisses Allegations of Afghan Taliban Support
VOA News February 1, 2012
Pakistan has dismissed a leaked report allegedly authored by the NATO-led coalition in Afghanistan that accuses Pakistan of secretly assisting the Taliban.
According to a classified report seen by The Times newspaper and the BBC, Pakistan's military spy agency, the ISI, is supporting the Afghan Taliban, and the insurgents believe victory is inevitable once NATO troops leave in 2014.
Pakistan's Foreign Ministry Wednesday called the report's findings “frivolous” and said Islamabad is committed to “non-interference” in Afghanistan.
Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar told the Reuters news agency the report can be “disregarded as a potentially strategic leak.” She said the information in the report is not new.
The leaked document reportedly was compiled from information learned in the interrogations of 4,000 captured Taliban and al-Qaida operatives.
A NATO spokesman said the report was a collection of opinions of Taliban detainees, not an analysis of the progress of the war, now in its 11th year.
News of the report comes as Foreign Minister Khar is in in Kabul for talks with Afghan President Hamid Karzai.
Mr. Karzai said at the meeting that insecurity in Afghanistan and Pakistan has inflicted great harm on both countries and has held them back in their efforts toward peace.
Relations between Pakistan and Afghanistan have been tense, as Afghan officials have accused militants from Pakistan of fomenting violence in Afghanistan and disrupting the peace process there.
On Wednesday, the Afghan Taliban denied reports that they were opening peace talks with Afghan government officials in Saudi Arabia.
Afghan officials had suggested that such a dialogue would take place separately from reported peace efforts in Qatar between the United States and Taliban.
The insurgent group has repeatedly refused to deal with Mr. Karzai's government, calling it a “puppet regime.”
Taliban spokesman Zabiullah Mujahid said Wednesday that the group would not be sending a delegation to Saudi Arabia for talks with representatives of the Karzai government.
The spokesman also said that the Taliban had not yet started negotiations with U.S. officials in Qatar.
Special Envoy Says US Determined to Encourage Afghan Dialogue
VOA News February 1, 2012
The U.S. special envoy to Afghanistan and Pakistan, Marc Grossman, says the United States is using "all of its contacts in the region" in order to get Afghans talking to Afghans.
In an interview with VOA's Urdu Service Tuesday, Grossman did not confirm that the U.S. government is talking to the Taliban at this point, and disagreed with the contention that the United States is sidelining anyone in the Afghan reconciliation process.
Commenting on a New York Times article that the government of Afghan President Hamid Karzai feels left out and is starting parallel talks with the Taliban in Saudi Arabia, Grossman called it "wrong" and said that how the Afghans talk to each other is "their business." He stressed that the important thing is that "Afghans talk to Afghans."
He reiterated the State Department's position that the U.S. wants to talk itself "out of a job" by getting the Afghans to talk to each other.
As for U.S.-Pakistani relations, special envoy Grossman called the parliamentary review of Islamabad's ties to Washington Pakistan's right as a sovereign country. He expressed hope that the two countries would be able to forge "a wide-ranging active relationship based on mutual interests and respect."
Grossman acknowledged that Pakistan has a huge role to play in supporting Afghan peace efforts and said Washington has been trying to keep Islamabad informed of its efforts towards Afghan reconciliation and peace.
US Unaware of Afghan Peace Talks in Saudi
TOLOnews.com By Sharif Amiry Tuesday, 31 January 2012
US has not negotiated with Taliban in any countries so far, US deputy Ambassador to Kabul, James Canningham, said at a news conference on Tuesday.
He added that his country hasn't yet made any decision about release of Taliban prisoners from Guantanomo Bay detention centre.
Establishment of an office for the Taliban in Qatar will not remove current challenges, he believes.
There were earlier rumours that Qatar was hosting talks between the US and the Taliban but now it seems that US has another vision about the issue.
"We are not negotiating with the Taliban about Afghanistan, as far as the opening of Taliban office in Qatar, nothing has been concluded and more needs to be done," Mr Canningham said. "This work includes beginning a conversation between Qatar and Afghanistan and also the need for the Taliban to issue a clear statement against international terrorism and in support of peace process with Afghans talking to Afghans."
He also said that his country has clearly expressed interest in participating in negotiations in any country.
"I don't have specific information about discussions that might be taking place in Saudi, the president has made clear that he's interested," he added.
About the release of Taliban prisoners he said that there is no decision is made yet.
"We have not made any decisions about transfer or release of prisoners, it is a complicated issue for us and requires careful considerations and no decisions have been made," the Deputy Ambassador added.
Some experts believe that it's still unclear what really Taliban demand from these negotiations.
Meanwhile, the Deputy Speaker of the Afghan Parliament criticises the government's policy about negotiations and says it will have unpleasant consequences.
"It's within the authorities of the parliament to decide about it, but when they ignore it I will assure the negotiations will not have positive impacts," Deputy Speaker of the Parliament Abdul Zaher Qadir said. "Afghan government first welcome Taliban's office in Qatar, then withdraw from its position."
Mr Qadir cited some reports indicating that some ministries and provinces will be handed to Taliban saying it is unacceptable for the Afghans. Afghanistan is a united and inseparable country.
He also said that a parliamentary system is not in the interest of Afghanistan.
Saudi Arabia cautious on possible Afghan talks
Reuters By Angus McDowall Jan 31, 2012
* Saudi Arabia wants Taliban to renounce al Qaeda
* No approach made to Saudis on talks
RIYADH - Saudi Arabia is reluctant to host talks between the Afghan government and the Taliban without concessions from the Islamist movement including renouncing its ties to al Qaeda, sources in Riyadh and Kabul said on Tuesday.
An Afghan official said on Monday that talks would be held in the Islamic kingdom this year, but on Tuesday the Afghan ambassador to Riyadh, Saeed Ahmed Omarkhail, said no formal approach had yet been made to the Saudi authorities.
"The kingdom has a role and has been involved in these issues in the past ... The Afghan president has asked Saudi Arabia to hold talks in the past but there is nothing new," Omarkhail said.
A Saudi source with strong government connections and a senior Afghan government source said Saudi Arabia was taking a cautious approach to talks.
Al Qaeda has in the past carried out high profile bombings in Saudi Arabia and has vowed to overthrow the U.S.-backed royal family.
Saudi Arabia's objections to the Taliban's links to al Qaeda were cited by U.S. diplomats as the reason proposed talks failed to move forwards in early 2010, according to a U.S. diplomatic cable released by WikiLeaks.
It said Saudi intelligence chief Prince Muqrin turned down a request from Afghan President Hamid Karzai to host talks because the Saudis "would not support such talks until the Taliban renounced al Qaeda".
"The major problem that Saudi has in mind is that the Taliban are heavily linked to al Qaeda, and secondly it's next to impossible for the Taliban to formally cut ties with al Qaeda," said an Afghan official.
Other potential sticking points include the Taliban's use of the title "Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan", which Saudi officials believe precludes the movement from recognising other legitimate power structures in the country, said the Saudi source.
FACE-TO-FACE
A senior Afghan government source said negotiations would not be possible without a Taliban ceasefire and face-to-face meetings between the two sides.
Ambassador Omarkhail in Riyadh said any move to hold talks in the Gulf Arab kingdom would not be possible until after the Taliban had established a representative office in Qatar.
"After that there will be agendas set for talks," he said.
The Taliban announced this month they would open a political office in the Qatari capital Doha to support possible peace talks with the United States.
The U.S. special envoy to Afghanistan and Pakistan, Frank Ruggiero, visited Riyadh this month but Washington is expected to leave any new moves on talks in the kingdom to the Saudis.
Saudi Arabia has had some influence in Afghanistan since it supported mujahideen fighters against Soviet occupation forces in the 1980s. It has maintained a close relationship with Pakistan and supports both countries with large aid donations.
Private Saudi institutions have also set up religious schools in the two countries that teach the kingdom's strict Wahhabi brand of Islam.
"What matters to Saudi Arabia is Pakistan. Bringing peace to Afghanistan will help very much in bringing peace back to Pakistan," said Jamal Khashoggi, a Saudi commentator.
Saudi Arabia has taken a more assertive role in foreign policy in recent months after last year's Arab uprisings, which transformed its immediate neighbourhood and threatened to alter the power balance with regional rival Iran.
Riyadh orchestrated a Gulf Arab plan to ease a power transition in Yemen, and led Arab League efforts to isolate Syria over its crackdown on mass protests.
However, it has been frustrated before by the complex process of mediating between warring Afghan factions.
Two decades ago a Saudi prince took Afghan warlords inside the black cube of the Kaaba in Mecca, which all Muslims must face in prayer, and had them solemnly swear to end the fighting that was destroying their country.
That peace was broken before the warlords left the building as a Saudi official who was present received a phone call from Kabul saying that one side had just started shelling the other. (Reporting By Angus McDowall, Asma Alsharif, Hamid Shalizi and Rob Taylor; Editing by Giles Elgood)
US officials: Release of Taliban prisoners at Gitmo may promote talks; Afghan objections fade
Associated Press By ANNE GEARAN, KIMBERLY DOZIER January 31, 2012
WASHINGTON - U.S. intelligence officials acknowledged Tuesday that the United States may release several Afghan Taliban prisoners from the military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, as an incentive to bring the Taliban to peace talks.
Meanwhile, Afghan officials told The Associated Press that a plan to give Afghanistan a form of legal custody over the men if they are released satisfied their earlier objection to sending the prisoners to a third country.
Director of National Intelligence Jim Clapper told Congress Tuesday that no decision had been made on whether to trade the five Taliban prisoners, now held at Guantanamo Bay as part of nascent peace talks with the Taliban. He and CIA Director David Petraeus did not dispute that the Obama administration is considering transferring the five to a third country.
U.S. officials and others had previously spoken only vaguely, and usually anonymously, about the proposal to send the prisoners to Qatar, a Persian Gulf country that has asserted a central role in framing talks that might end the 10-year war in Afghanistan. The lead U.S. negotiator trying to coax the Taliban into talks had also publicly acknowledged the possibility of a release, but said there was no final decision. The prisoners proposed for transfer include some of the detainees brought to Guantanamo during the initial days and weeks of the U.S. invasion that toppled the Taliban government in Afghanistan in 2001. At least one has been accused in the massacre of thousands of Shiite Muslims in Afghanistan, according to U.S. and other assessments, but none are accused of directly killing Americans.
"I don't think anybody harbors any illusions about it, but I think the position is to at least explore the potential for negotiating with them as a part of this overall resolution of the situation in Afghanistan," Clapper said during a Senate Intelligence Committee hearing.
The Obama administration has recently embraced the possibility of negotiation with the Taliban much more openly, saying that although they remain cautious they are also encouraged that the militants may be ready to bargain. Peace talks, if they come to pass, would include the elected Afghan government and, at least at the outset, representatives of the U.S. government. With nearly 100,000 troops in Afghanistan and a war and development budget in the billions of dollars, the U.S. remains the largest power broker in Afghanistan.
Afghan President Hamid Karzai supports a prisoner release as a means to build confidence among the Taliban militants that talks are worthwhile, but he had balked at the U.S.-backed plan to send them to Qatar instead of home to Afghanistan. That plan appeared to undercut his authority and offend Afghan sovereignty, Afghan officials said. Karzai yanked his ambassador from Qatar, saying Qatar had not kept him properly informed.
But recent discussions between Karzai and U.S. negotiators found a way around the Afghan objections, a senior Afghan diplomat and another official said. Speaking on condition of anonymity because the arrangement is still under discussion, the officials said Afghanistan could assume a sort of legal custody over the prisoners and then, with the prisoners' own consent, agree to consign them to house arrest in Qatar.
An Afghan delegation would prepare the way for that arrangement by visiting the prisoners at Guantanamo and signing off on the transfer plan, one official said.
The Obama administration does not want to send the prisoners to Afghanistan, in part for fear they might be released. The men are considered "enemy combatants" who were, at least until recently, considered too dangerous to release.
Afghan custody of the men, even if only on paper, could provide sufficient political cover for Karzai against criticism at home that the arrangement is a snub. Karzai has already reluctantly publicly endorsed Qatar as the site for a militant political office that would serve as a headquarters for talks.
U.S. officials would not confirm the possible solution but did not dispute it.
Separately, Afghan officials said their government plans to explore talks with militants under the auspices of Saudi Arabia or others. Those talks would complement talks in Qatar, not undermine them, and carry at least an implicit stamp of approval from U.S. negotiators, the officials said.
The White House National Security Council had no comment on either issue.
The AP previously reported a proposal to release two or three of the Taliban prisoners as an initial goodwill gesture, to be followed by the others. All would go into custody in Qatar, under conditions that are likely to be less secure and less restrictive than at Guantanamo.
Several members of Congress oppose any release, and Congress has erected several legal hurdles that military and other officials acknowledge would slow and complicate the process.
Several GOP lawmakers who object to the transfer are pushing the White House to keep the detainees in Guantanamo "until the end of hostilities," according to a U.S. official with knowledge of the negotiations.
If the Taliban wants to end hostilities through negotiations, "then we could transfer their fighters," the official said, speaking on condition of anonymity to discuss conversations with the White House.
Of particular concern is Mullah Norullah Nori, described in U.S. military documents as one of the most significant former Taliban officials held at Guantanamo. He was a senior Taliban commander in Mazar-e-Sharif when the Taliban fought U.S. forces in late 2001. He previously was a Taliban governor in two provinces Northern Afghanistan, where he has been accused of ordering the massacre of thousands of Shiite Muslims.
Petraeus also acknowledged discussions about the five Taliban prisoners, and told Congress that the U.S. government has assessed the risk that the men might still be dangerous.
"This proposed so-called trade has actually not been decided yet," Clapper said, speaking at an annual hearing on worldwide threats. Republicans were openly skeptical, saying recidivism among former Guantanamo detainees is high and the gambit is of questionable value in promoting peace.
Petraeus said his analysts had assessed various scenarios under which the prisoners could be released to countries other than Afghanistan and Pakistan. The analysts sought to determine which countries would be best able to monitor the freed men, and keep them from returning to militancy.
Clapper's office reported in December 2010 that 13.5 percent of released Guantanamo detainees are "confirmed" and 11.5 percent "are suspected" of reengaging in terrorist or insurgent activities after being transferred.
Clapper said in the case of the Taliban prisoners, U.S. negotiators would first have to determine where the prisoners would be released, and how best to make sure they did not return to the fight. The defense spending bill signed by President Barack Obama in December also requires that the Pentagon certify that any release is safe.
"Part and parcel of such a decision, if it were finally made, would be the actual determination of where these detainees might go and the conditions in which they would be controlled or surveilled," Clapper said.
But Clapper said the prisoner release could be a confidence-building measure that helps move negotiations forward.
The intelligence agencies' annual threat assessment said the Taliban was less able to intimidate the Afghan population that last year, especially in areas where NATO forces are concentrated, but that its leaders continue to direct the insurgency from their safe haven in Pakistan.
U.S. officials have pledged to consult with Congress about any release, which was not enough to persuade Sen. Saxby Chambliss, R-Ga.
"I want to state publicly as strong as I can that we should not transfer these detainees from Guantanamo," Chambliss told the intelligence agency heads.
— Associated Press writer Ben Fox contributed to this report from San Juan, Puerto Rico.
Anne Gearan can be followed on Twitter at (at)agearan.; Kimberly Dozier can be followed on Twitter (at)kimberlydozier;
Man in Afghan Army Uniform Kills Another NATO Soldier
VOA News February 1, 2012
NATO says a man wearing an Afghan army uniform has shot and killed a coalition service member in southern Afghanistan, the latest in a series of such attacks on foreign forces.
The coalition did not give any other details about Tuesday's incident, but Afghan police officials say the shooting took place in the Marjah district of Helmand province.
Afghan army commander Sayed Malluk said during the intial probe of the incident, the Afghan soldier claimed that he killed the NATO service member by accident.
Last week, France announced it was pulling its combat troops from Afghanistan a year early — in 2013 — after an Afghan soldier killed four French troops during a training exercise in eastern Afghanistan on January 20.
Earlier this month, an Afghan soldier shot and killed an American service member in the south. And in December, an Afghan soldier opened fire and killed two members of the French Foreign Legion.
NATO officials have said such incidents are isolated cases.
Pakistan Carries Out Deadly Bombing Raids Near Afghan Border
VOA News February 1, 2012
Pakistan says its fighter jets have bombed militant hideouts in the country's northwest along the Afghan border, killing at least 18 insurgents.
The bombing Wednesday in the Kurram tribal region came a day after dozens of militants attacked a security post there. At least 10 Pakistani soldiers and 40 Taliban militants were killed in subsequent fighting Tuesday.
The Kurram region is an area considered sympathetic to Pakistani Taliban leader Hakimullah Mehsud.
Meanwhile in southwestern Baluchistan province, at least 11 Pakistani soldiers were killed in overnight clashes with Baluch separatists.
Officials say the fighting began when rebels attacked several checkpoints east of the city of Quetta, setting off a gunbattle.
Baluch militants have been waging a low-level insurgency in hopes of gaining political autonomy and a greater share of the profits from the region's natural resources.
Pakistan's military first launched operations against Islamist militants in Kurram last July, and the fighting has yet to die down. It follows a series of similar military operations in the country's mountainous northwest aimed at stopping the Pakistani Taliban, known as the Tehrik-i-Taliban .
The TTP is responsible for many attacks targeting civilians, foreigners and government sites that have killed thousands during the past few years. The group says it wants to take down the Pakistani government, in part, because of its partnership with the United States in the war on terror.
US officials say most attacks by Afghan forces on US troops were not insurgent-controlled
Associated Press By LOLITA C. BALDOR February 1, 2012
WASHINGTON - Supposedly friendly Afghan security forces have attacked U.S. and coalition troops 45 times since May 2007, U.S. officials say, for the first time laying out details and analysis of attacks that have killed 70 and wounded 110.
In testimony prepared for delivery Wednesday to the House Armed Services Committee, defense officials said that in most cases the Afghans acted out of personal motivation and were not controlled or directed by insurgent groups. The second most common circumstances involved insurgents impersonating or infiltrating Afghan security forces. Such insider attacks by Afghan security forces have been on the rise, punctuated by the Jan. 20 shooting of four French troops by an Afghan soldier, which prompted France to halt its training program and threaten to withdraw its forces from Afghanistan earlier than planned. The incidents further erode support for the increasingly unpopular war in Afghanistan, and add more complications to the already difficult mission of U.S. forces.
The testimony, obtained by The Associated Press in advance of Wednesday's hearing, lays out the screening process for Afghan nationals who are brought in to provide security for U.S. forces. And it includes improvements in the program made after an attack at Forward Operating Base Frontenac in March 2011 that killed two U.S. soldiers and wounded four others. The base is in Kandahar Province in southern Afghanistan, and lawmakers have been demanding details about the incident."The insider threat is an issue of increasing significance to coalition forces and Afghan National Security Forces operating in Afghanistan," the defense officials said. "It creates distrust between our forces and their Afghan counterparts during a critical juncture in Afghanistan."
Among the officials scheduled to present the data to the committee are Deputy Assistant Defense Secretary David Sedney and Brig. Gen. Stephen Townsend, who is the Pentagon's director of the Pakistan-Afghanistan coordination group.
While there have been some instances of insurgents secretly joining the Afghan security forces, officials said it is difficult to determine how often that has happened because the infiltrator often remains undetected. Insurgents can easily disguise themselves as Afghan security forces and have been doing so more often, the military said, noting that the attackers simply obtain and wear Afghan uniforms.
Overall, however, officials said most attacks have come from members of the Afghan forces "acting intentionally yet independently" without any direct guidance from outside insurgent groups. They are generally spurred by personal motivations, grievances, ideological differences or even combat stress.
Until now, Pentagon officials had not released figures on the number of incidents. But the officials said there have been 42 incidents involving Afghan security forces and three others involving private security company personnel. In most cases the assault involved small arms fire.
The report to Congress also includes details about the March 2011 incident that involved an Afghan man hired by the private security contractor Tundra, which provides protection at nine installations in Afghanistan.
Security companies that hire Afghans are required to carry out an in-depth vetting process that includes verifying applicants' identities, work history, address and other personal information, as well as police checks, fingerprinting and other biometric information such as iris scans and photographs. The contractors are also required to report individuals who turn out to be security risks.
According to the defense officials, Tundra's official records had indicated the company had investigated the man involved in the Frontenac attack as a possible threat but the allegation was unsubstantiated. And Tundra did not pass that information along to U.S. military authorities prior to the Frontenac incident.
As a result of the attack, the military issued a request for corrective action — a formal action taken against contractors that requires them to submit plans to fix the problems found. Tundra submitted a plan, which was accepted by the military, and the case was closed, although the contract will continue to be audited.
Since then the U.S. has directed commanders to conduct random checks on private security companies to ensure that all of their personnel are properly screened, including all of the biometric requirements. Commanders also have to do weekly biometric screenings of local nationals to compare against watch lists.
Pakistan softens line on US-Taliban talks
Financial Times By Matthew Green January 31, 2012
Islamabad - It has become a truism of the Afghan war that the road to peace runs not through the battlefields of Helmand and Kandahar, but over the border into Pakistan.
As diplomats and Taliban commanders make the opening moves in talks that already resemble a three-dimensional game of chess, the calculations of Pakistan’s spymasters are under even greater scrutiny.
The US wants to forge a peace agreement with the Taliban to reduce the risk that the west’s Afghan adventure will be a prelude to a new conflict in 2015, when most foreign troops will have left.
For years, Pakistan has been seen as a spoiler. Received wisdom states that the military – which has long backed the Taliban and allied Haqqani network – will only allow insurgents to talk on its terms.
That may still be Pakistan’s intent, but its security hierarchy has been playing a relatively supportive role in the latest US moves to contact the Taliban – not least by declining to sabotage them.
“There may be some sense that Pakistan feels it’s better to be involved if there is a process moving forward than to sit on the sidelines,” said a western diplomat. “It’s exploring, trying to find out where things are going.”
Hina Rabbani Khar, Pakistan’s foreign minister, will visit Kabul on Wednesday for the first public, high-level trip since relations with Afghanistan plunged after the murder of Burhanuddin Rabbani, the former Afghan president, in September.
Afghan officials accused Pakistan of orchestrating the hit on Mr Rabbani – who was leading Kabul’s outreach to the Taliban – though they gave no evidence and theories over culprits abound.
Instead of lambasting their neighbour, Afghan diplomats are asking what kind of help Pakistan might offer to facilitate talks with Taliban leaders cloistered in highland camps or urban hide-outs.
“It’s too early to judge how far Pakistan can go in co-operating – it’s the extent that’s important,” said a senior Afghan official.
Last year, Pakistan helped arrange some secret contacts between US officials and insurgents. In a new sign of co-operation, Pakistan has quietly allowed Taliban representatives to travel to Qatar to work towards establishing a Taliban “office” to serve as a hub for future talks, according to Afghan and Pakistani officials.
“The Taliban left Pakistan for Qatar legally by using their old passports from the time of the Taliban regime,” said Arsala Rahmani, a former Taliban official who advises the Afghan government.
Pakistan extended the favour in spite of a spate of disasters in its ties with Washington, including the humiliation of the raid that killed Osama bin Laden last May and the deaths of 24 Pakistani soldiers in a US air strike in November.
In spite of its fury, Pakistan’s India-fixated military appears to have calculated that a deal that cements the emergence of a stable government in Kabul would ultimately suit its interest more than the prospect of fresh Afghan chaos.
Western hopes of a convergence of interests over Afghanistan are tempered by a realisation that Pakistan is still pursuing its timeworn strategy of hedging it bets. Contacts with the Taliban remain tentative and the start of substantive peace process may still be a long way off.
In a move unlikely to please the US, Pakistan’s security establishment is letting it be known that it favours a proposal that Saudi Arabia, not Qatar, should be a focal point for dialogue.
The government of Hamid Karzai, Afghanistan’s president, began pushing the Saudi track at the weekend partly because it fears that the US might cut a deal with the Taliban in Qatar behind its back.
Pakistan has longstanding ties with Riyadh, but its eagerness to endorse yet another strand of talks might raise suspicions that it is content to see the waters muddied further.
Pakistan is waiting to see whether Washington will raise the stakes by carrying out a proposal to transfer five Taliban prisoners from Guantánamo Bay to build trust. Pakistan’s military, which has thrived on ambiguity in its approach to Afghanistan, insists it only wants clarity over where talks might be headed.
“Pakistan needs to know more about what’s going on,” said a senior Pakistani security official. “We can’t play a constructive role without a clear blueprint for what is expected.”
French decision to accelerate exit causes some Afghans to question NATO
McClatchy Newspapers By Jon Stephenson Tuesday, Jan. 31, 2012
KABUL, Afghanistan - The announcement by France last week that it would speed up the exit of its troops from Afghanistan has been greeted with a mixture of cynicism, disbelief and concern by politicians here.
"It may have a bad impact on other NATO allies," said Shukria Barakzai, an Afghan parliamentarian and chairwoman of the National Assembly's defense committee. She said the announcement "might provide an excuse for other countries" to leave Afghanistan before the end of 2014, when NATO is scheduled to end its combat mission.
Mawlawi Qalamuddin, a member of Afghanistan's High Peace Council and formerly the Taliban's minister of vice and virtue, dismissed the statement by French President Nicolas Sarkozy — which came after an Afghan soldier killed four French soldiers on Jan. 20 — as mere rhetoric.
"Emotional comments are not credible," said Qalamuddin, "and it doesn't seem logical. It's not possible that France will withdraw before scheduled because France is member of NATO, and the rest of NATO is here."
While NATO officials pledged this week in Brussels to stick to their plan to hand security responsibilities over to Afghan forces by the end of 2014, the French decision has reverberated mightily in Afghan political circles and prompted some to wonder whether it could fracture NATO solidarity or further undermine the confidence of locals in the U.S.-led coalition.
After the killings on a French base in Kapisa province, northeast of Kabul, Sarkozy said that French troops in Kapisa would transfer security to Afghan authorities in March — four months earlier than planned.
It is not clear yet what led to the attack at Kapisa. Fifteen other French soldiers were wounded in the shooting, eight of them seriously. It was the latest in a series of attacks by Afghan security personnel on their U.S. and NATO counterparts that have become more frequent in the last few years.
The attacks are often carried out by insurgents who have infiltrated the Afghan police or army and are designed to create distrust between the U.S.-led coalition and Afghanistan's fledgling security forces. However, U.S. military reports have suggested that some such attacks are motivated by anger among Afghan personnel at the way their Western counterparts treat them or behave toward other Afghans.
As NATO defense ministers prepared to open a meeting Thursday in Brussels to discuss their Afghanistan policy, the reactions of some politicians here to Sarkozy's announcement indicates that a fresh layer of mistrust may have been added to the already tense relationship between Afghans and their allies.
Barakzai, for instance, described the shooting as "a really unpleasant action from the Afghan soldier," but she said Sarkozy's response to it had been even more damaging. She suggested that the push for an early French withdrawal might be linked to France's forthcoming presidential election, in which Sarkozy's key rival, Socialist Party candidate Francois Hollande, has called for French troops to come home even sooner — by the end of 2012.
Barakzai said foreign politicians shouldn't endanger the future of Afghanistan because of their own domestic political calculations.
"Maybe later on Sarkozy will say something different, but the impact of this message will damage badly the Afghan people's minds and hearts," Barakzai said. "We thought our allies are with us, but right now it seems to me that we were counting on the wrong partners, unfortunately."
Qalamuddin, who served as a minister under the Taliban government but has undergone something of a rehabilitation and was named by President Hamid Karzai to serve on the peace council, which is tasked with promoting negotiations with the insurgency, said he was confident that French troops would remain with other NATO nations until the end of 2014. "The president of France made these comments to calm the people of France and the families of those who were injured or killed by the Afghan soldier," he said.
If France or other NATO members leave before the expected date, Afghanistan will return to the state it was in after Russian forces left in the 1980s, ushering in the era of the Taliban, he said.
"The Russians left, and a 10-year war lasted 30 years," said Qalamuddin. "I don't think the world wants to repeat that mistake by leaving Afghanistan as it is now."
Attaullah Jan Habib, a parliamentarian from the restive southern province of Kandahar, said U.S.-led forces should remain in Afghanistan "because they promised when they came that they would demolish the Taliban, that they would fix Afghanistan. They have not done that yet."
Afghans felt sorry about the killings of the French soldiers in Kapisa, said Habib. However, he added, sacrifices had to be made in the fight against insurgents, and troop-contributing nations had to be prepared to absorb such losses.
Haji Ata Mohammad Amiri, the head of the elected provincial council in Panshir — a province that borders Kapisa and which strongly supports the U.S. presence — warned that if French troops left Kapisa earlier than scheduled, insurgents would see it as a sign of weakness and infiltrate the area to show strength.
"This shooting was not supported by the people of Kapisa," said Amiri. "This was the act of one man, and the actions of one man are making a problem for all the people of Kapisa."
Amiri compared the incident to one in July, when three NATO personnel were shot in Panjshir by a disaffected local. An American soldier and a civilian died, and a third man was injured. Amiri wondered why the French were withdrawing when the Americans had made no such move.
"That shooting was also the work of one man," said Amiri. "There was no difference between what happened in Panjshir and what has happened in Kapisa."
Barakzai said Afghans had also made a lot of sacrifices in the wake of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on America, accepting the presence of foreign forces in their country for more than a decade because "we thought these bad days would one day go."
"We even accepted that they should control our freedom, where sometimes we were not even able to walk freely in our own country," she said.
Barakzai had a blunt message for NATO defense ministers: If alliance members wanted to demonstrate leadership, they would not give up on Afghanistan.
"Right now it seems to me everyone wants to find an exit," she said, "sometimes with excuses, sometimes without."
(Stephenson is a McClatchy special correspondent.)
Afghanistan: IWPR Film Tackles Past Atrocities
Documentary helps some come to terms with the past, and younger audience to find out more about it.
IWPR 31 Jan 12
Afghanistan - A groundbreaking documentary produced by IWPR on war crimes and abuses committed in Afghanistan between 1978 and 2001 has debuted around the country, with audiences applauding its courageous stance.
“Forgotten Victims” covers the period from just before the 1979 Soviet invasion and ensuing occupation, through the civil war of the early 1990s, to the Taleban’s rule from 1996 to 2001. Because of its wide historical sweep, the film covers only a selection of incidents.
The documentary has been shown in the capital Kabul and in Herat, Nangarhar and Balkh provinces, with wide coverage from Afghan and international media, including this BBC Persian report.
Audiences said they were impressed that the film tackled such highly sensitive issues, especially since some of those allegedly responsible for past abuses still held positions of power.
“No one has shown such courage until now. This initiative by IWPR is the first of its kind,” said Bashir Ahmad Hanif, a broadcast manager at Kilid Radio who attended the film’s Herat launch.
Mohammad Nader Atash, a defence lawyer who watched the film with about 300 other people in Nangarhar, agreed.
“Making a film like this in the current climate requires a lot of courage,” he said. “It’s a great step towards seeking justice.”
Audiences praised “Forgotten Victims” for shining light on Afghanistan’s bloody past, and several younger viewers said they were previously unaware of the sheer scope of the violence.
Jawad, a 21-year-old Kabul resident, said that until seeing the film he had thought the worst human rights violations occurred in Kabul.
“After watching the film, I realised how extensive the crimes really were, and who the criminals are,” he said.
Mohammad Salim, a 20-year-old Kabul resident, said many younger people knew little about events between 1978 and 2001.
“The film informed me about things I knew nothing about,” he said. “It’s important to make such films and documentaries for the younger generation.”
He added that he would like to see a similar film focusing on the bloodshed over the decade since 2001.
Many of the factional leaders and warlords implicated in past cycles of violence still wield considerable power in Afghanistan.
Nazari, who works for the Tamaddon TV station – set up by Ayatollah Asef Mohseni, past leader of the mujahedin group Harakat-e Islami – said the film was one-sided, and accused its makers of failing to seek comment from those accused of past abuses. Raking up the past would only revive old animosities, he said.
IWPR country director Noorrahman Rahmani said the documentary makers had in fact made every effort to interview every individual or group mentioned in the film.
“Not only did these groups refuse to be interviewed; they also threatened the film makers,” he said.
By contrast, Rahmani, said, the relatives of victims were hoping the documentary would contribute to the process of judicial retribution.
Kabul resident Shekeb, 22, said it was difficult for individuals on their own to speak up against perpetrators, so he was pleased the filmmakers had done so.
“I’m now really optimistic that the criminals will stand trial in the court of history,” he said.
Due to recent legislation, holding actual trials may prove impossible.
In 2010, a law came quietly into force providing immunity from prosecution for those accused of war crimes and crimes against humanity in previous decades, but who have renounced violence.
Human rights activists have attacked the legislation for offering impunity to the perpetrators of major atrocities, while those who lost loved ones say they should have been consulted.
Benazir, a Kabul resident who appears in the documentary, who lost seven relatives in a single rocket attack. She told IWPR that members of parliament would not have passed the immunity law if it had been their own children who were killed.
Some viewers expressed hope that the film would help bring closure to victims.
Abdul Qader Rahimi, who heads the Herat branch of the Afghan Independent Human Rights Commission, said the film could help heal psychological wounds, and remind victims that they were not forgotten.
Nabi Asir, a reporter for Germany’s Deutsche Welle Radio in Balkh, said the film might help younger people avoid leaders who concealed criminal intentions behind a “veil of ethnicity, language or regional origin”.
And Turialay Razaqyar, formerly information and culture chief in Balkh province, expressed hope that open discussion might foster a less violent culture,
“This film will increase the public’s rejection of war and violence. It can be regarded as an effective message of peace,” he said.
www.afghanistannewscenter.com
By Hamid Shalizi and Mirwais Harooni
KABUL (Reuters) - The Taliban, backed by Pakistan, remains confident despite a decade of NATO efforts that it will retake control of Afghanistan, NATO said in a new classified report that raises more questions about Afghanistan's future as foreign forces withdraw.
"Taliban commanders, along with rank and file members, increasingly believe their control of Afghanistan is inevitable. Though the Taliban suffered severely in 2011, its strength, motivation, funding and tactical proficiency remains intact," according to an excerpt of the report, published by the Times of London and the BBC.
"While they are weary of war, they see little hope for a negotiated peace. Despite numerous tactical setbacks, surrender is far from their collective mindset. For the moment, they believe that continuing the fight and expanding Taliban governance are their only viable courses of action," the published excerpts said.
Lieutenant Colonel Jimmie Cummings, a spokesman for the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force, confirmed the existence of the document, but military officials downplayed it as a depiction of the views of thousands of Taliban detainees who were interviewed by NATO officials.
"The classified document in question is a compilation of Taliban detainee opinions," Cummings said. "It's not an analysis, nor is it meant to be considered an analysis."
Still, the published excerpts paint a troubling picture of the Afghan war more than 10 years after the Taliban government was toppled, and as foreign forces begin to go home in earnest.
U.S. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta said on Wednesday the United States was aiming to complete its combat role in Afghanistan by mid- to late 2013, shifting to a training role.
The report's findings - including assertions that the Taliban had not formally split from international extremists - could also reinforce the view of Taliban hard-liners that they should not negotiate with the United States and President Hamid Karzai's unpopular government while in a position of strength.
Hours after the Times report, the Afghan Taliban said that no peace negotiation process had been agreed to with the international community, "particularly the Americans."
Taliban spokesman Zabihullah Mujahid said in a statement that before any negotiations, confidence-building measures must be completed, putting pressure on Washington to meet demands for the release of five Taliban in U.S. custody.
The hard-line Islamist movement also said it had no plans to hold preliminary peace talks with Afghanistan's government in Saudi Arabia, dismissing media reports of talks in the kingdom.
Britain's Kabul ambassador, William Patey, wrote on his Twitter feed that "if elements of the Taliban think that in 2015 they can take control of Afghanistan they will be in for a shock." He did not say if he was referring to the NATO report.
"We really do believe that militarily we are making an impact on the Taliban," said Captain John Kirby, a Pentagon spokesman.
PAKISTAN LINK
The published excerpts of the report also gave further indication of the Taliban's reliance on neighboring Pakistan, where elements of the Inter-Services Intelligence agency has long had links to the Taliban.
"Reflections from detainees indicate that Pakistan's manipulation of Taliban senior leadership continues unabated. The Taliban themselves do not trust Pakistan, yet there is a widespread acceptance of the status quo in lieu of realistic alternatives," another excerpt published by the Times read.
The report overshadowed a visit to Kabul by Pakistani Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar designed to repair ties and raise the issue with Karzai of peace talks with the Taliban.
"I can disregard this as a potentially strategic leak. ... This is old wine in an even older bottle," she told reporters, repeating Pakistan's denials it backs militant groups.
Khar, whose visit was the first high-level meeting in months between officials from both countries, added the neighbors should stop blaming each other for strained cross-border ties.
The Times said the "highly classified" report was put together by the U.S. military at Bagram air base, near Kabul, for top NATO officers last month. It was based on interrogations of more than 4,000 Taliban and al Qaeda detainees, it said.
Kirby declined to comment on the specifics of the report, but did acknowledge "long-standing concerns about the ties between elements of the ISI and the Taliban. This is not a new notion."
Large swathes of Afghanistan have been handed back to Afghan security forces, with the last foreign combat troops due to leave by the end of 2014. While some foreign soldiers will stay, likely to conduct counterterrorism operations, many Afghans doubt their security forces can stave off insurgents.
NATO spokeswoman Oana Lungescu, speaking in Brussels, played down the implications and said a surge offensive had seen the Taliban suffer "tremendous setbacks."
"We know that they have lost a lot of ground and a lot of leaders, and we also know that support for the Taliban is at an all-time low," she said.
As of January 1, 889 U.S. soldiers had been killed in a conflict that was launched after the September 11, 2001, attacks and has drained almost half a trillion dollars from U.S. coffers.
'WRONG POLICIES'
New accusations of Pakistani collusion with the Taliban could further strain ties between Western powers and Islamabad.
Critics say Pakistan uses militants as proxies to counter the growing influence of India in Afghanistan. The belief that Pakistan supports the insurgents is widely held in Afghanistan.
"It would be a mistake now for the international community to leave Afghanistan, and drop us in a dark ocean," said Afghan telecommunications worker Farid Ahmad Totakhil.
Pakistan is reviewing ties with the United States, which have suffered a series of setbacks since a U.S. raid that killed Osama bin Laden on Pakistani soil in May last year humiliated Pakistan's powerful generals.
A November 26 cross-border NATO air attack that killed 24 Pakistani soldiers deepened the crisis, prompting Pakistan to close supply routes to NATO forces in Afghanistan.
Pakistan is seen as critical to U.S. efforts to stabilize Afghanistan. Yet Islamabad has resisted U.S. pressure to go after insurgent groups like the Taliban, and argues Washington's approach overlooks complex realities on the ground.
Pakistan says the United States should attempt to bring all militant groups into a peace process and fears a 2014 combat troop exit could be hasty, plunging the region into the kind of chaos seen after the Soviet exit in 1989.
"They don't need any backing," Tariq Azim, of the Pakistani Senate's Defence Committee, told Reuters, referring to the Taliban. "Everybody knows that after 10 years, they (NATO) have not been able to control a single province in Afghanistan because of the wrong policies they have been following."
The Taliban announced this month it would open a political office in Qatar to support possible reconciliation talks. There has been talk of efforts to hold separate talks in Saudi Arabia.
U.S. lawmakers also pressed the Pentagon on Wednesday to step up measures to ensure Western soldiers are not attacked by Afghan forces or employees of security firms working with NATO.
France said it would withdraw its troops completely by the end of 2013 after four of its soldiers were killed by a rogue Afghan soldier, the latest such "insider" attack.
The U.S. Defense Department said that over 40 similar attacks on foreign personnel had taken place since mid-2007, some of them by people working with private security contractors.
"We ... owe it to our military personnel to do everything we can to reduce this sort of risk," said Representative Adam Smith, the senior Democrat on the House Armed Services Committee.
Pentagon officials said NATO took extensive steps to vet Afghans working with foreign troops and was exploring ways to prevent future attacks.
(Additional reporting by Dan Magnowski, Rob Taylor and Amie Ferris-Rotman in KABUL, David Brunnstrom in BRUSSELS, Qasim Nauman in ISLAMABAD, Missy Ryan in WASHINGTON; Writing by Michael Georgy and Rob Taylor; Editing by Robert Birsel and Peter Cooney)
Leaked NATO Report Shows Pakistan Support For Taliban
February 1, 2012 Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty
A classified NATO military report obtained in Afghanistan by news organizations says Pakistan's secret services are helping Taliban in directing attacks against foreign troops in Afghanistan.
The BBC and "The Times" newspaper in London quote the report as saying Pakistan's ISI intelligence agency is "intimately involved" with the Afghan insurgency.
The document alleges that Pakistan knows the locations of senior Taliban leaders and that "Pakistan's manipulation of the Taliban senior leadership continues unabatedly."
It also says the Taliban assume they will be able to retake control of Afghanistan after NATO-led forces withdraw from the country -- a move scheduled to take place by the end of 2014.
The leaked report was prepared by the U.S. military at Bagram Air Base near Kabul and given to top NATO officers in December.
The BBC says it was based on materials obtained in 27,000 interrogations of more than 4,000 captured Taliban and Al-Qaeda operatives.
The BBC says the report quotes one senior Al-Qaeda detainee as saying "Pakistan knows everything. They control everything. I can't [expletive] on a tree in Kunar [Province in Afghanistan] without them watching. The Taliban are not Islam. The Taliban are Islamabad."
Claim Is 'Nothing New'
Pakistan's Foreign Ministry has rejected the report as "frivolous," saying Islamabad "is committed to noninterference in Afghanistan."
But Pakistani journalist Ahmed Rashid -- a noted author on Taliban and Al-Qaeda militancy in the region -- told RFE/RL that there is nothing surprising in the claim that Taliban and other militants receive support from elements within Pakistan's intelligence services.
"It's very well known amongst NATO militaries [and] amongst the U.S. military," he said. "I was told by senior American generals that they approached [former U.S.] President [George W.] Bush and Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld back in 2005 about the support that the Taliban were getting from Pakistan.
"But it was ignored by Bush at that time. So this is nothing new, I think, for anyone. But the fact that it should be leaked and that it should come in such language, I suppose, is going to create quite a furor."
U.S. Pentagon spokesman John Kirby said the United States has long been concerned about "ties between elements of the ISI and some extremist networks."
But Kirby said the U.S. Defense Department had not yet seen the document reported by the BBC and "The Times."
Lieutenant Colonel Jimmie Cummings, a spokesman for the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan, confirmed the existence of the document. Nonetheless, Cummings said it was "a compilation of Taliban detainee opinions" -- and not a strategic assessment.
'A New Phase' In Cooperation
The U.S. Embassy in Kabul declined immediate comment on the report. But the accusations are expected to further strain ties between Western powers and Islamabad, which has long denied backing militant groups that seek to topple the U.S.-backed government in Kabul.
Pakistan's Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar, who arrived in Kabul on February 1 for a previously planned one-day visit, said Pakistan "can disregard this as a potentially strategic leak." She described the report as "old wine in an even older bottle."
Before the news reports about the leaked document, Afghan Foreign Ministry spokesman Janan Mosazai said Khar's visit was aimed at opening a "new phase" in cooperation between the two countries.
Kabul has long accused Pakistan of interfering in Afghanistan's internal affairs by helping Taliban insurgents.
But relations have been particularly poor since last September, when Aghan peace envoy and former President Burhanuddin Rabbani was assassinated -- a killing that Kabul blamed on Pakistani spies.
Kabul says the bomber who killed Rabbani was a Pakistani and has accused Islamabad of hindering the investigation.
But Kabul also is seeking Pakistan's help to convince the Taliban's senior leadership -- known as the Quetta Shura -- to join peace talks in Saudi Arabia with members of the Afghan government.
On February 1, the Taliban denied reports that its leadership would soon meet in Saudi Arabia with Karzai's envoys.
Spokesman Zabihullah Mujahid said the Taliban is "in the process of creating an understanding with the international community" through a liaison office in Qatar.
But he said the Taliban "has not reached the actual process of negotiation" with the United States or its allies. He said confidence measures must first be completed.
A senior official in Karzai's government said on January 30 that a meeting was planned in Saudi Arabia with "some" factions willing to join peace talks.
Saudi officials are reluctant to host the talks unless the Taliban renounces ties to Al-Qaeda.
Taliban Fighters Killed
News of the alleged leaked report came as Pakistan's military said warplanes killed up to 31 Taliban fighters in an attack on hideouts in the country's northwestern tribal area.
Political administrators Wajid Khan and Amir Gul said bombing operations had taken place early on the morning morning of February 1 in the Orakzai and Kurram tribal areas.
A military official speaking under condition of anonymity said four hideouts in the Orakzai district used by supporters of Taliban commanders Mullah Tufan and Moheyuddin were destroyed.
The same official said Moheyuddin might have been killed in the bombing also.
The attacks come after fierce fighting in the Kurram district where Pakistani government troops and militants fought over a strategic mountaintop overlooking routes in Afghanistan.
Some 60 combatants were killed in that battle.
Compiled from agency reports
Pakistan Dismisses Allegations of Afghan Taliban Support
VOA News February 1, 2012
Pakistan has dismissed a leaked report allegedly authored by the NATO-led coalition in Afghanistan that accuses Pakistan of secretly assisting the Taliban.
According to a classified report seen by The Times newspaper and the BBC, Pakistan's military spy agency, the ISI, is supporting the Afghan Taliban, and the insurgents believe victory is inevitable once NATO troops leave in 2014.
Pakistan's Foreign Ministry Wednesday called the report's findings “frivolous” and said Islamabad is committed to “non-interference” in Afghanistan.
Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar told the Reuters news agency the report can be “disregarded as a potentially strategic leak.” She said the information in the report is not new.
The leaked document reportedly was compiled from information learned in the interrogations of 4,000 captured Taliban and al-Qaida operatives.
A NATO spokesman said the report was a collection of opinions of Taliban detainees, not an analysis of the progress of the war, now in its 11th year.
News of the report comes as Foreign Minister Khar is in in Kabul for talks with Afghan President Hamid Karzai.
Mr. Karzai said at the meeting that insecurity in Afghanistan and Pakistan has inflicted great harm on both countries and has held them back in their efforts toward peace.
Relations between Pakistan and Afghanistan have been tense, as Afghan officials have accused militants from Pakistan of fomenting violence in Afghanistan and disrupting the peace process there.
On Wednesday, the Afghan Taliban denied reports that they were opening peace talks with Afghan government officials in Saudi Arabia.
Afghan officials had suggested that such a dialogue would take place separately from reported peace efforts in Qatar between the United States and Taliban.
The insurgent group has repeatedly refused to deal with Mr. Karzai's government, calling it a “puppet regime.”
Taliban spokesman Zabiullah Mujahid said Wednesday that the group would not be sending a delegation to Saudi Arabia for talks with representatives of the Karzai government.
The spokesman also said that the Taliban had not yet started negotiations with U.S. officials in Qatar.
Special Envoy Says US Determined to Encourage Afghan Dialogue
VOA News February 1, 2012
The U.S. special envoy to Afghanistan and Pakistan, Marc Grossman, says the United States is using "all of its contacts in the region" in order to get Afghans talking to Afghans.
In an interview with VOA's Urdu Service Tuesday, Grossman did not confirm that the U.S. government is talking to the Taliban at this point, and disagreed with the contention that the United States is sidelining anyone in the Afghan reconciliation process.
Commenting on a New York Times article that the government of Afghan President Hamid Karzai feels left out and is starting parallel talks with the Taliban in Saudi Arabia, Grossman called it "wrong" and said that how the Afghans talk to each other is "their business." He stressed that the important thing is that "Afghans talk to Afghans."
He reiterated the State Department's position that the U.S. wants to talk itself "out of a job" by getting the Afghans to talk to each other.
As for U.S.-Pakistani relations, special envoy Grossman called the parliamentary review of Islamabad's ties to Washington Pakistan's right as a sovereign country. He expressed hope that the two countries would be able to forge "a wide-ranging active relationship based on mutual interests and respect."
Grossman acknowledged that Pakistan has a huge role to play in supporting Afghan peace efforts and said Washington has been trying to keep Islamabad informed of its efforts towards Afghan reconciliation and peace.
US Unaware of Afghan Peace Talks in Saudi
TOLOnews.com By Sharif Amiry Tuesday, 31 January 2012
US has not negotiated with Taliban in any countries so far, US deputy Ambassador to Kabul, James Canningham, said at a news conference on Tuesday.
He added that his country hasn't yet made any decision about release of Taliban prisoners from Guantanomo Bay detention centre.
Establishment of an office for the Taliban in Qatar will not remove current challenges, he believes.
There were earlier rumours that Qatar was hosting talks between the US and the Taliban but now it seems that US has another vision about the issue.
"We are not negotiating with the Taliban about Afghanistan, as far as the opening of Taliban office in Qatar, nothing has been concluded and more needs to be done," Mr Canningham said. "This work includes beginning a conversation between Qatar and Afghanistan and also the need for the Taliban to issue a clear statement against international terrorism and in support of peace process with Afghans talking to Afghans."
He also said that his country has clearly expressed interest in participating in negotiations in any country.
"I don't have specific information about discussions that might be taking place in Saudi, the president has made clear that he's interested," he added.
About the release of Taliban prisoners he said that there is no decision is made yet.
"We have not made any decisions about transfer or release of prisoners, it is a complicated issue for us and requires careful considerations and no decisions have been made," the Deputy Ambassador added.
Some experts believe that it's still unclear what really Taliban demand from these negotiations.
Meanwhile, the Deputy Speaker of the Afghan Parliament criticises the government's policy about negotiations and says it will have unpleasant consequences.
"It's within the authorities of the parliament to decide about it, but when they ignore it I will assure the negotiations will not have positive impacts," Deputy Speaker of the Parliament Abdul Zaher Qadir said. "Afghan government first welcome Taliban's office in Qatar, then withdraw from its position."
Mr Qadir cited some reports indicating that some ministries and provinces will be handed to Taliban saying it is unacceptable for the Afghans. Afghanistan is a united and inseparable country.
He also said that a parliamentary system is not in the interest of Afghanistan.
Saudi Arabia cautious on possible Afghan talks
Reuters By Angus McDowall Jan 31, 2012
* Saudi Arabia wants Taliban to renounce al Qaeda
* No approach made to Saudis on talks
RIYADH - Saudi Arabia is reluctant to host talks between the Afghan government and the Taliban without concessions from the Islamist movement including renouncing its ties to al Qaeda, sources in Riyadh and Kabul said on Tuesday.
An Afghan official said on Monday that talks would be held in the Islamic kingdom this year, but on Tuesday the Afghan ambassador to Riyadh, Saeed Ahmed Omarkhail, said no formal approach had yet been made to the Saudi authorities.
"The kingdom has a role and has been involved in these issues in the past ... The Afghan president has asked Saudi Arabia to hold talks in the past but there is nothing new," Omarkhail said.
A Saudi source with strong government connections and a senior Afghan government source said Saudi Arabia was taking a cautious approach to talks.
Al Qaeda has in the past carried out high profile bombings in Saudi Arabia and has vowed to overthrow the U.S.-backed royal family.
Saudi Arabia's objections to the Taliban's links to al Qaeda were cited by U.S. diplomats as the reason proposed talks failed to move forwards in early 2010, according to a U.S. diplomatic cable released by WikiLeaks.
It said Saudi intelligence chief Prince Muqrin turned down a request from Afghan President Hamid Karzai to host talks because the Saudis "would not support such talks until the Taliban renounced al Qaeda".
"The major problem that Saudi has in mind is that the Taliban are heavily linked to al Qaeda, and secondly it's next to impossible for the Taliban to formally cut ties with al Qaeda," said an Afghan official.
Other potential sticking points include the Taliban's use of the title "Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan", which Saudi officials believe precludes the movement from recognising other legitimate power structures in the country, said the Saudi source.
FACE-TO-FACE
A senior Afghan government source said negotiations would not be possible without a Taliban ceasefire and face-to-face meetings between the two sides.
Ambassador Omarkhail in Riyadh said any move to hold talks in the Gulf Arab kingdom would not be possible until after the Taliban had established a representative office in Qatar.
"After that there will be agendas set for talks," he said.
The Taliban announced this month they would open a political office in the Qatari capital Doha to support possible peace talks with the United States.
The U.S. special envoy to Afghanistan and Pakistan, Frank Ruggiero, visited Riyadh this month but Washington is expected to leave any new moves on talks in the kingdom to the Saudis.
Saudi Arabia has had some influence in Afghanistan since it supported mujahideen fighters against Soviet occupation forces in the 1980s. It has maintained a close relationship with Pakistan and supports both countries with large aid donations.
Private Saudi institutions have also set up religious schools in the two countries that teach the kingdom's strict Wahhabi brand of Islam.
"What matters to Saudi Arabia is Pakistan. Bringing peace to Afghanistan will help very much in bringing peace back to Pakistan," said Jamal Khashoggi, a Saudi commentator.
Saudi Arabia has taken a more assertive role in foreign policy in recent months after last year's Arab uprisings, which transformed its immediate neighbourhood and threatened to alter the power balance with regional rival Iran.
Riyadh orchestrated a Gulf Arab plan to ease a power transition in Yemen, and led Arab League efforts to isolate Syria over its crackdown on mass protests.
However, it has been frustrated before by the complex process of mediating between warring Afghan factions.
Two decades ago a Saudi prince took Afghan warlords inside the black cube of the Kaaba in Mecca, which all Muslims must face in prayer, and had them solemnly swear to end the fighting that was destroying their country.
That peace was broken before the warlords left the building as a Saudi official who was present received a phone call from Kabul saying that one side had just started shelling the other. (Reporting By Angus McDowall, Asma Alsharif, Hamid Shalizi and Rob Taylor; Editing by Giles Elgood)
US officials: Release of Taliban prisoners at Gitmo may promote talks; Afghan objections fade
Associated Press By ANNE GEARAN, KIMBERLY DOZIER January 31, 2012
WASHINGTON - U.S. intelligence officials acknowledged Tuesday that the United States may release several Afghan Taliban prisoners from the military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, as an incentive to bring the Taliban to peace talks.
Meanwhile, Afghan officials told The Associated Press that a plan to give Afghanistan a form of legal custody over the men if they are released satisfied their earlier objection to sending the prisoners to a third country.
Director of National Intelligence Jim Clapper told Congress Tuesday that no decision had been made on whether to trade the five Taliban prisoners, now held at Guantanamo Bay as part of nascent peace talks with the Taliban. He and CIA Director David Petraeus did not dispute that the Obama administration is considering transferring the five to a third country.
U.S. officials and others had previously spoken only vaguely, and usually anonymously, about the proposal to send the prisoners to Qatar, a Persian Gulf country that has asserted a central role in framing talks that might end the 10-year war in Afghanistan. The lead U.S. negotiator trying to coax the Taliban into talks had also publicly acknowledged the possibility of a release, but said there was no final decision. The prisoners proposed for transfer include some of the detainees brought to Guantanamo during the initial days and weeks of the U.S. invasion that toppled the Taliban government in Afghanistan in 2001. At least one has been accused in the massacre of thousands of Shiite Muslims in Afghanistan, according to U.S. and other assessments, but none are accused of directly killing Americans.
"I don't think anybody harbors any illusions about it, but I think the position is to at least explore the potential for negotiating with them as a part of this overall resolution of the situation in Afghanistan," Clapper said during a Senate Intelligence Committee hearing.
The Obama administration has recently embraced the possibility of negotiation with the Taliban much more openly, saying that although they remain cautious they are also encouraged that the militants may be ready to bargain. Peace talks, if they come to pass, would include the elected Afghan government and, at least at the outset, representatives of the U.S. government. With nearly 100,000 troops in Afghanistan and a war and development budget in the billions of dollars, the U.S. remains the largest power broker in Afghanistan.
Afghan President Hamid Karzai supports a prisoner release as a means to build confidence among the Taliban militants that talks are worthwhile, but he had balked at the U.S.-backed plan to send them to Qatar instead of home to Afghanistan. That plan appeared to undercut his authority and offend Afghan sovereignty, Afghan officials said. Karzai yanked his ambassador from Qatar, saying Qatar had not kept him properly informed.
But recent discussions between Karzai and U.S. negotiators found a way around the Afghan objections, a senior Afghan diplomat and another official said. Speaking on condition of anonymity because the arrangement is still under discussion, the officials said Afghanistan could assume a sort of legal custody over the prisoners and then, with the prisoners' own consent, agree to consign them to house arrest in Qatar.
An Afghan delegation would prepare the way for that arrangement by visiting the prisoners at Guantanamo and signing off on the transfer plan, one official said.
The Obama administration does not want to send the prisoners to Afghanistan, in part for fear they might be released. The men are considered "enemy combatants" who were, at least until recently, considered too dangerous to release.
Afghan custody of the men, even if only on paper, could provide sufficient political cover for Karzai against criticism at home that the arrangement is a snub. Karzai has already reluctantly publicly endorsed Qatar as the site for a militant political office that would serve as a headquarters for talks.
U.S. officials would not confirm the possible solution but did not dispute it.
Separately, Afghan officials said their government plans to explore talks with militants under the auspices of Saudi Arabia or others. Those talks would complement talks in Qatar, not undermine them, and carry at least an implicit stamp of approval from U.S. negotiators, the officials said.
The White House National Security Council had no comment on either issue.
The AP previously reported a proposal to release two or three of the Taliban prisoners as an initial goodwill gesture, to be followed by the others. All would go into custody in Qatar, under conditions that are likely to be less secure and less restrictive than at Guantanamo.
Several members of Congress oppose any release, and Congress has erected several legal hurdles that military and other officials acknowledge would slow and complicate the process.
Several GOP lawmakers who object to the transfer are pushing the White House to keep the detainees in Guantanamo "until the end of hostilities," according to a U.S. official with knowledge of the negotiations.
If the Taliban wants to end hostilities through negotiations, "then we could transfer their fighters," the official said, speaking on condition of anonymity to discuss conversations with the White House.
Of particular concern is Mullah Norullah Nori, described in U.S. military documents as one of the most significant former Taliban officials held at Guantanamo. He was a senior Taliban commander in Mazar-e-Sharif when the Taliban fought U.S. forces in late 2001. He previously was a Taliban governor in two provinces Northern Afghanistan, where he has been accused of ordering the massacre of thousands of Shiite Muslims.
Petraeus also acknowledged discussions about the five Taliban prisoners, and told Congress that the U.S. government has assessed the risk that the men might still be dangerous.
"This proposed so-called trade has actually not been decided yet," Clapper said, speaking at an annual hearing on worldwide threats. Republicans were openly skeptical, saying recidivism among former Guantanamo detainees is high and the gambit is of questionable value in promoting peace.
Petraeus said his analysts had assessed various scenarios under which the prisoners could be released to countries other than Afghanistan and Pakistan. The analysts sought to determine which countries would be best able to monitor the freed men, and keep them from returning to militancy.
Clapper's office reported in December 2010 that 13.5 percent of released Guantanamo detainees are "confirmed" and 11.5 percent "are suspected" of reengaging in terrorist or insurgent activities after being transferred.
Clapper said in the case of the Taliban prisoners, U.S. negotiators would first have to determine where the prisoners would be released, and how best to make sure they did not return to the fight. The defense spending bill signed by President Barack Obama in December also requires that the Pentagon certify that any release is safe.
"Part and parcel of such a decision, if it were finally made, would be the actual determination of where these detainees might go and the conditions in which they would be controlled or surveilled," Clapper said.
But Clapper said the prisoner release could be a confidence-building measure that helps move negotiations forward.
The intelligence agencies' annual threat assessment said the Taliban was less able to intimidate the Afghan population that last year, especially in areas where NATO forces are concentrated, but that its leaders continue to direct the insurgency from their safe haven in Pakistan.
U.S. officials have pledged to consult with Congress about any release, which was not enough to persuade Sen. Saxby Chambliss, R-Ga.
"I want to state publicly as strong as I can that we should not transfer these detainees from Guantanamo," Chambliss told the intelligence agency heads.
— Associated Press writer Ben Fox contributed to this report from San Juan, Puerto Rico.
Anne Gearan can be followed on Twitter at (at)agearan.; Kimberly Dozier can be followed on Twitter (at)kimberlydozier;
Man in Afghan Army Uniform Kills Another NATO Soldier
VOA News February 1, 2012
NATO says a man wearing an Afghan army uniform has shot and killed a coalition service member in southern Afghanistan, the latest in a series of such attacks on foreign forces.
The coalition did not give any other details about Tuesday's incident, but Afghan police officials say the shooting took place in the Marjah district of Helmand province.
Afghan army commander Sayed Malluk said during the intial probe of the incident, the Afghan soldier claimed that he killed the NATO service member by accident.
Last week, France announced it was pulling its combat troops from Afghanistan a year early — in 2013 — after an Afghan soldier killed four French troops during a training exercise in eastern Afghanistan on January 20.
Earlier this month, an Afghan soldier shot and killed an American service member in the south. And in December, an Afghan soldier opened fire and killed two members of the French Foreign Legion.
NATO officials have said such incidents are isolated cases.
Pakistan Carries Out Deadly Bombing Raids Near Afghan Border
VOA News February 1, 2012
Pakistan says its fighter jets have bombed militant hideouts in the country's northwest along the Afghan border, killing at least 18 insurgents.
The bombing Wednesday in the Kurram tribal region came a day after dozens of militants attacked a security post there. At least 10 Pakistani soldiers and 40 Taliban militants were killed in subsequent fighting Tuesday.
The Kurram region is an area considered sympathetic to Pakistani Taliban leader Hakimullah Mehsud.
Meanwhile in southwestern Baluchistan province, at least 11 Pakistani soldiers were killed in overnight clashes with Baluch separatists.
Officials say the fighting began when rebels attacked several checkpoints east of the city of Quetta, setting off a gunbattle.
Baluch militants have been waging a low-level insurgency in hopes of gaining political autonomy and a greater share of the profits from the region's natural resources.
Pakistan's military first launched operations against Islamist militants in Kurram last July, and the fighting has yet to die down. It follows a series of similar military operations in the country's mountainous northwest aimed at stopping the Pakistani Taliban, known as the Tehrik-i-Taliban .
The TTP is responsible for many attacks targeting civilians, foreigners and government sites that have killed thousands during the past few years. The group says it wants to take down the Pakistani government, in part, because of its partnership with the United States in the war on terror.
US officials say most attacks by Afghan forces on US troops were not insurgent-controlled
Associated Press By LOLITA C. BALDOR February 1, 2012
WASHINGTON - Supposedly friendly Afghan security forces have attacked U.S. and coalition troops 45 times since May 2007, U.S. officials say, for the first time laying out details and analysis of attacks that have killed 70 and wounded 110.
In testimony prepared for delivery Wednesday to the House Armed Services Committee, defense officials said that in most cases the Afghans acted out of personal motivation and were not controlled or directed by insurgent groups. The second most common circumstances involved insurgents impersonating or infiltrating Afghan security forces. Such insider attacks by Afghan security forces have been on the rise, punctuated by the Jan. 20 shooting of four French troops by an Afghan soldier, which prompted France to halt its training program and threaten to withdraw its forces from Afghanistan earlier than planned. The incidents further erode support for the increasingly unpopular war in Afghanistan, and add more complications to the already difficult mission of U.S. forces.
The testimony, obtained by The Associated Press in advance of Wednesday's hearing, lays out the screening process for Afghan nationals who are brought in to provide security for U.S. forces. And it includes improvements in the program made after an attack at Forward Operating Base Frontenac in March 2011 that killed two U.S. soldiers and wounded four others. The base is in Kandahar Province in southern Afghanistan, and lawmakers have been demanding details about the incident."The insider threat is an issue of increasing significance to coalition forces and Afghan National Security Forces operating in Afghanistan," the defense officials said. "It creates distrust between our forces and their Afghan counterparts during a critical juncture in Afghanistan."
Among the officials scheduled to present the data to the committee are Deputy Assistant Defense Secretary David Sedney and Brig. Gen. Stephen Townsend, who is the Pentagon's director of the Pakistan-Afghanistan coordination group.
While there have been some instances of insurgents secretly joining the Afghan security forces, officials said it is difficult to determine how often that has happened because the infiltrator often remains undetected. Insurgents can easily disguise themselves as Afghan security forces and have been doing so more often, the military said, noting that the attackers simply obtain and wear Afghan uniforms.
Overall, however, officials said most attacks have come from members of the Afghan forces "acting intentionally yet independently" without any direct guidance from outside insurgent groups. They are generally spurred by personal motivations, grievances, ideological differences or even combat stress.
Until now, Pentagon officials had not released figures on the number of incidents. But the officials said there have been 42 incidents involving Afghan security forces and three others involving private security company personnel. In most cases the assault involved small arms fire.
The report to Congress also includes details about the March 2011 incident that involved an Afghan man hired by the private security contractor Tundra, which provides protection at nine installations in Afghanistan.
Security companies that hire Afghans are required to carry out an in-depth vetting process that includes verifying applicants' identities, work history, address and other personal information, as well as police checks, fingerprinting and other biometric information such as iris scans and photographs. The contractors are also required to report individuals who turn out to be security risks.
According to the defense officials, Tundra's official records had indicated the company had investigated the man involved in the Frontenac attack as a possible threat but the allegation was unsubstantiated. And Tundra did not pass that information along to U.S. military authorities prior to the Frontenac incident.
As a result of the attack, the military issued a request for corrective action — a formal action taken against contractors that requires them to submit plans to fix the problems found. Tundra submitted a plan, which was accepted by the military, and the case was closed, although the contract will continue to be audited.
Since then the U.S. has directed commanders to conduct random checks on private security companies to ensure that all of their personnel are properly screened, including all of the biometric requirements. Commanders also have to do weekly biometric screenings of local nationals to compare against watch lists.
Pakistan softens line on US-Taliban talks
Financial Times By Matthew Green January 31, 2012
Islamabad - It has become a truism of the Afghan war that the road to peace runs not through the battlefields of Helmand and Kandahar, but over the border into Pakistan.
As diplomats and Taliban commanders make the opening moves in talks that already resemble a three-dimensional game of chess, the calculations of Pakistan’s spymasters are under even greater scrutiny.
The US wants to forge a peace agreement with the Taliban to reduce the risk that the west’s Afghan adventure will be a prelude to a new conflict in 2015, when most foreign troops will have left.
For years, Pakistan has been seen as a spoiler. Received wisdom states that the military – which has long backed the Taliban and allied Haqqani network – will only allow insurgents to talk on its terms.
That may still be Pakistan’s intent, but its security hierarchy has been playing a relatively supportive role in the latest US moves to contact the Taliban – not least by declining to sabotage them.
“There may be some sense that Pakistan feels it’s better to be involved if there is a process moving forward than to sit on the sidelines,” said a western diplomat. “It’s exploring, trying to find out where things are going.”
Hina Rabbani Khar, Pakistan’s foreign minister, will visit Kabul on Wednesday for the first public, high-level trip since relations with Afghanistan plunged after the murder of Burhanuddin Rabbani, the former Afghan president, in September.
Afghan officials accused Pakistan of orchestrating the hit on Mr Rabbani – who was leading Kabul’s outreach to the Taliban – though they gave no evidence and theories over culprits abound.
Instead of lambasting their neighbour, Afghan diplomats are asking what kind of help Pakistan might offer to facilitate talks with Taliban leaders cloistered in highland camps or urban hide-outs.
“It’s too early to judge how far Pakistan can go in co-operating – it’s the extent that’s important,” said a senior Afghan official.
Last year, Pakistan helped arrange some secret contacts between US officials and insurgents. In a new sign of co-operation, Pakistan has quietly allowed Taliban representatives to travel to Qatar to work towards establishing a Taliban “office” to serve as a hub for future talks, according to Afghan and Pakistani officials.
“The Taliban left Pakistan for Qatar legally by using their old passports from the time of the Taliban regime,” said Arsala Rahmani, a former Taliban official who advises the Afghan government.
Pakistan extended the favour in spite of a spate of disasters in its ties with Washington, including the humiliation of the raid that killed Osama bin Laden last May and the deaths of 24 Pakistani soldiers in a US air strike in November.
In spite of its fury, Pakistan’s India-fixated military appears to have calculated that a deal that cements the emergence of a stable government in Kabul would ultimately suit its interest more than the prospect of fresh Afghan chaos.
Western hopes of a convergence of interests over Afghanistan are tempered by a realisation that Pakistan is still pursuing its timeworn strategy of hedging it bets. Contacts with the Taliban remain tentative and the start of substantive peace process may still be a long way off.
In a move unlikely to please the US, Pakistan’s security establishment is letting it be known that it favours a proposal that Saudi Arabia, not Qatar, should be a focal point for dialogue.
The government of Hamid Karzai, Afghanistan’s president, began pushing the Saudi track at the weekend partly because it fears that the US might cut a deal with the Taliban in Qatar behind its back.
Pakistan has longstanding ties with Riyadh, but its eagerness to endorse yet another strand of talks might raise suspicions that it is content to see the waters muddied further.
Pakistan is waiting to see whether Washington will raise the stakes by carrying out a proposal to transfer five Taliban prisoners from Guantánamo Bay to build trust. Pakistan’s military, which has thrived on ambiguity in its approach to Afghanistan, insists it only wants clarity over where talks might be headed.
“Pakistan needs to know more about what’s going on,” said a senior Pakistani security official. “We can’t play a constructive role without a clear blueprint for what is expected.”
French decision to accelerate exit causes some Afghans to question NATO
McClatchy Newspapers By Jon Stephenson Tuesday, Jan. 31, 2012
KABUL, Afghanistan - The announcement by France last week that it would speed up the exit of its troops from Afghanistan has been greeted with a mixture of cynicism, disbelief and concern by politicians here.
"It may have a bad impact on other NATO allies," said Shukria Barakzai, an Afghan parliamentarian and chairwoman of the National Assembly's defense committee. She said the announcement "might provide an excuse for other countries" to leave Afghanistan before the end of 2014, when NATO is scheduled to end its combat mission.
Mawlawi Qalamuddin, a member of Afghanistan's High Peace Council and formerly the Taliban's minister of vice and virtue, dismissed the statement by French President Nicolas Sarkozy — which came after an Afghan soldier killed four French soldiers on Jan. 20 — as mere rhetoric.
"Emotional comments are not credible," said Qalamuddin, "and it doesn't seem logical. It's not possible that France will withdraw before scheduled because France is member of NATO, and the rest of NATO is here."
While NATO officials pledged this week in Brussels to stick to their plan to hand security responsibilities over to Afghan forces by the end of 2014, the French decision has reverberated mightily in Afghan political circles and prompted some to wonder whether it could fracture NATO solidarity or further undermine the confidence of locals in the U.S.-led coalition.
After the killings on a French base in Kapisa province, northeast of Kabul, Sarkozy said that French troops in Kapisa would transfer security to Afghan authorities in March — four months earlier than planned.
It is not clear yet what led to the attack at Kapisa. Fifteen other French soldiers were wounded in the shooting, eight of them seriously. It was the latest in a series of attacks by Afghan security personnel on their U.S. and NATO counterparts that have become more frequent in the last few years.
The attacks are often carried out by insurgents who have infiltrated the Afghan police or army and are designed to create distrust between the U.S.-led coalition and Afghanistan's fledgling security forces. However, U.S. military reports have suggested that some such attacks are motivated by anger among Afghan personnel at the way their Western counterparts treat them or behave toward other Afghans.
As NATO defense ministers prepared to open a meeting Thursday in Brussels to discuss their Afghanistan policy, the reactions of some politicians here to Sarkozy's announcement indicates that a fresh layer of mistrust may have been added to the already tense relationship between Afghans and their allies.
Barakzai, for instance, described the shooting as "a really unpleasant action from the Afghan soldier," but she said Sarkozy's response to it had been even more damaging. She suggested that the push for an early French withdrawal might be linked to France's forthcoming presidential election, in which Sarkozy's key rival, Socialist Party candidate Francois Hollande, has called for French troops to come home even sooner — by the end of 2012.
Barakzai said foreign politicians shouldn't endanger the future of Afghanistan because of their own domestic political calculations.
"Maybe later on Sarkozy will say something different, but the impact of this message will damage badly the Afghan people's minds and hearts," Barakzai said. "We thought our allies are with us, but right now it seems to me that we were counting on the wrong partners, unfortunately."
Qalamuddin, who served as a minister under the Taliban government but has undergone something of a rehabilitation and was named by President Hamid Karzai to serve on the peace council, which is tasked with promoting negotiations with the insurgency, said he was confident that French troops would remain with other NATO nations until the end of 2014. "The president of France made these comments to calm the people of France and the families of those who were injured or killed by the Afghan soldier," he said.
If France or other NATO members leave before the expected date, Afghanistan will return to the state it was in after Russian forces left in the 1980s, ushering in the era of the Taliban, he said.
"The Russians left, and a 10-year war lasted 30 years," said Qalamuddin. "I don't think the world wants to repeat that mistake by leaving Afghanistan as it is now."
Attaullah Jan Habib, a parliamentarian from the restive southern province of Kandahar, said U.S.-led forces should remain in Afghanistan "because they promised when they came that they would demolish the Taliban, that they would fix Afghanistan. They have not done that yet."
Afghans felt sorry about the killings of the French soldiers in Kapisa, said Habib. However, he added, sacrifices had to be made in the fight against insurgents, and troop-contributing nations had to be prepared to absorb such losses.
Haji Ata Mohammad Amiri, the head of the elected provincial council in Panshir — a province that borders Kapisa and which strongly supports the U.S. presence — warned that if French troops left Kapisa earlier than scheduled, insurgents would see it as a sign of weakness and infiltrate the area to show strength.
"This shooting was not supported by the people of Kapisa," said Amiri. "This was the act of one man, and the actions of one man are making a problem for all the people of Kapisa."
Amiri compared the incident to one in July, when three NATO personnel were shot in Panjshir by a disaffected local. An American soldier and a civilian died, and a third man was injured. Amiri wondered why the French were withdrawing when the Americans had made no such move.
"That shooting was also the work of one man," said Amiri. "There was no difference between what happened in Panjshir and what has happened in Kapisa."
Barakzai said Afghans had also made a lot of sacrifices in the wake of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on America, accepting the presence of foreign forces in their country for more than a decade because "we thought these bad days would one day go."
"We even accepted that they should control our freedom, where sometimes we were not even able to walk freely in our own country," she said.
Barakzai had a blunt message for NATO defense ministers: If alliance members wanted to demonstrate leadership, they would not give up on Afghanistan.
"Right now it seems to me everyone wants to find an exit," she said, "sometimes with excuses, sometimes without."
(Stephenson is a McClatchy special correspondent.)
Afghanistan: IWPR Film Tackles Past Atrocities
Documentary helps some come to terms with the past, and younger audience to find out more about it.
IWPR 31 Jan 12
Afghanistan - A groundbreaking documentary produced by IWPR on war crimes and abuses committed in Afghanistan between 1978 and 2001 has debuted around the country, with audiences applauding its courageous stance.
“Forgotten Victims” covers the period from just before the 1979 Soviet invasion and ensuing occupation, through the civil war of the early 1990s, to the Taleban’s rule from 1996 to 2001. Because of its wide historical sweep, the film covers only a selection of incidents.
The documentary has been shown in the capital Kabul and in Herat, Nangarhar and Balkh provinces, with wide coverage from Afghan and international media, including this BBC Persian report.
Audiences said they were impressed that the film tackled such highly sensitive issues, especially since some of those allegedly responsible for past abuses still held positions of power.
“No one has shown such courage until now. This initiative by IWPR is the first of its kind,” said Bashir Ahmad Hanif, a broadcast manager at Kilid Radio who attended the film’s Herat launch.
Mohammad Nader Atash, a defence lawyer who watched the film with about 300 other people in Nangarhar, agreed.
“Making a film like this in the current climate requires a lot of courage,” he said. “It’s a great step towards seeking justice.”
Audiences praised “Forgotten Victims” for shining light on Afghanistan’s bloody past, and several younger viewers said they were previously unaware of the sheer scope of the violence.
Jawad, a 21-year-old Kabul resident, said that until seeing the film he had thought the worst human rights violations occurred in Kabul.
“After watching the film, I realised how extensive the crimes really were, and who the criminals are,” he said.
Mohammad Salim, a 20-year-old Kabul resident, said many younger people knew little about events between 1978 and 2001.
“The film informed me about things I knew nothing about,” he said. “It’s important to make such films and documentaries for the younger generation.”
He added that he would like to see a similar film focusing on the bloodshed over the decade since 2001.
Many of the factional leaders and warlords implicated in past cycles of violence still wield considerable power in Afghanistan.
Nazari, who works for the Tamaddon TV station – set up by Ayatollah Asef Mohseni, past leader of the mujahedin group Harakat-e Islami – said the film was one-sided, and accused its makers of failing to seek comment from those accused of past abuses. Raking up the past would only revive old animosities, he said.
IWPR country director Noorrahman Rahmani said the documentary makers had in fact made every effort to interview every individual or group mentioned in the film.
“Not only did these groups refuse to be interviewed; they also threatened the film makers,” he said.
By contrast, Rahmani, said, the relatives of victims were hoping the documentary would contribute to the process of judicial retribution.
Kabul resident Shekeb, 22, said it was difficult for individuals on their own to speak up against perpetrators, so he was pleased the filmmakers had done so.
“I’m now really optimistic that the criminals will stand trial in the court of history,” he said.
Due to recent legislation, holding actual trials may prove impossible.
In 2010, a law came quietly into force providing immunity from prosecution for those accused of war crimes and crimes against humanity in previous decades, but who have renounced violence.
Human rights activists have attacked the legislation for offering impunity to the perpetrators of major atrocities, while those who lost loved ones say they should have been consulted.
Benazir, a Kabul resident who appears in the documentary, who lost seven relatives in a single rocket attack. She told IWPR that members of parliament would not have passed the immunity law if it had been their own children who were killed.
Some viewers expressed hope that the film would help bring closure to victims.
Abdul Qader Rahimi, who heads the Herat branch of the Afghan Independent Human Rights Commission, said the film could help heal psychological wounds, and remind victims that they were not forgotten.
Nabi Asir, a reporter for Germany’s Deutsche Welle Radio in Balkh, said the film might help younger people avoid leaders who concealed criminal intentions behind a “veil of ethnicity, language or regional origin”.
And Turialay Razaqyar, formerly information and culture chief in Balkh province, expressed hope that open discussion might foster a less violent culture,
“This film will increase the public’s rejection of war and violence. It can be regarded as an effective message of peace,” he said.
www.afghanistannewscenter.com