[Afghan News] March 8, 2012

[یاسمینه]

U.S. probes allegations Afghan Air Force involved in drug running
By Michael Georgy Thu Mar 8, 2012 8:01am EST
KABUL (Reuters) - U.S. authorities are looking into allegations that some Afghan Air Force (AAF) officials have been using aircraft to transport narcotics and illegal weapons across the country, a U.S. official said on Thursday.

"At this point allegations are being examined," said Lt. Col. Tim Stauffer, spokesman for the NATO Training Mission-Afghanistan, which is setting up and financing Afghan security forces, including the Air Force.

"Authorities are trying to determine whether the allegations warrant a full investigation."

The Wall Street Journal, which first reported the allegations, said the U.S. military is also looking into whether the alleged transporting of illegal drugs and weapons is connected to an April incident in which an AAF colonel killed eight U.S. Air Force officers at Kabul Airport.

A U.S. Air Force report about the deaths quoted American officials as saying that the killer was likely involved in moving illegal cargo, The Wall Street Journal reported.

Most of the victims had been taking part in an inquiry into the misuse of AAF aircraft, the newspaper said.

The allegations of drug running come from "credible" Afghan officers inside and outside the AAF and coalition personnel working within the AAF, it added.

An Afghan defense ministry official would not comment on the issue. But he did say that Afghanistan had come under pressure from the West to remove a senior AAF official over corruption allegations.

"They could not provide credible evidence," he told Reuters.

Major General Abdul Wahab Wardak, the AAF commander, told Reuters the drug-running allegations were "baseless and they must be proven". "We never do such things," he added.

The allegations are likely to raise further doubts over the ability of Afghan forces to secure the country before foreign combat troops withdraw at the end of 2014.

The AAF was set up mostly with U.S. funds.

The United States poured in a record amount, near $12 billion between October 2010 and September 2011, to train and equip Afghanistan's security forces. Almost as much cash, some $11 billion, is planned for the year through September 2012.

Afghanistan produces 90 percent of the world's opium and the drug trade is often blamed by Western officials for hindering economic development.

The poppy economy in Afghanistan, which provides an income for insurgents in the country blighted by decades of war, has grown significantly in 2011 with soaring prices and expanded cultivation, a U.N. report said late last year.

(Additional reporting by Hamid Shalizi and Mirwais Harooni; Editing by Sanjeev Miglani)

U.S. Says Iranian General Instrumental In Afghan Drug Traffic
By RFE/RL March 07, 2012
The United States has named a general in Iran's elite Al-Quds force as a key figure in trafficking heroin from Afghanistan.

The U.S. Treasury designated General Gholamreza Baghbani, who runs the Revolutionary Guards' Quds Force office in Zahedan, near the Afghan border, as a narcotics "kingpin."

Baghbani is accused of aiding Afghan drug runners in moving opiates into and through Iran, as well helping send weapons to the Taliban.

The Treasury said in a statement that "U.S. persons are prohibited from conducting financial or commercial transactions with General Baghbani, and any assets he may have under U.S. jurisdiction are frozen."

With AFP reporting

Top Afghan advisor resigns over differences with Karzai
Press TV
A top Afghan advisor has reportedly resigned over disagreements on a strategic partnership deal that will set the framework for continued US presence in Afghanistan beyond 2014, Press TV reports.

Reports say National Security Adviser Rangin Dadfar Spanta has submitted his resignation letter to Afghan President Hamid Karzai, though his resignation has not yet been accepted.

It is widely believed that resignation of Spanta, a former foreign minister, was part of an effort to pressure Karzai into a compromise on the Strategic Partnership Agreement.

Karzai is against two of the most contentious issues being negotiated -- the night-time raids and the US transfer of detention facilities to Afghan government control.

An Afghan official said on Tuesday that the United States is persistently pressuring President Karzai to submit to the deal.

Ezatullah Safi, the deputy director of Karzai's media information center, said the intense pressure comes as the president demands an end to night-time raids by US troops in Afghanistan and a timeline for Afghans to assume control over the US-run detention centers.

There are increasing doubts on whether Washington and Kabul will be able to reach a long-term Strategic Partnership Agreement as US-Afghanistan relations have been heavily strained in recent weeks.

UK identifies 6 soldiers missing, feared dead in Afghanistan
By the CNN Wire Staff March 8, 2012
(CNN) -- The British Defence Ministry Thursday identified six British soldiers who are missing and presumed dead following an explosion in southwest Afghanistan.

The Taliban claimed responsibility for the blast.

The soldiers were traveling in a tracked armored vehicle in Helmand province Tuesday when the explosion occurred, a British military official said.

The vehicle hit a land mine, setting off a substantial explosion, said the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the issue.

The area where the blast occurred was not on a paved road. It is in the Nar-e-Saraj area of Helmand, where Britain has lost many troops previously.

The ministry identified the soldiers as Sgt. Nigel Coupe, 33; Corp. Jake Hartley, 20; Pvt. Anthony Frampton, 20; Pvt. Christopher Kershaw, 19; Pvt. Daniel Wade, 20; and Pvt. Daniel Wilford, 21.

All of the soldiers, with the exception of Coupe, were assigned to 3rd Battalion, the Yorkshire Regiment, the ministry said. Coupe was assigned to 1st Battalion, The Duke of Lancaster's Regiment, it said.

If confirmed, the deaths in Tuesday's attack would be the most British troops killed in a single day in Afghanistan since six were killed on July 10, 2009, according to a CNN tally.

It was not immediately clear whether the explosion was caused by a roadside bomb.

There is a possibility the blast was caused by a "legacy device," a mine left over from the Soviet era, the military official said. Such devices have been found in that area, but there is no evidence leading to that conclusion at this point, he added.

It is also possible, even if it was an old mine, that it had been replanted by insurgents, he said.

On a Taliban website, the group claimed responsibility and described the explosive as a landmine.

Members of the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force reached the area, but will not officially confirm the deaths until they get into the damaged vehicle.

CNN's Laura Perez Maestro contributed to this report.

1 civilian wounded as blast shocks Afghan northern city of Kunduz
KUNDUZ, Afghanistan, March 8 (Xinhua)-- An explosion shocked northern Kunduz city, capital of Kunduz province 250 km north of capital city Kabul on Thursday, wounding one person, a local police spokesman said.

"It was a roadside bomb organized by the enemies of peace and targeted Mawlawi Khosh Mohammad, the secretary of Provincial Council at 03:30 p.m. local time. As a result one civilian was injured but Khosh Mohammad escaped unhurt," Syed Sarwar Hussaini told Xinhua.

Taliban militants fighting the Afghan government resorting very often to suicide attacks and roadside bombings have yet to make any comment.

This is the second bomb blast in Afghanistan in a single day on Thursday. An earlier blast wounded 12 people, including six police in the eastern Jalalabad city, the capital of Nangarhar province 120 km east of Kabul.

Pakistan Considers Re-opening NATO Supply Routes
VOA News March 8, 2012 Brian Padden
Islamabad - Pakistan's parliament is expected draw up rules of engagement and increased transit fees the United States and NATO must agree to before it will reopen the border for military convoys heading into Afghanistan. Pakistan closed the vital supply route last November when American air strikes killed 24 Pakistani troops in a "friendly fire" incident.

In mid-March a Pakistan Senate session will open, and a parliament review of all cooperative arrangements with the United States and NATO is expected to top the agenda.

In November, the Pakistan government ordered the review after a cross-border NATO airstrike on two military outposts in the country's northwest. Pakistani Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani said it was an "an attack on Pakistan's sovereignty" and Pakistan subsequently shut down all NATO supply lines through its territory to Afghanistan.

Defense analyst Mahmood Shah, a retired Pakistani general, said the review is expected to lay out conditions that must be met to ensure Pakistan's territorial integrity is respected. He says it will call for closer intelligence sharing and coordination of military operations in border areas and explicitly prohibits international intelligence organizations from operating inside Pakistan.

"That no secret American agents would be allowed in Pakistan. And, if there is anyone caught spying for the U.S., whether he is a Pakistani or a U.S. citizen [he], will be prosecuted," Shah said.

In addition, new fees and taxes may be added to trucks and containers ferrying supplies to coalition forces in Afghanistan. Former Pakistani foreign secretary Najmuddin Shaik says there needs to be more transparency in how military assistance is being dispersed. And, he says these suggested transit fees are commonly imposed to compensate the host country for damage done by heavy military equipment on its roads and rail system.

"My point about this is not so much about money as it is about the fact that these things need to be negotiated in a business-like manner. And, that whatever agreements are reached, those agreements must be clear. Let us have everything done in an organized fashion," he said.

Although Pakistan's Senate is scheduled to discuss the review, retiring Senator Saleem Saifullah, who until recently was the chairman of the Foreign Affairs Committee, says that does not mean they will soon pass a resolution to restart relations with the United States and NATO.

"So you know parliament, when 440 people sit together, it is quite difficult to predict what they want to do. So, it is a tough one for the government. They have my sympathy," he said.

NATO had managed to keep supplies flowing to troops in Afghanistan by using routes on its northern border as well as deliveries by air. But U.S. officials say the roads through Pakistan are needed to carry out a scheduled U.S. troop drawdown, which calls for reducing American forces from nearly 90,000 to 68,000 by the end of September.

US commanders: No plan to cede Afghan war to CIA
AP By KIMBERLY DOZIER, AP Intelligence Writer Mar. 7, 2012
WASHINGTON - U.S. military commanders said Wednesday there are no plans to turn the Afghan war over to CIA control after 2014, with special operations answering to American intelligence officials.

“There are absolutely no plans right now to put special operations under Title 50 in Afghanistan now that I am aware of,” said Adm. Bill McRaven, the overall special operations commander, referring to the legal authority under which the CIA operates.

Gen. James Mattis, who heads U.S. Central Command, and, McRaven told the House Armed Services Committee that they will continue an emphasis on special operations training of Afghan forces, especially at the village level.

McRaven also defended the continued use of “night raids” against Afghan enemy targets, saying they are all led by Afghan troops.

The commanders were giving lawmakers a bird’s eye view of where their forces stand since last year’s U.S. withdrawal from Iraq and where they might be headed as military leaders grapple with how to down troops fast enough to meet the White House’s 2014 deadline to end the U.S. combat role in Afghanistan.

Pentagon staffers already have put forward a plan to hand over much of the war-fighting to special operations troops in Afghanistan.

The chairman of the House Armed Services, Rep. Howard “Buck” McKeon, R-Calif., spoke of the option to add a three-star special operations general to the structure, to help coordinate the drawdown and shift to a U.S. special-operations-backed Afghan force.
McRaven answered several questions about his proposal to allow him to move more of his forces more quickly around the globe, when asked by U.S. regional commanders to train local forces or supplement existing U.S. operations. He said none of those troop movements would move ahead without the request by or coordination with the regional U.S. military chief or ambassador.

“I would never recommend circumventing any of those,” McRaven said.

The idea of turning the Afghan campaign over to the intelligence community after 2014 has been floated by a senior defense intelligence official and reported by The Associated Press last week. The plan is one of several possible scenarios that Pentagon officials are debating, but has yet to be presented to Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, the White House or Congress.

The notion did not sit well with either McRaven or Mattis, when consulted by lawmakers in closed sessions, according to an official who was briefed on the meetings and who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss private conversations.

Proponents of the draft proposal say one advantage would be a smaller, less visible footprint, at a time when Afghan President Hamid Karzai is eager to show his troops in the lead and that U.S. troops are on the way out.

But a CIA-run war would mean that the U.S. public would not be informed about funding or operations, as they are in a traditional war. Oversight would fall to the White House, top intelligence officials, and those two congressional committees, plus a few other key lawmakers.

While McRaven stressed repeatedly that no such plan is in the works, he acknowledged that when special operations troops are put under CIA control, as they were for last year’s raid against Osama bin Laden, they answer to the intelligence agency. That means Congressional oversight falls to the intelligence committees, not defense oversight bodies.

Rep. Hank Johnson, D-Ga., expressed concern that “we have budgetary control” in the committee, but no authority over when Special Operations Command passes off operational authority to intelligence agencies.

“We have no plans right now to put special operations under Title 50 in Afghanistan,” McRaven said, citing the legal title under which the CIA operates.

Key commanders have their say on Afghanistan
By Walter Pincus, The Washington Post
Two senior American military commanders spent the past two days putting into context recent negative news about the U.S. effort in Afghanistan. At the same time, they tried to get members of the Senate and House Armed Services committees to realize that U.S. units will remain in that country long after combat troops depart in 2014.

A question asked on both days: “Should the U.S. modify its Afghan strategy in the wake of those six U.S. soldiers being killed by Afghan soldiers between Feb. 23 and March 1?”

“Treachery has existed as long as there’s been warfare, and there’s always been a few people that you couldn’t trust” was the way Marine Gen. James Mattis, head of U.S. Central Command, put it. On Tuesday, he told the Senate panel: “I’m one of those who has slept peacefully under Afghan boys guarding me back in 2001. No force is perfect.”

On Wednesday, Mattis told House members that the U.S. military relationship with Afghan troops “should not be defined by the occasional tragedies.” He went on to say, “More Afghan boys have died as a result of this sort of thing in a society that has been turned upside down by the Soviets some decades ago. . . . The Kalashnikov culture found its way inside that society and violence has become too often the norm. It’s one of the things we’re trying to turn back.”

But, he added, “in Afghanistan right now, it has not stopped us in our tracks.”

Adm. William McRaven, head the U.S. Special Operations Command, told the senators that his troops “have not had any what we refer to as ‘green-on-blue’ incidents [Afghan soldiers attacking U.S. or NATO personnel] with respect to our partner relationships.”

Another question that came up several times was President Hamid Karzai’s repeated objection to Special Forces night raids on Afghan villages in order to capture targeted, high-value Taliban leaders.

McRaven told the senators that the raids are “essential” and that the high-value individuals “generally bed down at night. They are much more targetable at night. And I think if you look at it tactically, what you find is the Afghans are actually much safer if we target an individual at night because there aren’t so many people out and about in the little villages.”

He also said that Karzai has been told that Afghan forces have taken the lead on night raids. “They are the ones that do the call-outs, asking the people to come out of the compounds. They are the first ones through the door. They are the ones that do all of the sensitive site exploitation,” McRaven explained.

On Wednesday, McRaven told House members that “sometimes for political reasons” Afghan politicians will object to night raids, but that for the most part people approve of them because they remove unwanted people. Mattis added that for Karzai, the raid issue “cuts to the heart of [the Afghans’] self image” and remains “one of the very difficult issues that we have to sort out between us.”

Mattis said that recruitment and training of Afghan security forces is progressing and that the goal of 352,000 will “be reached in 60 days,” ahead of earlier plans.

At both hearings, questions were raised about the burden being placed on Special Operations Forces as regular forces are reduced by 22,000 this year and leadership in fighting the Taliban is taken over by Afghan forces. Special Operations Forces make up 8 percent of the forces in Afghanistan and “may increase by some small amount” as 2014 approaches, McRaven said. He also made clear that Special Operations Forces will be in Afghanistan after 2014, working with the Afghans on counterterrorism and overseeing the training of security forces.

The Special Operations Forces that remain will need regular Army troops to clear routes of makeshift bombs and pilot helicopters for medical evacuation of the wounded. And some Air Force elements will be needed to provide intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance support.

A Special Operations Forces program that still has a way to go is the Village Stability Operations/Afghan Local Police initiative. With help from other coalition elements, about 11,000 local police have been recruited, vetted and trained with the overall goal of 30,000, McRaven told the committees. He said the stability operation is underway in 57 districts.

The work is being done in partnership with Afghan commando and special forces troops.

McRaven said that it takes 18 months to get a village from planning through funding of local police units, but as they are established, U.S. Special Operations Forces go on to the next site. U.S. and Afghan special forces then share oversight of the units.

New solicitations call for the construction of two Special Operations Forces facilities at Kandahar Airfield. One is for a Joint Operation Center, the other a Special Operations Forces command and control facility. Each could cost up to $10 million, be finished in mid- to late 2013 and support “operations in southern and western Afghanistan,” according to the Corps of Engineers solicitations.

One of the more interesting answers came Wednesday from Mattis, when he was asked whether the failure to eliminate Taliban sanctuaries in Pakistan was a “showstopper” for U.S. operations in Afghanistan as many politicians and analysts have stated.

“It’s not,” Mattis said. He pointed to the progress that the Pakistani army had made in the past two years and how it has “thrown the Taliban back into the mountains.” He pointed out that the Pakistanis “continue to take casualties” and that havens in some areas exist “because the Pakistan army is stretched.”

But he concluded that, while the United States at times has a “problematic . . . relationship with Pakistan . . . there’s a lot of common ground around that we use — that we operate off of together.”

Too bad Democrats and Republicans don’t have the same kind of approach.

Afghanistan opens first women-only internet cafe
By Amie Ferris-Rotman
KABUL (Reuters) - Afghanistan opened its first female-only internet cafe on Thursday, hoping to give women a chance to connect to the world without verbal and sexual harassment and free from the unwanted gazes of their countrymen.

Swarms of hijab-wearing young visitors poured into the small cafe on a quiet street in central Kabul on International Women's Day in a country where women still face enormous struggles even though the Taliban were toppled over a decade ago.

"We wanted women to not be afraid, to create a safe place for women to use the internet," said Aqlima Moradi, a 25-year-old medical student and member of Afghan activist group YoungWomen4Change, which set up the cafe.

Spray-prainted in bright colours with smilies, birds and Facebook and Yahoo logos, the modest cafe was named after Sahar Gul, a 15-year-old Afghan girl who was brutally tortured last year by her in-laws for refusing to become a prostitute.

"There are a lot of Sahar Guls in Afghanistan. There are women every day facing violence," said Mohammad Jawad Alizada, 29, who oversaw the cafe's creation and is a volunteer from the male advocacy wing of the group.

"For as long as I can remember, Afghan women have had no rights. She (Gul) is a brave girl who stood up for herself. It is her bravery and her courage that we want to honour here," Alizada, who also works as a social research analyst at a U.S. company in Kabul, told Reuters.

While Afghan women have gained back basic rights in education, voting and work since the Taliban were toppled in 2001, their future remains highly uncertain as Afghan and U.S. officials seek to negotiate with the Taliban to ensure stability after foreign combat troops leave by end-2014.

At the net cafe's opening, high school student Sana Seerat bemoaned the lack of attention given to women: "We never have things that are just for women, everything in Afghanistan is always for men. But we are the same, equal".

Project manager Zainab Paiman applauded the cafe initiative, but said dividing the sexes could lead to further oppression of women. "We should work on harassment together. If we do things separately then we will have to continue this in future," she said, sporting a polka dot headscarf and long floral skirt.

TALIBAN THREATS

Organisers said a British charity donated the cafe's 15 used laptops, which sit on low wooden tables surrounded by cushions where women can sit and work for the reduced fee of 50 Afghanis an hour, much less than the rates in other net cafes.

Fundraising both at home and abroad secured the approximate $1,000 a month needed for the near future to run the cafe, purposely situated near a girls' high school, although it hopes to become self-sustaining in the future.

Like other projects designed to help women in Afghanistan, from business to culture and education, there is fear of threats and violence from the Taliban, who banned women from most work and forbade them to leave their homes without a male relative.

"There will always be threats. We're not going to say we are not worried. But we can't stop because of that," Alizada said of the cafe, which has painted windows and is discreetly marked.

There is now concern among some Western officials, activists and female Afghan lawmakers that women's rights in Afghanistan could be compromised under any power-sharing deal between the Afghan government and the Taliban.

Activists were outraged this week when President Hamid Karzai backed recommendations from his powerful clerics, the Ulema Council, to segregate the sexes and allow husbands to beat wives under certain circumstances, reminiscent of Taliban rule.

"We were so shocked by this. Karzai is an educated man, he should know that men and women are equal," said teenager Seerat.

(Reporting by Amie Ferris-Rotman; Editing by Michael Georgy and Paul Casciato)

Intractable Afghan Graft Hampering U.S. Strategy
New York Times By MATTHEW ROSENBERG and GRAHAM BOWLEY March 7, 2012
KABUL, Afghanistan - For the past few months, possibly the most intriguing poker game in Kabul has been taking place in the sprawling pink sitting room of the man at the center of one of the most public corruption scandals in the world, the near collapse of Kabul Bank.

The players include people tied to President Hamid Karzai’s inner circle, many of whom have profited from the crony capitalism that has come to define Afghanistan’s economic order, and nearly brought down Kabul Bank. The game’s stakes “aren’t too big — a few thousand dollars up or down,” one of the participants said.

Betting thousands of dollars a night in a country where most families live off a few hundred dollars a year would seem like a bad play for Sherkhan Farnood, the founder and former chairman of Kabul Bank, the country’s biggest. His assets are supposed to be frozen, and he is still facing the threat of prosecution over a scandal that could end up costing the Afghan government — and, by extension, the Western countries that pay most of its expenses — almost $900 million, a sum that nearly equals the government’s total annual revenues.

But Mr. Farnood, who in 2008 won about $143,000 at a World Series of Poker event in Europe, appears to know a good wager when he sees one. Despite years of urging and oversight by American advisers, Mr. Karzai’s government has yet to prosecute a high-level corruption case. And now many American officials say that they have little expectation that Mr. Farnood’s case will prove to be the exception — or that Washington will try to do much about it, especially after violent anti-American protests in recent weeks have sowed fresh doubts in the Obama administration over the viability of the mission in Afghanistan.

As Americans pull back from Afghanistan, Mr. Farnood’s case exemplifies how the United States is leaving behind a problem it underwrote over the past decade with tens of billions of dollars of aid and logistical support: a narrow business and political elite defined by its corruption, and despised by most Afghans for it.

The Americans and Afghans blame each other for the problem’s seeming intractability, contributing to the deterioration in relations that now threatens to scuttle talks on the shape of ties between the countries after the NATO combat mission ends in 2014. What is clear is that the pervasive graft has badly undercut the American war strategy, which hinged on building the Karzai administration into a credible alternative to the Taliban.

Still, the Obama administration has concluded that pressing the fight against corruption, as many American officials tried to do in recent years, could further alienate Mr. Karzai and others around him whom Washington is relying on as it tries to manage a graceful drawdown.

“It’s a little late in the game to worry about anticorruption measures because what in the world is the alternative going to be?” said Anthony H. Cordesman, a military analyst at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington. “If you find people who aren’t corrupt, it is largely because they haven’t had the opportunity.”

Some of the corruption will fade organically, as America and its allies cut back on their aid to Afghanistan, which is likely to have a harsh impact on the Afghan economy, Mr. Cordesman said. Efforts by the American-led coalition to better monitor the billions it spends each year in Afghanistan continue and are having an effect, although it remains slight largely because billions of dollars keep pouring in and are likely to do so for years to come.

The limits of the coalition’s efforts to police its own spending — and the newfound reluctance of top American officials to push back against Afghan intransigence over prosecuting corruption — were laid bare in December when Mr. Karzai’s office demanded that the coalition provide evidence if it wanted the government to prosecute the Afghan Army’s former surgeon general, Gen. Ahmad Zia Yaftali.

Coalition officials had in fact provided the evidence a full year earlier. General Yaftali was suspended in December 2010 after Gen. David H. Petraeus, then the coalition commander, told Mr. Karzai that NATO investigators had found that the Afghan officer had stolen tens of millions of dollars’ worth of drugs from the country’s main military hospital, an institution he ran and where Afghan soldiers regularly died from simple infections because they could not afford to bribe nurses or doctors to treat them.

The running of the hospital, like much of the Afghan Army, is financed by the United States, which last year spent $11.2 billion to pay, train and equip Afghanistan’s security force.

But after the suspension of the politically connected general, the investigation into his conduct remained in limbo — until Mr. Karzai on Dec. 29 unexpectedly demanded to see the evidence he had already seen.

The American officer in charge of the inquiry, Brig. Gen. H. R. McMaster, was furious. The investigation of General Yaftali and the Dawood Military Hospital was one of the major initiatives undertaken by General McMaster’s task force, a high-profile coalition effort set up in 2010 to go after corruption that was being financed by coalition spending. Now it appeared as if an officer who was accused of letting his own soldiers die so he could enrich himself would never be tried.

General McMaster and his staff quickly pulled together their evidence and wrote a statement to counter Mr. Karzai’s demand. Their draft, a copy of which was obtained by The New York Times, struck both accusatory and conciliatory notes.

It bluntly stated that the coalition had provided the evidence Mr. Karzai was now demanding. It said efforts to investigate had been met with “interference, obstruction, and delay.” It quoted a pledge Mr. Karzai had made in December at an international conference in Germany to end a “culture of impunity.”

The statement was never released. According to two NATO officials, the commander of coalition forces, Gen. John R. Allen, decided there was little to gain in picking a fight with Mr. Karzai over the matter.

A senior coalition officer who is involved with the case said he believed that it would eventually proceed. NATO is focused on preparing Afghan forces to take over the fight against the Taliban, and will continue to try to clamp down on corruption that undermines that goal, the officer said.

The American officials tracking the bank investigation seem similarly uninterested in challenging Afghan authorities over the status of Mr. Farnood and his former partner, Khalilullah Frozi.

Under pressure from the United States and its allies, Afghan authorities arrested both men in June. Kabul Bank was taken over nearly 10 months earlier amid accusations that its owners used it as their personal piggy bank.

Mr. Farnood spent more than $150 million of the bank’s money on villas in Dubai purchased in his own name. Kabul Bank money helped finance shell companies whose main function was to win subcontracts from businesses doing work for the American-led coalition, siphon a slice of the money and then find other subcontractors to do the actual work, American officials have said. Mahmoud Karzai, a brother of the Afghan president, and Abdul Haseen Fahim, a brother of the first vice president, Gen. Muhammad Qasim Fahim, both received interest-free loans so they could buy stakes in the bank.

News of the takeover prompted a run on the bank that almost led to its collapse. Afghanistan’s central bank spent nearly $900 million to keep it afloat, an outlay that the Afghan government, already short of cash, has since had to cover. While some of that money is likely to be recovered, some Western officials concede that donor funds will eventually be needed to close the hole in the Afghan budget, even if Western dollars do not go directly to cover Kabul Bank’s losses.

Deputy Attorney General Rahmatullah Nazari said the authorities this past fall gave permission to let Mr. Farnood and Mr. Frozi out of prison during the daytime so they could help recover assets owed to the bank. Mr. Farnood owes the bank $467 million, he said; Mr. Frozi owes $78 million.

Mr. Frozi has been helpful in tracking down missing assets; Mr. Farnood less so, Mr. Nazari said, although some Western officials disputed that characterization and said it was Mr. Farnood who was being more helpful.

But it is unclear how hard the Afghan government is pushing either man. The villas and a pair of partly constructed office towers in Dubai are still in Mr. Farnood’s name, and Mr. Nazari said the transfer of the property was being held up by a 2 percent tax that the United Arab Emirates levy on such deals. Some Western officials questioned why a routine tax would hold up such an important transaction.

Meanwhile, Mr. Farnood is collecting rent from tenants in some of the villas, Mr. Nazari said.

But, Mr. Nazari insisted, both will be prosecuted once the asset recovery has been completed.

American, European and even some Afghan officials say they doubt that will happen. Despite Mr. Nazari’s claim that both spend their nights in prison, the two have rented separate houses in Kabul and rarely, if ever, return to their cells, said people close to the men.

Mr. Farnood’s spacious house stands behind high walls in Kabul’s most expensive neighborhood, around the corner from the office of the International Monetary Fund, which is overseeing a forensic audit of Kabul Bank.

A pool table, a table for table tennis, a large Samsung flat-screen television and a set of purple faux-leather couches and arm chairs grace the cavernous pink sitting room. A pair of late-model black Toyota Land Cruisers sit in the driveway. The officer from Afghanistan’s National Directorate of Security, the country’s intelligence agency, who mans the front door functions more like a doorman than a guard.

Mr. Farnood lunches regularly at the Kabul Serena Hotel, where the buffet costs about $25 a head. Mr. Frozi has his own spot, Boccaccio, an upscale Italian eatery popular with well-heeled Afghans and foreigners, including American and European diplomats.

Lunching there on afternoon last month with four other men, Mr. Frozi declined to talk to a reporter. He said the American press had “destroyed the bank,” and he dismissed his questioner with a wave of his hand.

Sharifullah Sahak and Sangar Rahimi contributed reporting.

Cameron to discuss Afghanistan exit plans with Obama
PM to hold US talks to ensure allies are in 'lock step' after six British soldiers go missing, believed dead, in Helmand
Guardian.co.uk By Hélène Mulholland Wednesday 7 March 2012
David Cameron will hold talks with Barack Obama next week to ensure that Britain and America are in "lock step" over their forces' role in Afghanistan in the wake of news that six British soldiers are missing, believed dead.

The prime minister paid tribute to the missing soldiers as he addressed a sombre Commons chamber.

He also stressed the need to ensure troops had all the equipment "between now and then" to keep them "as safe as possible", as well as doing more for families at home who have lost loved ones in combat.

The prime minister said troops would not be in a combat role "anything like the numbers we're in now, at the end of 2014".

He urged the Taliban to lay down their weapons and engage in political talk to give the country a chance of peaceful progress.

The five soldiers from the 3rd Battalion the Yorkshire Regiment and one from the 1st Battalion the Duke of Lancaster's Regiment were on mounted patrol when their Warrior armoured fighting vehicle was struck on Tuesday in Helmand province.

Cameron told MPs: "This would be the largest loss of life in a single incident in Afghanistan since 2006. It takes the overall number of casualties that we have suffered in Afghanistan to over 400. Every death and every injury reminds us of the human cost paid by our armed forces to keep our country safe."

He said he had spoken to the chief of defence staff, General Sir David Richards, the chief of the general staff, General Sir Peter Wall, and the commanding officer of 3 Yorkshire Regiment.

He said: "Each stressed the commitment of our troops to the mission and to getting the job done. But I know everyone will want a message of support and backing for our troops and their families to go out from this House today."

He said he would use his visit to the US to discuss the Afghanistan situation with the president.

"Next week is an opportunity to make sure that Britain and America, as the two largest contributors to the Isaf mission in Afghanistan, are absolutely in lock step about the importance of training up the Afghan army, training up the Afghan police and making sure that all Nato partners have a properly co-ordinated process for transition in that country so that the Afghans can take responsibility for the security of their own country and we can bring our forces home," he said.

Cameron added: "We are clearly planning the increase in the army and police which are the physical forces that will take over, but the greatest difference we could make is a stronger political settlement that will make sure Afghanistan has the chance of real peace, stability, prosperity and security in the future."

The Labour leader, Ed Miliband, expressed his "profound sadness at the terrible news".

"Today is a day we are reminded of the ongoing commitment and sacrifice that our service personnel make on our behalf," he said. "By putting themselves in harm's way for our benefit, they demonstrate the utmost service and courage."

He said it was important to restate the reason for the UK military presence in Afghanistan, which was to foster "a more stable, self-governing Afghanistan to produce more stable outcomes in that region and to ensure greater safety for our citizens here at home".

Cameron said the mission was "vital to our national security" to prevent Afghanistan becoming a safe haven to al-Qaida "from where they might plan attacks on the UK or our allies".

"Our task is simple: it's to equip the Afghan government and forces of Afghanistan with the capability and the capacity to take care of their own security without the need for foreign troops on the soil," he said. "That is our aim. We are making progress."

There were 184,000 Afghan troops, on target to reach 195,000 by the end of the year, with 145,000 police set to reach 157,000 by the end of 2012, he said.

Miliband pressed the prime minister on the diplomatic progress being made on securing the broader and more inclusive political settlement needed for a stable Afghanistan. He said the whole international community needed to "up the pace of progress" on a political settlement before the departure of UK and allied combat troops at the end of 2014.

Cameron said there were some good signs in that there were proper discussions now between the Afghan and Pakistani governments. "There is a clear message coming out of Afghanistan and Pakistan to all those who are engaged in violence to give up that violence and to join a political process. There is strong support for that across the Arab world, particularly in the Middle East," he said.

"We need to give that every possible support we can and send a very clear message to the Taliban that, whether it is our troops who are there or whether it is Afghan troops who are there, they will not win on the battlefield – they never win on the battlefield – and now it is time for a political settlement to give this country a chance of peaceful progress."

He said that the military convenant would ensure families who had lost loved ones were supported, in response to a question from Kris Hopkins, a Conservative MP who formerly served in the 3rd Battalion the Yorkshire Regiment, urging him to do everything possible to help them.

The Ministry of Defence announced on Wednesday that troops believed to be suffering from mental health problems would be assessed in Nottingham instead of London as part of a move to save money.

Troops who fear they are suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder or other mental health issues relating to active service, have previously been sent to St Thomas's hospital for assessment.

But they will now be sent to the MoD's reinforcements training and mobilisation centre in Chilwell, Nottinghamshire.

The defence minister Andrew Robathan said in a written ministerial statement that the move was designed to cut costs but said it would also make it easier for troops from the Midlands and north of England to be assessed.

A high percentage of troops needing treatment came from the two regions, he said.

The Afghan trust deficit
Foreign Policy By Douglas A. Ollivant Wednesday, March 7, 2012
This past week's wave of killings in Afghanistan of U.S. military personnel by their nominal Afghan allies has exposed a key weakness in the NATO and U.S. transition "train and advise" strategy that will allow the large NATO units to disengage. Simply put, the tactic of putting small groups of experienced, seasoned soldiers with Afghan security forces to both train and provide access to NATO resource-such as intelligence and airpower-assumes that the two sides have enough mutual trust and respect to work together. It also assumes that the fratricidal violence between these two allied groups (Afghan and NATO) will be sufficiently low-preferably zero-that domestic support can be maintained in Washington and other capitals long enough for real changes to take root. Both of these assumptions are now questionable.

While some of these killings may be the work of Taliban infiltrators, defense officials privately say that well over half appear instead to be in response to a perceived personal insult or-as in at least some of last week's incidents-in response to an insult to Islam. Upon reflection, this should not surprise us. This is a society in which Afghan males occasionally kill their own daughters and sisters in order to maintain personal and family honor. How much easier to kill a Western trainer for similar reasons?

American and other NATO forces react as one would expect in this situation; they become risk averse. They spend less time with Afghans, avoid being alone with Afghans, and retreat to their compatriots. This understandable behavior makes the situation worse, further isolating the Westerners from the contact that might permit cultural understanding and reduce the friction between the two sides.

While markedly worse of late, the risk to trainers from their Afghan colleagues is not a new phenomenon in Afghanistan. Yet the advisory strategy has moved forward despite the clear vulnerability of the people asked to undertake it. It is not clear whether anyone identified this vulnerability and senior leaders decided it was an acceptable risk, or whether the influx of Iraq veterans bringing their "lessons learned" skewed the perception of what was possible, as there were very few of these "green on blue" incidents with trainers in the much more developed Iraq. This vulnerability has been discussed sotte vocce among the Afghan policy community for several months now, with no one wanting to expose the weaknesses in the plan or the long-term difficulties of this latest variant of the counter insurgency strategy. There is clearly no longer any secret to keep.

Regardless of how we arrived at this point, we now have a stubborn problem. The President, administration officials, and senior military leaders are saying the diplomatic things they have to say, but all realize the severity of the situation. No doubt measures are being put in place to try to alleviate the most obvious vulnerabilities and increase "force protection" throughout Afghanistan, even though this is completely at odds with the concept of an advisory mission. But the bottom line is that throughout the country, the NATO and Afghan forces are intertwined. To try to deny all opportunities for future attacks is simply not possible.

The issue is that no one appears to have a viable Plan B at this point. One can lament the set of circumstances that has brought us to this point, but that changes the facts not at all. The current strategy no longer appears workable, given the lack of trust now made apparent, not to mention domestic support. And yet the only easily discernible alternative-a rapid disengagement from Afghanistan-appears even worse, or at least an explicit admission of failure, without any fig leaf of "transition" as NATO departs, not to mention humanitarian concerns for the Afghans.

The American people appear to be demanding real answers to hard questions. What are our interests in Afghanistan? Why are we still there now that Osama bin Laden is dead? Why do our Afghan allies hate us enough to kill us when we are there to help them? Why are we supporting a government that can't keep its agents from killing ours and which appears to be corrupt? To date, the answers coming from the Administration and the war's supporters in Congress do not appear to be answering these questions, instead maintaining that the fratricide issue is manageable and that we can stay the course.

Unfortunately, Afghanistan is a "wicked problem" that appears to be getting more tangled by the day. Our presence is not simply a part of the solution but part of the problem, creating an inexorable spiral from which we are struggling to escape with both our dignity and our strategy intact. The refusal to acknowledge the recalculation of risk at both the senior and individual levels in Afghanistan refuses to acknowledge the diminishing likelihood that the "train and advise" plan will work. The Afghans will notice when senior mentors show up with their security detail or when more junior ones keep their weapons closer and their guard up.

The President owes the American people a clear, concise explanation of our policy and why the costs are worth paying; the buck does stop with him. If the President believes that trust can be restored between the Afghans trying to make a country and the people of good will we have asked to help them, then he must say so and be willing to risk the political storms that will follow if the costs-fiscal and human-increase. If he instead believes the new situation requires adjusting the policy, then so be it. When the assumptions on which plans are based turn out to be false, this is the logical next step. This may be politically inopportune, risking accusation either of giving up our allies and/or interests in Afghanistan or of selling out our dead.

In short, the "train and advise" strategy that is the current U.S. and NATO policy no longer appears feasible. The Commander in Chief, after serious deliberations with Congress, needs to posit a workable strategy the properly weights national interests and then plan to follow it through as a responsible party rather than turning to demagoguery. There are soldiers dying in Afghanistan executing an unclear policy and we all owe them more than that.

Douglas A. Ollivant, a Senior National Security Studies Fellow at New America Foundation, was the Senior Counterinsurgency Advisor to the Commander, Regional Command East, 2010-2011.

High level meeting focuses on future of special ops in Afghanistan
CNN By Barbara Starr March 7th, 2012
The head of U.S .Special Operations Command recently held a closed-door secret meeting at his Florida headquarters to discuss the future of special operations forces in Afghanistan after the U.S. formally withdraws at the end of 2014.

The Tampa meeting was called by Adm. William McRaven, commander of SOCOM. It involved some of the most senior officers in the military, as well as officials from U.S. intelligence agencies, two U.S. military officials told CNN.

Gen. John Allen, the top commander in Afghanistan; Gen. James Mattis, the commander of U.S. Central Command, as well as Gen. Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff were just some of the participants, the officials said.

The officials declined to be identified because what was discussed at the meeting is considered highly private by the participants prior to key decisions being made about the future role of special operations forces.

For McRaven, the essential question is the number of forces Special Operations need and the mission they will perform in Afghanistan as conventional forces added last year as part of a 'surge' of troops are withdrawn by the end of 2012, and all combat troops are removed by the end of 2014. The meeting was not aimed at coming to any decisions, but rather a discussion at the highest levels about how to proceed in the coming months, CNN was told.

The meeting included discussing various options for the command structure to oversee commando operations as well as the need to keep other conventional units in the country to assist them, according to the sources.

For example, even if only several thousand commando troops are kept in Afghanistan, they will still need other troops to provide helicopters, medical evacuation, support at bases, transportation and other key needs, the officials explained. Support forces could range up to three times the number of actual commandos on the ground.

Current military planning calls for special operations forces to remain after combat troops withdraw in 2014 with the primary mission of hunting down terrorists.

If they stay beyond 2014, a new agreement with the Afghan government would have to be reached.

The U.S. and President Hamid Karzai's administration are negotiating a status of forces agreement, but it's been held up over disagreements about handing over control of some prisons to the Afghan government and concerns about night raids, an official in Kabul said.

Officials have previously confirmed plans for a new high level command in Afghanistan to be headed by Maj. Gen. Tony Thomas, currently the deputy commander of the Joint Special Operations Command, which overseas all military counter terrorism operations. But sometime around 2013, if the bulk of the forces fall under SOCOM, then command of the entire war could fall under that element.

There are currently 89,000 US troops in Afghanistan, about 8% are special operations forces. McRaven Tuesday told the Senate Armed Services Committee the number is expected to increase even as the conventional forces are drawn down through 2014.

McRavens' forces not only conduct raids against terrorism targets, but also oversee operations to assist local villages with their security and establishing local Afghan police for those areas. So far, special operations forces have recruited and trained nearly 11,000 local police.

McRaven also told the committee that virtually all raids conducted at night now are led by Afghan forces so cultural sensitivities to foreign forces do not flare up especially in remote areas. The raids, McRaven told the committee, are vital.

"We think the night raids are essential for our task force to go after high value individuals. The high value individuals that we pursue during the course of a 24-hour period or days or weeks generally bed down at night," McRaven said on Tuesday. "They are much more targetable at night and in fact, I think if you look at it tactically, what you'll find is the Afghans are actually much safer if we target an individual at night because there aren't so many people out and about the little villages."

U.S. should have known better in Koran burning -Afghan rights chief
Reuters By Ian Simpson Thu Mar 8, 2012
WASHINGTON - The U.S. troops who burned copies of the Koran at a base in Afghanistan last month should have been aware it would enrage Muslims based on the reaction to previous instances of desecrating Islam's holy book, the head of Afghanistan's independent human rights body said on Wednesday.

Sima Samar, chairwoman of the Afghan Independent Human Rights Commission, said Americans previously have dealt with issues relating to the treatment of the Koran at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and had seen the furor created by the burning of the Koran at a Florida church last year.

U.S. officials have said that the Korans were confiscated from prisoners at Bagram air base and mistakenly discarded in an incinerator.

"On the issue of the Koran, it is a very unfortunate incident," Samar told a news conference in Washington.

"... Having the experience of the issue of Korans at Guantanamo and also the issue of Koran burning in Florida that led to riots and protests, I don't understand why they did it," Samar added.

Despite apologies from President Barack Obama and other U.S. officials, the burning of the Korans at Bagram ignited a wave of anti-Western fury across Afghanistan, including protests that killed 30 people.

Samar said the incident had given a "tool to conservative elements in society to promote their ideas."

A joint U.S.-Afghan investigation has concluded that five U.S. soldiers were involved in the incident, officials have said on condition of anonymity.

Samar, who was in Washington for a World Bank conference, said she was upbeat about human rights in Afghanistan following the scheduled departure of most foreign combat troops by the end of 2014.

She said the impoverished country had seen progress, including improvement in women's status, despite years of war and resistance from a strongly conservative society.

Yet at the same time, she expressed concern that Western strategy in the country was overly focused on security.

"What is lacking is the long-term strategy for Afghanistan, a multidimensional strategy for Afghanistan, not just through security forces," she said.

"If there is no rule of law I don't think we will have a proper society," she said.

(Editing by Warren Strobel and Will Dunham)

Avalanche buries village in Afghanistan; 50 dead
By DEB RIECHMANN | Associated Press – Wed, Mar 7, 2012
JARF, Afghanistan (AP) — Rescuers shoveled through deep snow Wednesday, searching for victims of an avalanche that destroyed a village of about 200 people in northeastern Afghanistan, authorities said. Fifty people have been confirmed dead, and most of the other residents of the devastated village are also believed to have perished.

Only seven people are known to have survived the avalanche, which buried dozens of homes Sunday night in Badakhshan province, said Sultanhamid, an employee of the Geneva-based Aga Khan Foundation who hiked to the site.

Four of the survivors were injured in the avalanche in Dasty village in the Darzab area, Sultanhamid said by telephone. The three others, two women and one child, were away from the village fetching water when tons of snow came crashing down, he said.

The 50 who have been confirmed dead included three who were found alive but died later because no medical personnel have reached the site, said Sultanhamid, who uses only one name, like many Afghans. The dead also included 18 children and two teachers who were in a mosque when the avalanche hit. The bodies that have been found were buried under at least six feet (two meters) of snow, he said.

Shams Ul Rahman, the deputy governor of Badakhshan province, expressed hope earlier in the day that some people might still be alive inside their homes.

But rescuers at the site feared there were no more survivors, said Sultanhamid, who walked to the avalanche site with 20 officials from Shakay district, where he is working on a government project. They started out at 4 a.m. on Wednesday, and the trek took nine hours.

The Defense Ministry sent two helicopters to help with the rescue effort Wednesday, but they were not able to land near the village because of bad weather, said Rahman. They landed in Shakay district and plan to try again Thursday, he said.

People from a nearby village were the first to reach the site. They were joined on Tuesday by rescue workers from Darwaz district, who walked for two days to reach the remote area.

About 100 rescuers equipped only with shovels were digging through mounds of snow, looking for anyone who might have survived, Rahman said.

The U.S. Embassy in Kabul expressed condolences to the families of those killed in the avalanche. USAID's office for disaster assistance was planning to send supplies, such as tents and plastic sheeting, through a partner in Tajikistan to help the people in the area.

Deadly avalanches are common in Afghanistan's mountainous north in winter. In February 2010, an avalanche killed more than 170 people at the 12,700-foot (3,800-meter) -high Salang Pass, which is the major route through the Hindu Kush mountains that connects the capital to the north.

At least three avalanches struck Darzab area on Sunday, said Abdul Marouf Rasekh, a provincial spokesman. The provincial governor was visiting the area when the avalanches started and was briefly stranded in a nearby village, Rasekh said.

On Tuesday the governor and his team made their way to Dushanbe, the Tajik capital, which is the closest city to the avalanche area, he said. Gov. Shah Waliullah Adeeb was expected back in Faizabad on Wednesday.

A rescue team has set out for the site from Tajikistan, said Badakhshan lawmaker Fawzia Kofi. Badakhshan has had a particularly deadly winter, with more than 200 people killed by avalanches, she said.
____

Associated Press writer Amir Shah contributed to this report from Kabul, Afghanistan.

Health gains in Afghanistan at risk, warns Red Cross
By Amie Ferris-Rotman
KABUL (Reuters) - Afghanistan risks giving up advances made in healthcare and humanitarian development as global attention and financial support wane ahead of the planned withdrawal of foreign combat troops in 2014, the Red Cross has warned.

Development aid is already dwindling in the impoverished and highly unstable country, putting at risk the hundreds of medical centres and schools that were set up following the ouster of the Taliban in 2001.

"With way less resources available (Afghanistan) will suddenly see much more hardship, and less organisations and government being able to cater to those in need," Reto Stocker, head of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) in Afghanistan, told Reuters in an interview.

This could create "a humanitarian situation that would be more dire" than today, Stocker said.

Civilian aid, the vast majority coming from the United States, peaked in 2010 in Afghanistan and Washington has said it will spend less on development as it withdraws troops.

"Afghans are very very very worried that international interest and support would wane, and they have a lot to lose. Because a lot has been achieved over the last ten years," said Stocker, who worked in Afghanistan in the late 1990s.

Recalling that time, when the Taliban were in power, Stocker said there were only a few running clinics per province providing primary healthcare, contrasting dramatically to the national health programme established last year.

Under that strategy, the World Bank, USAID and the European Commission work under the Ministry of Health, funding local non-governmental organisations who provide healthcare.

If resources such as these disappear, Afghans would "simply not understand and accept this. And I think rightly so," said Stocker.

U.S. economic and humanitarian aid to Afghanistan fell from $4.1 billion in 2010 to $2.5 billion in 2011. U.S. aid will be even lower this year as Washington shifts to sustainability projects, which they say require lower levels of funding.

Underscoring fears over Afghanistan's future, the United Nations has said ensuring sustainability is one of the key concerns to be voiced at major Afghanistan conferences in Chicago in May and Tokyo in July.

WORLD MUST STAY AFTER 2014
Stocker called on world powers to uphold their commitments to Afghanistan, long after the war winds down.

"There is at least a moral obligation for the international community to make sure that standards that have been promoted... would continue irrespective of the direct security presence here in Afghanistan".

Despite vast progress made since the Taliban were toppled just over a decade ago, large hurdles in health remain.

Stocker noted that Afghanistan is one of three countries along with Nigeria and Pakistan where polio is yet to be eradicated, and the healthcare programme needs to expand across the country of 30 million.

There is also a need for dialogue with all parties of the conflict, regardless of whatever state it had reached, so access to rural areas can be ensured.

Likewise, the issue of doctor intimidation by all sides of the war needs to cease, he said, saying that international humanitarian law entitles anyone who is injured to treatment, regardless of whom they stand for, including members of the insurgency.

The ICRC has been working with Afghanistan's national security forces, as well as U.S. special forces, to make sure such laws are respected, Stocker said.
(Editing by Michael Georgy and Sanjeev Miglani)

The Truth About Opium Brides
What Afghanistan's Heroin Industry Is Costing Women
Foreign Affairs By Fariba Nawa March 7, 2012
In the dusty village of Ghurian on Afghanistan's arid western border, Touraj* had made his life as a shepherd, but in the late 1990s, when a drought brought that livelihood to an end, he became a middleman in the country's lucrative drug business. Touraj's primary job was to hire couriers to carry drugs across the border into Iran. At first, the risk paid off -- he was able to build a two-story house and buy gold jewelry for his wife. For himself, he purchased a motorcycle and a Rado watch. Feeling flush, he even took a girl from the city on as a second wife.

But more recently, after a few deals went bad, Touraj fell into $10,000 worth of debt to smugglers from Helmand Province, the frontline of the NATO counterinsurgency campaign. He was jailed. To buy back his freedom and save the rest of his family, he would sell two of his daughters.

He bartered Darya, 12, and her 14-year-old sister, Saboora, as brides to opium smugglers. The girls were wed without their consent in Helmand -- Touraj and the smugglers performed the Islamic nikah ceremony, which pronounces a man and woman as husband and wife. As it turned out, Saboora escaped her newfound fate: Her husband never showed up to collect. He was presumably killed while on his way; Saboora remained with her family.

Darya's husband, however, did turn up to claim his new bride. Haji Tor was 34 years her elder and had another wife and eight children. He spoke Pashto; she only spoke Dari. For two years, Darya refused to go with him. He was lenient enough to let her stay with her family, although he routinely visited to try to convince her to come with him to Helmand. In 2003, I was in the village researching my book Opium Nation, and after I met Darya, she pleaded for me to somehow free her.

Over the last ten years, such stories have become increasingly common in Afghanistan, as bartering girls into marriage to pay off opium debts has become more prevalent. Farmers, middlemen in the drug trade, drug couriers, and even some drug lords themselves sell their daughters to more powerful traffickers and smugglers. The women are worth thousands of dollars, a sizeable sum in a country where the average monthly income for a civil servant is $70. Some women who are sold into the drug trade have not reached puberty; many are sold to men three to four decades their senior. In fact, the younger the wife, the more she raises the status of the man -- showing off his wealth and virility.

If a girl refuses to join the new husband, her entire family can become a target. Indeed, traffickers are infamous for their threats to collect their debts, whether it be kidnapping the girls, burning down family homes, or killing whole families in revenge.

The trade in opium brides has long existed in Afghanistan. But with the poppy trade now accounting for more than half of the country's economy, thousands more girls each year are likely becoming victims. Reliable statistics are hard to come by, but girls in villages bordering neighboring countries suffer the most. In one Kandahar village, I was told an entire block of homes included opium brides as second and third wives. Just about the only employment in these areas is in the narcotics industry -- for income, some families have uprooted their courtyard rose beds to plant poppies. Nearly 500,000 farming families, about 20 percent of Afghans, survive on poppy farms.

I reported Darya's case to the Afghan Independent Human Rights Commission, which informed me that it could do nothing to help one girl out of thousands. Under Afghan law, Sunni girls cannot be married until they are 16. There is more leeway for Shiites to marry younger. A year after I left, Darya's family convinced her to go with her husband. Just a few months later, however, Darya's mother asked me to travel south toward Helmand and find her daughter. Darya had threatened to burn herself to death -- an increasingly common form of protest among Afghan girls trying to escape their misery. From January to September 2011, a doctor in Herat Hospital reported 50 cases of self-inflicted burns.

It helps to understand how the drug trade works in Afghanistan today. In early to mid-summer, families harvest their crop. By scoring the milky juice from poppy pods and storing them overnight, they turn the poppies into opium. Two-thirds of that opium is then refined into heroin. Before 2001, the refining process, which involves cooking various chemicals with the opium and water, used to take place largely in Pakistan, Turkey, and other Gulf kingdoms.

In 2000, the Taliban outlawed production to raise opium prices and try to gain international recognition, but they still encouraged processing and trafficking. The Pakistani government raided the labs on its border, and lab workers moved across the mountain passes to Afghanistan. Heroin reaps ten times more profits than opium. Due to the international community's neglect of the drug trade after 2001, the accessibility of precursor chemicals, and the insurgency's reliance on the drug trade to fight its war, secret laboratories within Afghanistan are increasingly able to turn opium into heroin. Lower-grade, small-quantity heroin can be produced in home kitchens, while the finest China White, as it's known, is mass-produced inside elaborate labs nestled in mountain caves.

The Afghan heroin industry churns out 380 to 400 tons of heroin a year, an amount that exceeds global demand, according to the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime. Counternarcotic agents are often tipped off to lab locations, but usually by the time they arrive, chemists and lab workers have already escaped. Double agents in the Afghan government abound: They tell the lab workers first, then the agents, who respond by blowing up the labs with no drugs or people inside.

The opium and heroin industry is worth $65 billion per year worldwide. Afghanistan gets about $4 billion of the take, most of which flows into the pockets of the trafficking mafias, drug kingpins, and corrupt government officials who provide protection. Farmers, who usually turn to planting poppy out of desperation, receive only 20 percent of the profits and are the most vulnerable to debt. Under an antiquated loan system called salaam, local smugglers lend farmers the poppy seeds for their first crop. If the farmers' harvest is plentiful, they repay the loan and continue to plant. If the land does not yield the desired amount, or if opium prices dwindle, the farmer will have no way to repay the smuggler and falls deeper into debt. It is possible to get out of poppy farming only once the farmer has produced enough to sustain his livelihood and pay off the loan.

More than half of Afghanistan's heroin is transported through Iran, because it is the quickest route to Europe. Middlemen and couriers crossing borders are likely to end up in debt as well, as hauls are captured by authorities or lost in firefights en route. Smugglers, who are constantly competing for turf, battle one another with advanced weapons and fast-moving vehicles. The arms-for-drugs racket is prevalent -- instead of money, drug dealers may accept a machine gun on the black market for a kilo of heroin. Entering the narcotics industry is a high-risk business, and young girls -- and sometimes boys -- are its most innocent victims.

While in search of Darya, evidence abounded of a huge trade network of cash, drugs, and daughters between Afghanistan's west and south. The international community has spent billions of dollars trying to find a solution to Afghanistan's poppy problem. It has attempted to eradicate farms, find alternative livelihoods for farmers, and train elite counternarcotic forces. These efforts have yielded some success. Today, fewer provinces are cultivating poppy than in 2007, when a record 8,000 tons of opium were produced.

But a sustainable solution is elusive. Eradication of poorer farmers' crops only propels the sale of more girls. Fathers end up in debt when their harvest is destroyed. Farmers endure daily harassment by drug dealers if they are still in debt. Even after they settle their debts by selling their girls, they will continue to plant poppy for lack of a more profitable crop. Most small landowners divide their land in three plots, planting poppy in one and wheat for subsistence in another, while leaving one plot fallow to rejuvenate the soil.

It will take decades to wean Afghanistan off opium for good. In the meantime, the international community should do much more to protect young girls from becoming casualties. In a documentary film on opium brides released by "Frontline" in January, a young girl who had been sold to traffickers sought protection in a women's shelter. Today, there are about 14 women's shelters in Afghanistan serving abused Afghan women and girls. The number seems small, but it is still progress. The location of these shelters is secret. They give girls an option to save themselves from drug traffickers, even though their families will remain in danger. Investment in such projects would go a long way.

In addition, provincial governors and local leaders need to be held responsible for enforcing Afghanistan's laws on coerced and early marriage. More education and awareness about human rights among Afghans is vital. And any donor country invested in fighting the drug trade, including the United States and Britain, should partner with local organizations to help farmers repay debts and discourage the sale of girls.

Darya's fate is still unknown. The sale of girls like her -- the tens of thousands of them -- is not just the crime of underage or forced marriage. It is human trafficking, slavery, and a gross injustice that will continue to bring shame on those who choose to ignore it.

Matthew DuPee, a security and drug research specialist at the Naval Postgraduate School, contributed to this article.

* Some of the names have been changed to protect the lives of the individuals.

For peace in Afghanistan, women can't be 'secondary'
Afghanistan's religious authority declares women as 'secondary' and seeks restrictions on them. Karzai approves, perhaps to win over the Taliban in talks. But the outrage from Afghan women shows they no longer see themselves as willing victims.
By the Monitor's Editorial Board March 7, 2012 The Christian Science Monitor
For 10 years, ever since the end of Taliban rule in Afghanistan, the world has witnessed amazing progress for women in that country.

A quarter of lawmakers are female. Nearly half of students are girls. Women work alongside men in government. Their health has greatly improved. And women’s rights are enshrined in the Constitution.

But last week, Afghanistan’s council of Islamic scholars made a surprising declaration. It claimed that “women are secondary” to men.

The nation’s highest religious authority seeks a separation of the sexes in workplaces and in education. It would require women to travel in public only with a male relative. And what was even more startling was that President Hamid Karzai endorsed the declaration.

The apparent reason for this backward step is that Mr. Karzai is preparing for talks with the Taliban. He, like President Obama, sees the need for a negotiated settlement with the militant group before American combat troops leave Afghanistan in 2014. Perhaps Karzai believes that he can easily give up many women’s rights for the sake of winning a few concessions from the Taliban and bringing peace.

Such a move, however, hardly fits with one of the “red lines” set down by Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton for the outcome of talks with the Taliban. She insists the group accept all rights in the Constitution.

Ms. Clinton has also told Afghan women that “we will not abandon you.” And even when she was a senator in 2001 when US forces ousted the hard-line Islamist group, she said, “The proper treatment of women in post-Taliban Afghanistan can be a harbinger of a more peaceful, prosperous, and democratic future for that war-torn nation.”

The main purpose for the US invasion of Taliban-run Afghanistan was to prevent the possibility of that country again being used for an Al Qaeda-style terrorist attack. One way to ensure that, as Mr. Obama has said, is for the United States to leave behind a “stable” country. The US has already spent $70 billion building up Afghanistan’s government and infrastructure.

Would restricting the newfound freedoms of women really be stabilizing?

Not if one notes the reaction of leading Afghan women to the council’s declaration. The outcry of protest shows that many Afghan women no longer accept that their role in life is that of a victim and subordinate. They have realized the need to act as equal to men in public life.

Given that welcome response, both Obama and Clinton should be patient in coming weeks as Afghan women exercise their new confidence and demand that Karzai not accept the old-style paternalism.

The Afghan women have a base of progress from which to define and defend justice on their own terms without foreign meddling. The veil of victimhood has been lifted for them. The West should not so easily and quickly return to the old habits of “saving” Muslim women. Afghan women now know their rights don’t come from men.

Pakistani Taliban official raises questions about his demotion
From Shaan Khan, CNN March 8, 2012
Islamabad, Pakistan (CNN) -- A prominent figure in the Pakistani Taliban on Thursday questioned a decision by the group's leadership to remove him from his position of deputy commander over accusations he held unauthorized talks with the Pakistani government
The Pakistani Taliban's leaders demoted Maulvi Faqir Mohammed to the rank of regular fighter, Ihsanullah Ihsan, a spokesman for the organization said Monday.

The decision to relieve Faqir of his duties followed a written demand from the group's leader, Hakimullah Mehsud, Ihsan said. Faqir had been speaking to the Pakistani government without Mehsud's approval, Ihsan said.

But Faqir on Thursday contested that account. He said he had the approval of the organization to engage in peace talks with the Pakistani authorities.

The Pakistani Taliban, founded by Baitullah Mehsud in 2007, are a banned Islamist group active in Pakistan's tribal areas. They are said to have links with the Afghan Taliban and al Qaeda.

Faqir Mohammed said he had not been directly informed of the decision to demote him and would consult his colleagues about it before deciding what his future plans were.

He said he had no plans to leave the Pakistani Taliban and remained in favor of peace talks with the Pakistani authorities.

Since its inception, the Pakistani Taliban has carried out attacks on military forces and installations, as well as on civilian targets in the region.

Baitullah Mehsud was killed in a drone strike in 2009.

Marines to reduce by half in Afghanistan this year
By ROBERT BURNS | Associated Press
WASHINGTON (AP) — Marines will lead the U.S. troop drawdown in Afghanistan this year, reducing by about half their numbers in the key province of Helmand as Afghans move fully into the combat lead there, a top U.S. general said Wednesday.

Helmand, which has seen some of the fiercest American and allied fighting over the past two years, is transitioning to Afghan control faster than most other Taliban-contested areas of the country. Yet to be seen is whether the Afghans will manage to stand on their own as the Americans thin out.

As evidence that Helmand remains dangerous for allied forces, six British soldiers were killed Tuesday when their armored vehicle was hit by an explosion — the biggest loss for British forces there since 2006.

Maj. Gen. John Toolan, who has commanded the U.S. Marine contingent in Helmand for the past year, told The Associated Press in a phone interview from his Camp Leatherneck headquarters in southwestern Afghanistan that the number of Marines is likely to shrink by 8,000-10,000 from the current total of 17,500 by the end of September. That is the target date for the overall U.S. force in Afghanistan to drop to 68,000 from the current 90,000.

Toolan is completing his Afghan assignment on Monday, to be succeeded by Maj. Gen. Charles Gurganus. He asserted that the Taliban have been greatly weakened in what has long been considered their heartland.

"The insurgency is under significant pressure," he said. "A lot of its influence has been ushered to the periphery of the main population centers, and there is very strong momentum behind the transition" to Afghan control.

Toolan said the top commander of U.S. and allied forces in Afghanistan, Marine Gen. John Allen, has not yet made final decisions on the troop drawdown. His plan is expected to be final before President Barack Obama meets with other NATO heads of government at a summit meeting in Chicago in May.

The broad aim, established at NATO's November 2010 summit, is to have Afghan forces fully responsible for security by the end of 2014, with the residual U.S. and NATO military role yet to be fully defined. Between now and then, allied forces are shifting from combat into a "train-and-advise" mission.

Toolan said his Marines already have made that shift. They have formed 44 "security force assistance teams" of 12 to 18 people each that are working with individual Afghan army and police units to accelerate their move toward full independence, he said.

As the Marines' overall presence shrinks this year, the number of such teams will drop to about 30, he said. That will be enough to assist "a good portion" of — but not all — Afghan security units, he said.

As an illustration of how the Marines are preparing to shrink their role this year, Toolan said they will have reduced the number of their bases in Helmand to 75 by this spring, from 250 last October. By September or October they will be down to 30 bases, he said. Some are being closed; others are being transferred to Afghan forces for their use.

Stephen Biddle, a defense analyst at the Council on Foreign Relations and an occasional visitor to Afghanistan, said he sees reason to worry that U.S. forces will be handing off security responsibility to Afghans this year even as the U.S. troop numbers shrink. The Taliban are likely to see this transition as an opportune time to launch "another wave of counterattacks" that will test the Afghans, Biddle said.

"Lots of people view transition to Afghan security lead as an experiment, and there is a fair amount of uncertainty in a variety of corners about how well or badly it's going to go," he said. "I think it's very, very likely that the Taliban will try to find out."

Toolan said the strategy for Helmand this spring and summer will be focused on limiting the Taliban's capacity for regaining the ground they lost over the past two years by targeting the drug trade that finances them.

By destroying caches of opium and other drug materials, "we will reduce the threat that the insurgents will be able to present after this harvest season, which will support the drawdown of (U.S. and allied) forces that would be leaving here," he said.

Death toll of British soldiers in Afghanistan passes 400
British mission in Afghanistan will continue despite the loss of six soldiers who were caught in a huge explosion
Guardian.co.uk By Steven Morris, Richard Norton-Taylor and Nick Hopkins Wednesday 7 March 2012
The British mission in Afghanistan will continue despite the loss of six soldiers who were caught in a huge explosion that destroyed their armoured vehicle, defence officials have said.

If, as expected, the men are confirmed to have been killed in the blast, it will take the death toll of British personnel killed in Afghanistan to 404. It will also represent the biggest single loss of UK life in a single incident in Afghanistan since 2006, when an ageing RAF Nimrod crashed in the country shortly after mid-air refuelling, with the loss of all 14 people aboard.

Passing the symbolic milestone of 400 deaths would refocus attention on the reason for the presence of British troops in Afghanistan, the timetable for their removal and the capability of the Afghan army and police force to keep the country secure once coalition troops have left.

Defence officials said the deaths would have no effect on strategy or tactics deployed by British troops. If anything, it would encourage military commanders to stay the course, they said. However, officials indicated ministers were well aware of war weariness among the public.

An investigation is under way to find out what caused the explosion that wrecked the Warrior vehicle as it patrolled the border of Helmand and Kandahar in southern Afghanistan on Tuesday. The force of the blast led to early speculation that the vehicle was hit by an old mine, possibly from the Soviet era, but an initial examination of the Warrior suggested it was probably a large Taliban roadside bomb.

The bodies of the soldiers were still being extracted from the wreckage last night in an operation hampered by bad weather, defence officials said. The soldiers are expected to be named on Thursday.

David Cameron described the loss of the men – who were described by the Ministry of Defence as missing, believed killed – as a "desperately sad day for our country". He said it was a "reminder of the huge price that we are paying for the work we are doing in Afghanistan and the sacrifice that our troops have made and continue to make".

But the prime minister pointed out that the men were carrying out important work to prevent Afghanistan becoming a haven for al-Qaida to plan attacks on the UK or its allies.

Five of the soldiers presumed dead were from the 3rd Battalion the Yorkshire Regiment and one from the 1st Battalion the Duke of Lancaster's Regiment.

At Battlesbury barracks in Warminster, Wiltshire, where the 3rd Battalion the Yorkshire Regiment is based, the news was broken to families and friends of the missing men.

Service personnel past and present, army families and townsfolk arrived at the gates to lay flowers and express their sadness.

Stacey McLaughlin, 21, whose husband, John, is to fly to Afghanistan in April laid flowers with their daughter, three-year-old Olivia-Mai. Speaking through tears, she said: "They are true heroes. This loss will be felt badly by all the soldiers out there and the families back home. I just hope John comes back home safely when he goes out there."

Hayley Dymek, 22, whose husband, Private Darren Dymek, 24, is in Afghanistan with the Yorkshire regiment, said: "I panicked this morning when I first heard that six soldiers had been killed. But then I found out that the families had been informed, so I knew Darren was safe. This really brings home the dangers of what they are doing out there."

Downing Street said last month that British troops would end their lead combat role in Afghanistan by the end of next year. This will lead to Afghan security forces being in sole charge of combat operations against insurgents by the end of 2014, when most of Britain's 9,500-strong contingent will have returned home. The timeframe may well be shortened at the Nato summit in Chicago in May.

However, Nato commanders in Afghanistan have told Downing Street and the White House that they want to keep levels of International Security Assistance Force (Isaf) as high as possible between now and the end of the "fighting season" next year – September 2013.

They insist this is the best way of ensuring the country does not descend into chaos before the final withdrawal of combat troops. If Cameron agreed to Nato's proposal, about 9,000 UK troops would remain in Helmand until autumn next year.

They would be under more pressure too. Sixteen thousand US Marines are withdrawing from Helmand within months, and although Philip Hammond, the defence secretary, has said Britain would not "backfill", Afghan forces are unlikely to be able to shoulder the burden of security alone.

Privately, commanders also warn the Isaf coalition could disintegrate if either country signals an early exit. "That is the biggest danger for Afghanista," said one. "A hasty and chaotic exit must be avoided." But political pressure is mounting on both sides of the Atlantic to accelerate the drawdown.

The loss of the British soldiers this week is bound to raise questions about their resources. Cameron accepted there was a need to make sure personnel had all the equipment they needed to keep them "as safe as possible".

But the MoD was quick to quash suggestions that the vulnerability of the Warrior could be blamed for the deaths. Warrior had been upgraded throughout its service in Iraq and Afghanistan to try to combat the threat from roadside bombs and mines. A £1bn upgrade of the vehicle was announced at the end of last year to extend the life of the vehicle to 2040 and beyond but the MoD stressed this was not in response to "any identified deficiencies" in its armour.

A spokesman said: "Warrior provides some of the highest levels of protection available but sadly no armoured vehicle can provide absolute protection from the very largest explosions."

The chief of the defence staff, General Sir David Richards, said the men were doing "a dangerous but important job", adding: "Increasingly the Afghans themselves are taking the lead in providing security across Helmand. This transition is allowing Afghans to gain the confidence to reject the Taliban and live normal lives."

Some experts remain unconvinced. Gareth Price, senior research fellow on the Asia programme at Chatham House, suggested the explosion could have been designed to send a message to the Afghan people that the national army could not guarantee their safety.

Anthony Glees, director of the centre for security and intelligence studies at the University of Buckingham, said: "The fact that these people were killed by an IED (improvised explosive device) might suggest not just that this is a very dangerous place but that the Afghans aren't particularly good at delivering security."

Pakistan charges bin Laden's wives
By MUNIR AHMED | Associated Press
ISLAMABAD, Pakistan (AP) — Pakistan has charged Osama bin Laden's three widows with illegally entering and living in the country, the interior minister said Thursday.

The three women have been in Pakistani detention since May last year, when U.S. commandos raided the house where they, bin Laden and several of their children were staying. The commandos shot and killed bin Laden, and then buried his body at sea.

Rehman said the three had been charged in court, but he did not say when. It was unclear if they had a lawyer.

He said their children were free to leave Pakistan, but could stay with their mothers for the duration of the trial.

A Pakistani legal expert contacted about the case, Hashmat Habib, said the maximum punishment the women could receive was five years in jail. One of their relatives has reportedly visited Pakistan recently to urge authorities to let them leave the country. The decision to charge them could be a formal part of that process.

One of the women is known to be from Yemen, another from Saudi Arabia. The nationality of the third woman is unclear.

Bin Laden, the subject of a massive international manhunt, had been living in the Pakistani army town of Abbottabad for around five years before the CIA traced his whereabouts. The unilateral American raid humiliated and angered the Pakistani army, which has also faced uncomfortable questions over why it wasn't aware of bin Laden's presence.

A government commission is investigating the affair, but few expect it to come up with many answers. Its members have interviewed the wives. Last month, the government destroyed the three-story compound the bin Laden clan was living in, removing a concrete reminder of the country's association with the world's most wanted man.


www.afghanistannewscenter.com