Tweet
Afghanistan working to stop divisive NATO night raids: Karzai
By Mirwais Harooni | Reuters
KABUL (Reuters) - Afghan President Hamid Karzai said on Thursday his government was pressing to end divisive NATO night raids in negotiations with the United States on a long-term strategic pact, saying some past operations had violated Afghan sovereignty.
The increasingly assertive Afghan leader's admonition came as U.S. and Afghan officials try to agree on a framework for some American troops and advisers to stay in the country beyond a 2014 deadline for most NATO combat forces to withdraw.
Both countries recently agreed to transfer a U.S.-run prison to Afghan authority. The final sticking point is Western military raids on Afghan homes at night, which both infuriate Afghans and damage Karzai's popularity.
"The fight against terrorism in our country has led to some activities which are against our national sovereignty. We are about to solve it entirely," Karzai told a graduation ceremony of Afghan army cadets in the capital, Kabul.
"The issue of prisons, imprisonment and keeping prisoners is over. We are working now to halt night raids in Afghan houses. The security of Afghanistan must be provided by the sons of Afghanistan, according to the constitution," he said.
Afghanistan's constitution requires a judge to approve searches by security forces.
Karzai said his government would "take a magnifying glass" to the negotiations with the United States to put an end to mounting civilian casualties which he said last week had his government at "the end of the rope" with its main backer.
Afghan officials had presented the Americans with a list of demands in the negotiations and U.S. officials had their own conditions, understood to include the ability to carry out unilateral operations against al Qaeda militants, he said.
"We assure all Afghanistan's security forces - the army, national police and the national directorate of security - that we will lay the foundation for the country's future," he said. "We will take a magnifying glass and check everything carefully, and then we will sign the pact."
Afghanistan, Karzai said, would need about $4.1 billion a year from the United States and other international backers to fund the 350,000-strong security forces in the decade beyond 2014, with the Afghan government to supply the rest.
The police and army are eventually expected to shrink back to about 230,000 after a "surge" timed to coincide with the NATO drawdown. Karzai also called for the supply of weapons, aircraft and radar.
The United States said on Wednesday it seemed to be on track to sign the partnership agreement with Afghanistan, which will chart their ties, before or during a late May summit.
TIES STRAINED
This week, Karzai appeared to have won a major concession from Washington following a deadly shooting spree by a U.S. soldier, with the Obama administration considering curbs on night raids including judicial veto.
The U.S. government was discussing options with the Afghans including a warrant-based approach or possibly allowing Afghan judges to review raids before they took place, a U.S. official said on Monday.
Nearly 11 years after the Taliban government was toppled, the United States and its allies face a resilient insurgency, a weak Afghan government, and an uncertain future for Western support after the end of 2014 pullout.
At a summit in Chicago in late May, NATO nations are expected to outline their path out of the war and agree on backing for Afghan security forces.
U.S.-Afghan relations have been badly strained by the March 11 incident in which a U.S. soldier is suspected of killing 16 Afghan civilians, and by the burning of copies of the Koran at NATO's main base in the country last month.
General John Allen, who commands U.S. and NATO forces in Afghanistan, said on Tuesday he would present recommendations for Obama on troop levels in 2013 and beyond during the last three months of this year.
A decision late in the year would allow U.S. commanders to size up the strength of the Taliban after the traditional summer fighting season and allow more time to see whether nascent peace talks take hold.
In a blow to NATO hopes of a negotiated end to the war, the Afghan Taliban said last week that they were suspending talks with the United States.
The U.S. government, however, has said it remained committed to political reconciliation involving talks with the Taliban but progress would require agreement between the Afghan government and the insurgents.
(Writing by Jack Kimball; Editing by Rob Taylor and Robert Birsel)
Top commander in Afghanistan says he prefers robust force of 68,000 in 2013
ASSOCIATED PRESS March 22, 2012
WASHINGTON — The top commander in Afghanistan said Thursday he prefers a robust U.S. combat force of 68,000 in 2013, signaling a potential halt in the drawdown and complicating any effort by President Barack Obama to accelerate the timetable after more than a decade of war.
"My opinion is that we will need significant combat power in 2013," Marine Gen. John Allen told the Senate Armed Services Committee.
Pressed by the panel's top Republican, John McCain, on whether a force of 68,000 would be sufficient, Allen said, "Sixty-eight thousand is a good going-in number, but I owe the president some analysis on that."
Allen's comments were his most explicit in two days of testimony on Capitol Hill and represent a marker for the military. Obama faces increasing political and public pressure to accelerate the timetable after more than 10 years of fighting and recent incidents that dealt a major setback to the fragile U.S.-Afghanistan relationship. Afghan outrage over the burnings of Qurans and a shooting spree that left 17 Afghan civilians dead have been blamed on Americans.
Allen said the United States is on track to reduce the 23,000-member surge force by the end of September, but he said he won't make his recommendation on the pace of further reductions until the last three months of the year — an announcement likely to come after Election Day.
He defended that approach under questioning from Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin, D-Mich., who is pressing for the United States to stick to its timetable for Afghan forces to assume the responsibility for security.
"I think it's exactly the best way ultimately to identify the state of the insurgency, the state of the full ISAF force, to include the U.S. force, but also to evaluate the operational requirements for '13 in order to make a comprehensive recommendation," Allen told the committee.
The current plan calls for the U.S. to withdraw its surge force of 23,000 American troops by the end of September, with a complete drawdown by December 2014. Currently the United States has 90,000 troops in the region.
Allen's appearance was his second on Capitol Hill this week. He also faced repeated questions about a potential reduction of Afghan security forces from the goal of 352,000 to 240,000 by 2017, a notion that unnerved several lawmakers.
"Given the fact that transition to a strong Afghan security force is the key to success of this mission, why would it be -- why does it make sense to talk about reducing the size of the Afghan army by a third?" Levin asked.
Allen said that was a target number for 2017 and they were weighing what number would be optimal.
"There are a number of different options, and we're continuing to evaluate what those options might be, all the way from the current force, the 352,000 force, which will continue to exist for several years once we have fielded it, down to a force that was smaller than 230,000, which probably doesn't have the right capabilities, the right combination of capabilities," Allen said.
U.S. and Afghan officials are working separately to resolve a dispute over military raids on Afghan homes that had become a bitter sticking point. Under a draft agreement expected to be signed this week, Afghan military units would take a larger role in planning and carrying out the raids, with the United States moving into a supporting role. An Afghan judge or panel would have a say, if not full veto, over operations the Afghans complain cause too many civilian deaths.
U.S. officials described elements of the security agreement on condition of anonymity because it is not final. Negotiators were expected to finish it Thursday in Kabul. Control over what Afghan call "night raids" was the last issue holding up a larger agreement governing U.S.-Afghan relations after most foreign forces leave in 2014.
That agreement is expected to be a centerpiece of a NATO summit the United States will host in May. Obama and Karzai could sign the document then, or perhaps earlier if they arrange a separate meeting.
One element in the ongoing conflict are on-again, off-again negotiations between the United States and the Taliban. The Taliban is seeking the release of five prisoners held at the U.S. military prison in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. The Associated Press has reported that the U.S. agreed in principle to transfer the prisoners to custody in Qatar, and U.S. officials have publicly acknowledged the idea is in play. .
Jim Miller, the acting undersecretary of defense for policy, told the committee that no decision has been made on the transfer of the prisoners, a step that would require notification of Congress.
Sustaining success in Afghanistan
The Washington Post By John McCain, Joseph I. Lieberman and Lindsey Graham Opinions Thursday, March 22, 2012
John McCain (R-Ariz.), Joseph I. Lieberman (I-Conn.) and Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) are members of the Senate Armed Services Committee.
A series of tragic events in Afghanistan has increased the desire of a war-weary public to end our mission there. As heart-wrenching as these events have been, they do not change the vital U.S. national security interests at stake in Afghanistan, nor do they mean that the war is lost. It is not. There is still a realistic path to success if the right decisions are made in the coming months.
The painful lesson we learned on Sept. 11, 2001, remains true today: What happens in Afghanistan directly affects our safety here at home. We abandoned Afghanistan in the 1990s, and the result was a fanatical regime that allowed its territory to become a base for global terror attacks, while inflicting medieval tyranny on the Afghan people, especially women. If we quit Afghanistan again, and abandon the millions of Afghans who have risked everything to be our allies in the hopes of succeeding together, the consequences will be disastrous for both our peoples.
It does not have to be this way. Significant military progress has been made in Afghanistan — progress that we have personally witnessed over repeated visits. Four years ago, southern Afghanistan was overrun by the Taliban, and our coalition lacked the resources and the strategy necessary to break their momentum. Today, that situation has been reversed, thanks to the president’s surge of forces, the leadership of talented military commanders, and the courage and perseverance of our troops.
Similarly, our effort to build the Afghan National Security Forces — which was under-resourced and disorganized four years ago — has been overhauled. Growing numbers of Afghan units are increasingly capable of leading the fight. The examples of the few Afghan soldiers who despicably turned their weapons on Americans should not obscure the fact that hundreds of thousands of Afghans fight every day as our faithful allies in a common battle against al-Qaeda and the Taliban and that these Afghan patriots are wounded and killed in far greater numbers than our forces. Afghans bear an overwhelming and increasing share of this war. This should give us hope that our common goal, an Afghanistan that can secure and govern itself, remains achievable over time.
To sustain this fragile progress, it is critical that President Obama resist the shortsighted calls for additional troop reductions, which would guarantee failure. Our forces are slated to draw down to 68,000 by September — a faster pace than our military commanders recommended, which has significantly increased the risks for our mission. At a minimum, there should be a pause after September to assess the impact of the drawdown. It would be much better to maintain the 68,000 forces through next year’s fighting season, possibly longer.
At the strategic level, our effort continues to be undermined by the perception that the United States will again abandon Afghanistan. This suspicion makes everything our troops are trying to achieve significantly harder. It creates perverse incentives for the Taliban to keep fighting, for the Pakistani army to hedge its bets by providing support to the Taliban, and for our Afghan allies to make counterproductive decisions based on fears of a post-American future.
The best way to reverse this dynamic is by realizing the president’s stated goal of a long-term political, economic and military relationship with Afghanistan. The mechanism for doing so is the Strategic Partnership Agreement, which the U.S. and Afghan governments have painstakingly negotiated for two years.
Two weeks ago, one of the two major obstacles was resolved when our governments agreed on a timetable for handing over detention operations. We are optimistic that a similar resolution can be found soon regarding the gradual transfer of the lead for “night raids” to Afghan forces. Already, Afghans increasingly lead these operations. The success rate is overwhelming, and in most cases no shots are fired.
With these two issues resolved, we could finally conclude the Strategic Partnership Agreement. This could provide a framework for an enduring U.S. military commitment to Afghanistan beyond 2014, including joint operating facilities and long-term support for the 350,000-plus Afghan National Security Forces necessary to secure the country. It would also encourage our allies to make similar long-term commitments.
A key part of this post-2014 U.S. military commitment should be a counterterrorism force that can continue working with our Afghan partners against al-Qaeda and the Taliban, ensuring that these groups can no longer pose a military threat to Afghanistan, our allies and us. This force could be a fraction of our current military presence in Afghanistan and still be serious and robust, consisting of U.S. air power, intelligence support for the Afghans and Special Operations Forces. It would, in effect, be an insurance policy against a terrorist takeover of Afghanistan, the place where the Sept. 11 attacks were planned.
Making these commitments will set the conditions under which our forces can responsibly draw down and hand the lead to the Afghans. The strategic partnership will make clear to the Taliban that it cannot wait us out and win on the battlefield, thus fostering real reconciliation on terms favorable to the Afghan government and to us. It will demonstrate to Pakistani intelligence that continued support for the Taliban, on the assumption its members will be needed as proxies once we leave, will only leave Islamabad more isolated and less secure. And it will give Afghan leaders the reassurance to fight corruption and govern better, knowing that they have a long-term alternative to Pakistani generals, Iranian operatives, foreign terrorists and Afghan warlords. In short, this agreement could change the narrative in Afghanistan and the region from one of imminent international abandonment to enduring international commitment.
These decisions rest, more than anyone else, with President Obama. We have disagreed with some of his choices regarding the war in Afghanistan. But after all our nation has sacrificed in Afghanistan, we stand ready to do everything in our power to secure the same bipartisan support for this war in its twilight hours as when it began more than a decade ago.
Afghan officials likely to press for veto power over night raids in formal talks
The Washington Post By Karen DeYoung Thursday, March 22, 2012
In formal negotiations set to begin Thursday, Afghan officials are expected to press their U.S. counterparts for veto power over controversial night raids on Afghan homes as well as warrants signed by a judge before the operations are carried out.
Despite substantive differences, officials on both sides expressed confidence that they are heading toward an understanding on the raids that will allow them to complete within two months a broader accord governing the long-term military relationship between the countries.
The officials spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss the sensitive talks.
Afghan President Hamid Karzai has long insisted on an end to the raids, which U.S. commanders consider one of their most effective tools against Taliban insurgents. Karzai repeated his demand in angry remarks last week after a March 11 shooting rampage, allegedly carried out by a U.S. soldier, that left 16 Afghan civilians dead.
“We saw his comments, but we’ve been reassured . . . since then,” a senior U.S. defense official said of Karzai. This official and others attributed the easing of tensions to a Friday telephone call and other recent conversations between Karzai and President Obama.
Both sides see the shooting and its aftermath as a watershed that has gotten them to move forward on the night-raid negotiations and other issues, although for different reasons.
From Afghanistan’s perspective, the incident gave the Americans a glimpse of the kinds of disasters that were increasingly likely if the two sides remained at loggerheads.
U.S. officials view it as evidence that the relationship is sturdy enough not to collapse even under the most trying circumstances. Although the administration does not characterize its evolving positions as concessions, its rhetoric on the night raids has softened.
The White House said this week that requiring judicial warrants was a “reasonable” Afghan expectation.
Whether U.S. negotiators in Kabul will determine that Afghan veto power over the raids is similarly reasonable is uncertain. Officials declined to discuss what one of them described as Afghanistan’s opening position in the talks.
Karzai has deemed the more than 2,000 night operations conducted by U.S. Special Operations forces last year as a violation of Afghan sovereignty and culture — and a cause of civilian casualties. U.S. commanders have said that all the raids are conducted in partnership with Afghan forces as part of the gradual transition to Afghan security control throughout the country, due to be completed next year.
In congressional testimony this month, Adm. William H. McRaven, head of the Special Operations Command, said, “Afghan special forces are in the lead on all of our night operations . . . surrounding a particular compound, trying to call out the specific individual — and the first forces through the door.”
Afghan officials say that they are “in the lead” in about 60 percent of the raids but that U.S. troops are effectively in control of all of them because they provide the intelligence on which targets are selected and which operations are planned, often without giving that information to Afghan partners in advance.
U.S. forces also provide the logistics, including specialized helicopters, that make the raids possible.
Without these capabilities, the Afghans say, the only way they can be in charge of the operations, with U.S. forces in a supporting role, is with full information that allows them to approve, or veto, the raids in advance.
Karzai also called for U.S. withdrawal from Afghan towns and villages where small Special Operations units are organizing local protection forces.
But in subsequent explanations, Afghan officials have said that they see this pullback as part of the ongoing transition process, in which U.S. troops would withdraw from villages as Afghan units grow capable of standing on their own.
Although opinion polls show that a majority of Americans now favor an early withdrawal from Afghanistan, the Afghans say they do not want to speed the overall departure of foreign troops.
Instead, they say, they want to accelerate the transition process so they can test their security wings while foreign troops remain to back them up.
This month, U.S. and Afghan officials signed a memorandum of understanding on a process to transfer detainees and American-run prisons to Afghanistan’s control. A similar agreement on night raids would remove the remaining stumbling block to the separate, long-term strategic partnership agreement.
Obama has said that he hopes the long-term accord can be signed before a NATO summit scheduled for May in Chicago. That agreement will set the terms for a U.S. military presence in Afghanistan beyond NATO’s planned withdrawal of all international combat troops by the end of 2014.
Pentagon officials are planning for a follow-on force, numbering 5,000 to 30,000 troops, including training, support and counterterrorism units that would be based inside military posts flying Afghan flags.
The agreement, assuming it is ready by mid-May, is unlikely to contain any troop numbers, officials said. Instead, it will commit the two sides to negotiating the details of a 10-year, renewable security arrangement before the December 2014 NATO deadline.
Avalanche claims 18 lives in NE. Afghan province
FAIZABAD, Afghanistan, March 22 (Xinhua) -- Eighteen people lost their lives as an avalanche struck a village in Wakhan district of Badakhshan province, 315 km northeast of capital city Kabul Wednesday night, a local official said Thursday.
"The tragic incident happened in Ark village of Wakhan district late Wednesday night during which several houses were smashed and 18 people including women and children were killed," Director of the Counter-Natural Disaster Department in Badakhshan province Sanaullah Amiri told Xinhua.
However, local people said 21 people have lost their lives in the natural tragic incident.
Meantime, Syed Piroz, the governor of Wakhan district when approached confirmed the incident, but he did not give the figure, saying a rescue operation is going on.
The mountainous Badakhsan province has received heavy snowfalls over the past two months. More than 100 people, according to local officials, have lost their lives in avalanches and freezing weather in the far-flanged mountainous villages of Badakhshan over the past two months.
NATO soldier dies in Afghanistan
KABUL, March 22 (Xinhua) -- A soldier with the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force died in Afghanistan on Thursday, a press release of the alliance issued here said.
"An International Security Assistance Force service member died as a result of a non-battle related injury in eastern Afghanistan today," the press release confirmed without giving details.
This is the second NATO soldier has lost life in Afghanistan over the past two days.
Another NATO soldier lost his life in a roadside bombing in the southern Afghan region on Wednesday.
More than 80 soldiers with the NATO-led troops have been killed in Afghanistan since the beginning of this year.
British Watchdog Group Urges Scrutiny On Aid To Afghanistan
March 22, 2012 Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty
Britain's Independent Commission for Aid Impact is calling on the British government to tighten oversight of its aid program for Afghanistan.
The watchdog organization said there were insufficient monitoring systems in place to prevent "the loss or diversion of aid monies away from the intended beneficiaries as a result of theft, fraud or corruption."
The commission said Britain's Department for International Development that handles distribution of aid to Afghanistan needs to strengthen its grip and reduce risk by deploying people with more financial and procurement skills.
The British government created the Independent Commission for Aid Impact in 2011 to ensure foreign aid money is spent as intended.
Based on Reuters reporting
Clinton Opposes Any Afghan Peace That Shortchanges Women
Bloomberg By Indira A.R. Lakshmanan Mar 22, 2012
Any peace deal in Afghanistan that excludes women or tries to roll back their rights is doomed to fail, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said.
Speaking at an event yesterday in Washington marking the 10th anniversary of the U.S.-Afghan Women’s Council, Clinton pledged the U.S. will defend the advances Afghan women have made since the fall of the Taliban. Any peace deal that may emerge from exploratory talks with insurgents must abide by the Afghan constitution, which enshrines rights for women, she said.
“We will not waver on this point,” Clinton assured guests at the event, including Afghan officials and U.S. business leaders who have supported programs for Afghan women. A peace agreement “excluding more than half the population is no peace at all. It’s a figment that will not last,” she said to applause.
The Obama administration is seeking negotiations between the Afghan government and the Taliban to help bring an end to a military conflict that began in October 2001. Exploratory talks have gone slowly, stymied most recently by disagreements over a potential U.S. transfer of Taliban detainees from the military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
Clinton met yesterday with visiting Afghan Foreign Minister Zalmai Rassoul, whose government has insisted on the same “red lines” for reconciliation talks with the Taliban as the Obama administration: insurgents must renounce violence, cut ties with al-Qaeda and abide by the Afghan constitution.
Still, Afghan women activists and some in the U.S. government have expressed concern that the Afghan government, in its desire to take insurgents off the battlefield and end the war, might bend to Taliban demands to curtail women’s advances. Under the Taliban in the 1990s, Afghan women were largely prevented from attending school, holding jobs, participating in government or leaving home without male escorts. Women’s Worries
“Many are worried that in whatever future negotiations that might occur, women -- their rights, their roles, their concerns -- will be sacrificed and the old days will return,” Clinton said.
“The United States cannot and will not let that happen,” she said. “Let there be no doubt that even as the U.S. role in Afghanistan changes during the next few years of transition,” with the drawdown of U.S. combat troops, “it’s absolutely critical we protect” women’s gains and expand on them, said Clinton, a longtime advocate of women’s rights. “We will continue to stand with and work closely with Afghan women.”
Clinton cited a list of achievements for women since the fall of the Taliban, from most basic health and social indicators to accomplishments in politics and industry. Female Education
The average life expectancy for Afghan women in 2001 was 44; now it is 62, Clinton said. Back then, girls were prohibited from attending government schools; now, almost 3 million do, representing a third of primary and secondary school students, she said. She said 100,000 have graduated from high school, and 15,000 enrolled in universities in the last decade.
Rassoul cited the advances of women in government. There were no female politicians under the Taliban; now they make up about 28 percent of parliament and serve on provincial councils nationwide. One in four government workers are women, as were 40 percent of the voters in the last election, Rassoul said. On the Afghan High Peace Council, nine of the 70 members are women, according to the peace council.
Vartan Gregorian, president of the Carnegie Corporation of New York, joined Clinton at the State Department to praise those advances and announced the foundation was pledging $1 million in grants for higher education for women at Afghan universities. Business Opportunities
Former First Lady Laura Bush, who was instrumental in establishing the U.S-Afghan Women’s Council a decade ago, highlighted the accomplishments of women in commerce. Under the Taliban, women were barred from owning or operating businesses. Today, she said, there are hundreds of women-owned businesses, from artisan workshops to financial services and engineering firms. A third of the workforce is made up of women, Bush said.
Melanne Verveer, ambassador-at-large for global women’s issues, said yesterday that several companies have invested in training and education for Afghan women, including Goldman Sachs Group Inc. (GS), automaker Daimler AG (DAI) and Kate Spade New York, a designer fashion company.
“There are still problems” including violence against women, Verveer said in an interview. “The biggest fear today is will there be rollback and will they have a seat at the table” for peace talks, she said. She praised the Afghan government for pledging not to allow that to happen.
“This isn’t a favor to women,” she said. “If women are silenced, that potential for peace will be stymied.”
To contact the reporter on this story: Indira A.R. Lakshmanan in Washington at ilakshmanan@bloomberg.net
To contact the editor responsible for this story: John Walcott at jwalcott9@bloomberg.net
Karzai repeats call for halting night raid operations
KABUL, March 22 (Xinhua) -- Afghanistan President Hamid Karzai once again repeated his call for halting night raid operations by NATO-led forces in the militancy-plagued country on Wednesday.
"We are working to stop the night raid operations," President Karzai said in his speech at a graduation ceremony in the National Military Academy here in Kabul.
He made this remarks just after couple of weeks that the United States agreed to hand over the control of Bagram detention center to Afghan administration.
Bagram detention center, 50 km north of Afghan capital Kabul where hundreds of suspected Taliban and al-Qaida operatives have been held, is located in Bagram airbase, the main U.S. military center in Afghanistan.
After signing agreement with the United States which occurred two weeks ago in Kabul, no foreigners would have detention center in Afghanistan, President Karzai said, adding the night raid operations would also be halted and Afghans would take over the whole security of their country.
Running detention center by U.S. military in Afghanistan and conducting night raids by foreign troops against suspected Taliban insurgents in villages have been opposed by Afghan government.
Afghan government believes that running prison by U.S. troops is a violation of Afghan national sovereignty and night raid operations often harm the civilians.
In his address, President Karzai said that Afghanistan would sign the strategic partnership with the United States and progress has been made in this regard.
However, he noted his government would move very cautiously in inking the proposed strategic pact to safeguard the national interests and sovereignty of Afghanistan.
The United States and the allied nations contributing troops in Afghanistan have agreed to support Afghan national security forces with 4.1 billion U.S. dollars for 10 years, after 2014 when the security transition to Afghan forces completes and NATO-led forces leave the country.
President Karzai in his address to the newly graduated officers also emphasized for self-reliance, urging them to serve the war- torn nation until it stands on its feet.
Afghanistan Expects 'Swift, Transparent' Probe into Kandahar Killings
VOA News March 21, 2012 Scott Stearns | The State Department
Afghan officials said the United States needs a swift, transparent investigation into the burning of Korans and the killing of civilians, in order to restore public confidence in the NATO-led security force there. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton met Wednesday with Afghan Foreign Minister Zalmai Rassoul.
Secretary Clinton said it has been a difficult period in U.S.-Afghan relations following the burning of Korans at a U.S. air base and the suspected killing of 16 civilians by U.S. Staff Sergeant Robert Bales near Kandahar.
“This has been very personally painful to me and to the president. It does not represent who the United States is, who the American people are, and we appreciate the understanding and response of the Afghan government and the Afghan people.”
Foreign Minister Rassoul said Afghans expect a credible inquiry into the violence as a way to improve relations between Kabul and Washington.
“We are awaiting the swift and transparent investigation of this case and the punishment of anyone involved," Rassoul said. "That will greatly reinforce the Afghan people's confidence in the existing strong friendship and partnership with the United States.”
Clinton and Rassoul discussed the state of ongoing negotiations on a strategic partnership agreement between the United States and Afghanistan, including the issue of night raids by U.S. troops.
The Afghan foreign minister said he is confident that an agreement can be concluded despite recent setbacks.
“The great shared sacrifices in blood and treasure that the American and Afghan people have given in Afghanistan in the past decade in the fight against terrorism and for the country's peace development and young democracy have created solid foundation for a close, long-term friendship and partnership between our two government and two nations," Rassoul added. "I have no doubt about that.”
The top U.S. and NATO commander in Afghanistan, Marine Corps General John Allen, told U.S. lawmakers this week that coalition forces remain on track to deny al-Qaida safe haven in the country.
General Allen says he will not recommend any further reductions of U.S. troops in Afghanistan until late this year. All American forces are scheduled to be withdrawn by the end of 2014.
Clinton: U.S., Afghanistan 'On Track' To Sign Partnership Deal
March 21, 2012 Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty
WASHINGTON -- U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton says the United States and Afghanistan are "on track" to sign a strategic partnership agreement charting their future relations during or before a NATO summit in late May.
The top U.S. diplomat was speaking alongside Afghan Foreign Minister Zalmay Rasul after a meeting in Washington.
Rasul said that "solid foundations" had been laid for partnership with Washington beyond the withdrawal of all U.S. combat troops by the end of 2014 and cited "a lot of progress" on U.S. night raids and the transfer of detainees.
Clinton also described last month's Koran burnings on a U.S. military base and the deadly shooting spree by a U.S. soldier in Afghanistan last week as "personally painful" to both herself and to U.S. President Barack Obama.
With Reuters reporting
Afghan pull-out set to save £2.4bn
Financial Times By James Blitz, Defence and Diplomatic Editor March 21, 2012
George Osborne has for the first time spelt out the financial savings Britain will make by withdrawing its forces from Afghanistan over the next three years, announcing in the Budget that the UK will cut some £2.4bn from projected costs on the mission between now and 2015.
When he unveiled the four-year comprehensive spending review in 2010, the chancellor projected significant spending on Afghanistan operations from the Treasury’s Special Reserve. Initial projections were for the UK to spend £3.8bn on the Afghanistan operation in 2012-13, £3.8bn in 2013-14 and £3.5bn in 2014-15, when the UK plans to withdraw fully.
In the Budget, Mr Osborne has now revised those annual figures down significantly. The Treasury now plans to spend £3.7bn on Afghan operations in 2012-13, £3bn in 2013-14 and £2bn in 2014-15.
Treasury and Ministry of Defence officials insisted on Wednesday that the reduced spending profile reflected the fact that UK political and military leaders were planning to scale back operations. The officials said reduced spending did not imply a Treasury decision to underfund the mission in any way.
The cuts in projected spending reflect recent UK decisions to scale back operations more quickly than had been anticipated. Last week, Downing Street indicated that UK troops would move to a support role in Helmand in the middle of 2013 and not at the end of next year as had been earlier mooted. This will allow the Afghan national army and police to take the lead security role more quickly than planned.
David Cameron, the prime minister, underscored the possibility of UK troops moving to this support role on Wednesday when he referred to talks he held last week with President Barack Obama in Washington.
“If there are opportunities to change the nature of the mission and be more in support rather than a direct combat role, then that’s something that I think everyone will want to see,’’ he said at Prime Minister’s Questions.
The Afghanistan mission is the most financially costly military operation that the UK has undertaken in its recent history and is far in excess of what was spent in the Iraq conflict.
According to the latest Treasury data, Britain will end up spending £25.2bn in Afghanistan between 2006 – the year when operations were ramped up – and 2014, the year of departure. By contrast Britain spent a total of £8.4bn over the six years of military operations in Iraq, according to MoD figures. Total spending on last year’s Libya operation was £212m, the MoD said last year.
Mr Osborne took the opportunity to announce that while spending on Afghanistan was being cut back, some of the savings would be used to support serving military personnel.
The government said it would reinvest £100m of the reduction in the Special Reserve provision in 2013-14 to improve accommodation for up to 1,275 military personnel. Some £3m will be reinvested each year to double the council tax rebate, from 50 per cent to 100 per cent, for around 9,500 deployed military personnel. A further £2m will be reinvested each year to double the rate of the families welfare grant, benefiting the families of around 20,000 deployed troops.
Pakistani president to visit Tajikistan on March 25
ISLAMABAD, March 22 (Xinhua) -- Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari will visit Tajikistan at the invitation of his Tajik counterpart Imamali Rahman to attend Nauroz celebrations in Dushanbe on Sunday, said a foreign office spokesman on Thursday.
Foreign Office Spokesman Abdul Basit said that the visit would provide an opportunity to the two leaders to review all aspects of bilateral relations.
The two leaders will also discuss the measures to further enhance bilateral political, economic, defence and security relations.
He said that they would also reflect on the development of rail and road infrastructure and air connectivity between the two countries.
During the visit, Zardari will attend a quadrilateral summit with the leaders of Tajikistan, Iran and Afghanistan on March 26 to discuss the Afghan situation and economic cooperation, said the spokesman.
First S. Asian Weightlifting Competition taking place in Nepal
KATHMANDU, March 22 (Xinhua) -- The inaugural South Asian Weightlifting Competition is taking place in Nepalgunj in mid-western Nepal from Thursday.
According to Nepal Weightlifting Association Central General Secretary Partha Sarathi Sen, 60 players from Nepal, India, Afghanistan, Sri Lanka, Pakistan and Bangladesh will compete for 135 medals under both the women's and men's categories.
Among the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) members, Bhutan and the Maldives are not participating in the competition.
A SAARC-level conference of the weightlifting associations is to be organized here Thursday, said Association Central Chairman Ratan Tandan.
Pakistan 'does not want Taliban to seize control of Afghanistan'
Pakistan does not want the Taliban to seize control of Afghanistan when international forces pull out, according to a leaked account of a meeting with the recently retired head of its intelligence service.
Telegraph.co.uk By Rob Crilly 21 Mar 2012
Islamabad - The country's shadowy Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) agency has long been accused of siding with the Taliban as part of a strategy to ensure a friendly government in Kabul and to ensure arch-rival India cannot gain a foothold.
However, this year its civilian government has taken pains to insist that any political settlement must be part of an Afghan-led process.
Now, details of an interview with Lieutenant-General Ahmad Shuja Pasha, who stepped down as ISI director general last weekend, give an insight into the agency's secretive world and its position on Afghanistan.
The account of the meeting in April last year – written by a researcher with the private intelligence firm Stratfor and obtained by WikiLeaks – suggests the ISI fears that a Taliban takeover would have dangerous implications for Pakistan's security.
"We do not wish to see the Talibs dominate Afghanistan," he said. "On the contrary, we want to see a broad-based government that can end the civil war in that country, which has had a disastrous fallout for us. Of course the Talibs will be a key player in a post-Nato Afghanistan, which we feel is necessary for true peace to take place."
Well-placed observers in Islamabad suggest Pakistan's Afghan policy is undergoing a period of "evolution".
Having worked closely with Jihadi groups to oust Soviet forces from Afghanistan in the 1980s and then helped the Taliban to power, Pakistan's security forces have suffered huge losses in recent years as some militant groups turned against Islamabad.
That concern about violent blowback remains balanced, for now, with the knowledge that Taliban allies could still prove useful in negotiating a favourable deal in Afghanistan.
The military has so far resisted US pressure to launch an offensive in North Waziristan, where the feared Haqqani network is headquartered and from where it launches attacks against Nato forces in Afghanistan.
In the meeting, General Pasha apparently said the military wanted to move into North Waziristan, but was still trying to secure neighbouring areas.
"The only way to mount an offensive in NW is through South Waziristan, which we are trying to stabilise with the building of roads and resettlement of locals," he said
www.afghanistannewscenter.com
By Mirwais Harooni | Reuters
KABUL (Reuters) - Afghan President Hamid Karzai said on Thursday his government was pressing to end divisive NATO night raids in negotiations with the United States on a long-term strategic pact, saying some past operations had violated Afghan sovereignty.
The increasingly assertive Afghan leader's admonition came as U.S. and Afghan officials try to agree on a framework for some American troops and advisers to stay in the country beyond a 2014 deadline for most NATO combat forces to withdraw.
Both countries recently agreed to transfer a U.S.-run prison to Afghan authority. The final sticking point is Western military raids on Afghan homes at night, which both infuriate Afghans and damage Karzai's popularity.
"The fight against terrorism in our country has led to some activities which are against our national sovereignty. We are about to solve it entirely," Karzai told a graduation ceremony of Afghan army cadets in the capital, Kabul.
"The issue of prisons, imprisonment and keeping prisoners is over. We are working now to halt night raids in Afghan houses. The security of Afghanistan must be provided by the sons of Afghanistan, according to the constitution," he said.
Afghanistan's constitution requires a judge to approve searches by security forces.
Karzai said his government would "take a magnifying glass" to the negotiations with the United States to put an end to mounting civilian casualties which he said last week had his government at "the end of the rope" with its main backer.
Afghan officials had presented the Americans with a list of demands in the negotiations and U.S. officials had their own conditions, understood to include the ability to carry out unilateral operations against al Qaeda militants, he said.
"We assure all Afghanistan's security forces - the army, national police and the national directorate of security - that we will lay the foundation for the country's future," he said. "We will take a magnifying glass and check everything carefully, and then we will sign the pact."
Afghanistan, Karzai said, would need about $4.1 billion a year from the United States and other international backers to fund the 350,000-strong security forces in the decade beyond 2014, with the Afghan government to supply the rest.
The police and army are eventually expected to shrink back to about 230,000 after a "surge" timed to coincide with the NATO drawdown. Karzai also called for the supply of weapons, aircraft and radar.
The United States said on Wednesday it seemed to be on track to sign the partnership agreement with Afghanistan, which will chart their ties, before or during a late May summit.
TIES STRAINED
This week, Karzai appeared to have won a major concession from Washington following a deadly shooting spree by a U.S. soldier, with the Obama administration considering curbs on night raids including judicial veto.
The U.S. government was discussing options with the Afghans including a warrant-based approach or possibly allowing Afghan judges to review raids before they took place, a U.S. official said on Monday.
Nearly 11 years after the Taliban government was toppled, the United States and its allies face a resilient insurgency, a weak Afghan government, and an uncertain future for Western support after the end of 2014 pullout.
At a summit in Chicago in late May, NATO nations are expected to outline their path out of the war and agree on backing for Afghan security forces.
U.S.-Afghan relations have been badly strained by the March 11 incident in which a U.S. soldier is suspected of killing 16 Afghan civilians, and by the burning of copies of the Koran at NATO's main base in the country last month.
General John Allen, who commands U.S. and NATO forces in Afghanistan, said on Tuesday he would present recommendations for Obama on troop levels in 2013 and beyond during the last three months of this year.
A decision late in the year would allow U.S. commanders to size up the strength of the Taliban after the traditional summer fighting season and allow more time to see whether nascent peace talks take hold.
In a blow to NATO hopes of a negotiated end to the war, the Afghan Taliban said last week that they were suspending talks with the United States.
The U.S. government, however, has said it remained committed to political reconciliation involving talks with the Taliban but progress would require agreement between the Afghan government and the insurgents.
(Writing by Jack Kimball; Editing by Rob Taylor and Robert Birsel)
Top commander in Afghanistan says he prefers robust force of 68,000 in 2013
ASSOCIATED PRESS March 22, 2012
WASHINGTON — The top commander in Afghanistan said Thursday he prefers a robust U.S. combat force of 68,000 in 2013, signaling a potential halt in the drawdown and complicating any effort by President Barack Obama to accelerate the timetable after more than a decade of war.
"My opinion is that we will need significant combat power in 2013," Marine Gen. John Allen told the Senate Armed Services Committee.
Pressed by the panel's top Republican, John McCain, on whether a force of 68,000 would be sufficient, Allen said, "Sixty-eight thousand is a good going-in number, but I owe the president some analysis on that."
Allen's comments were his most explicit in two days of testimony on Capitol Hill and represent a marker for the military. Obama faces increasing political and public pressure to accelerate the timetable after more than 10 years of fighting and recent incidents that dealt a major setback to the fragile U.S.-Afghanistan relationship. Afghan outrage over the burnings of Qurans and a shooting spree that left 17 Afghan civilians dead have been blamed on Americans.
Allen said the United States is on track to reduce the 23,000-member surge force by the end of September, but he said he won't make his recommendation on the pace of further reductions until the last three months of the year — an announcement likely to come after Election Day.
He defended that approach under questioning from Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin, D-Mich., who is pressing for the United States to stick to its timetable for Afghan forces to assume the responsibility for security.
"I think it's exactly the best way ultimately to identify the state of the insurgency, the state of the full ISAF force, to include the U.S. force, but also to evaluate the operational requirements for '13 in order to make a comprehensive recommendation," Allen told the committee.
The current plan calls for the U.S. to withdraw its surge force of 23,000 American troops by the end of September, with a complete drawdown by December 2014. Currently the United States has 90,000 troops in the region.
Allen's appearance was his second on Capitol Hill this week. He also faced repeated questions about a potential reduction of Afghan security forces from the goal of 352,000 to 240,000 by 2017, a notion that unnerved several lawmakers.
"Given the fact that transition to a strong Afghan security force is the key to success of this mission, why would it be -- why does it make sense to talk about reducing the size of the Afghan army by a third?" Levin asked.
Allen said that was a target number for 2017 and they were weighing what number would be optimal.
"There are a number of different options, and we're continuing to evaluate what those options might be, all the way from the current force, the 352,000 force, which will continue to exist for several years once we have fielded it, down to a force that was smaller than 230,000, which probably doesn't have the right capabilities, the right combination of capabilities," Allen said.
U.S. and Afghan officials are working separately to resolve a dispute over military raids on Afghan homes that had become a bitter sticking point. Under a draft agreement expected to be signed this week, Afghan military units would take a larger role in planning and carrying out the raids, with the United States moving into a supporting role. An Afghan judge or panel would have a say, if not full veto, over operations the Afghans complain cause too many civilian deaths.
U.S. officials described elements of the security agreement on condition of anonymity because it is not final. Negotiators were expected to finish it Thursday in Kabul. Control over what Afghan call "night raids" was the last issue holding up a larger agreement governing U.S.-Afghan relations after most foreign forces leave in 2014.
That agreement is expected to be a centerpiece of a NATO summit the United States will host in May. Obama and Karzai could sign the document then, or perhaps earlier if they arrange a separate meeting.
One element in the ongoing conflict are on-again, off-again negotiations between the United States and the Taliban. The Taliban is seeking the release of five prisoners held at the U.S. military prison in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. The Associated Press has reported that the U.S. agreed in principle to transfer the prisoners to custody in Qatar, and U.S. officials have publicly acknowledged the idea is in play. .
Jim Miller, the acting undersecretary of defense for policy, told the committee that no decision has been made on the transfer of the prisoners, a step that would require notification of Congress.
Sustaining success in Afghanistan
The Washington Post By John McCain, Joseph I. Lieberman and Lindsey Graham Opinions Thursday, March 22, 2012
John McCain (R-Ariz.), Joseph I. Lieberman (I-Conn.) and Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) are members of the Senate Armed Services Committee.
A series of tragic events in Afghanistan has increased the desire of a war-weary public to end our mission there. As heart-wrenching as these events have been, they do not change the vital U.S. national security interests at stake in Afghanistan, nor do they mean that the war is lost. It is not. There is still a realistic path to success if the right decisions are made in the coming months.
The painful lesson we learned on Sept. 11, 2001, remains true today: What happens in Afghanistan directly affects our safety here at home. We abandoned Afghanistan in the 1990s, and the result was a fanatical regime that allowed its territory to become a base for global terror attacks, while inflicting medieval tyranny on the Afghan people, especially women. If we quit Afghanistan again, and abandon the millions of Afghans who have risked everything to be our allies in the hopes of succeeding together, the consequences will be disastrous for both our peoples.
It does not have to be this way. Significant military progress has been made in Afghanistan — progress that we have personally witnessed over repeated visits. Four years ago, southern Afghanistan was overrun by the Taliban, and our coalition lacked the resources and the strategy necessary to break their momentum. Today, that situation has been reversed, thanks to the president’s surge of forces, the leadership of talented military commanders, and the courage and perseverance of our troops.
Similarly, our effort to build the Afghan National Security Forces — which was under-resourced and disorganized four years ago — has been overhauled. Growing numbers of Afghan units are increasingly capable of leading the fight. The examples of the few Afghan soldiers who despicably turned their weapons on Americans should not obscure the fact that hundreds of thousands of Afghans fight every day as our faithful allies in a common battle against al-Qaeda and the Taliban and that these Afghan patriots are wounded and killed in far greater numbers than our forces. Afghans bear an overwhelming and increasing share of this war. This should give us hope that our common goal, an Afghanistan that can secure and govern itself, remains achievable over time.
To sustain this fragile progress, it is critical that President Obama resist the shortsighted calls for additional troop reductions, which would guarantee failure. Our forces are slated to draw down to 68,000 by September — a faster pace than our military commanders recommended, which has significantly increased the risks for our mission. At a minimum, there should be a pause after September to assess the impact of the drawdown. It would be much better to maintain the 68,000 forces through next year’s fighting season, possibly longer.
At the strategic level, our effort continues to be undermined by the perception that the United States will again abandon Afghanistan. This suspicion makes everything our troops are trying to achieve significantly harder. It creates perverse incentives for the Taliban to keep fighting, for the Pakistani army to hedge its bets by providing support to the Taliban, and for our Afghan allies to make counterproductive decisions based on fears of a post-American future.
The best way to reverse this dynamic is by realizing the president’s stated goal of a long-term political, economic and military relationship with Afghanistan. The mechanism for doing so is the Strategic Partnership Agreement, which the U.S. and Afghan governments have painstakingly negotiated for two years.
Two weeks ago, one of the two major obstacles was resolved when our governments agreed on a timetable for handing over detention operations. We are optimistic that a similar resolution can be found soon regarding the gradual transfer of the lead for “night raids” to Afghan forces. Already, Afghans increasingly lead these operations. The success rate is overwhelming, and in most cases no shots are fired.
With these two issues resolved, we could finally conclude the Strategic Partnership Agreement. This could provide a framework for an enduring U.S. military commitment to Afghanistan beyond 2014, including joint operating facilities and long-term support for the 350,000-plus Afghan National Security Forces necessary to secure the country. It would also encourage our allies to make similar long-term commitments.
A key part of this post-2014 U.S. military commitment should be a counterterrorism force that can continue working with our Afghan partners against al-Qaeda and the Taliban, ensuring that these groups can no longer pose a military threat to Afghanistan, our allies and us. This force could be a fraction of our current military presence in Afghanistan and still be serious and robust, consisting of U.S. air power, intelligence support for the Afghans and Special Operations Forces. It would, in effect, be an insurance policy against a terrorist takeover of Afghanistan, the place where the Sept. 11 attacks were planned.
Making these commitments will set the conditions under which our forces can responsibly draw down and hand the lead to the Afghans. The strategic partnership will make clear to the Taliban that it cannot wait us out and win on the battlefield, thus fostering real reconciliation on terms favorable to the Afghan government and to us. It will demonstrate to Pakistani intelligence that continued support for the Taliban, on the assumption its members will be needed as proxies once we leave, will only leave Islamabad more isolated and less secure. And it will give Afghan leaders the reassurance to fight corruption and govern better, knowing that they have a long-term alternative to Pakistani generals, Iranian operatives, foreign terrorists and Afghan warlords. In short, this agreement could change the narrative in Afghanistan and the region from one of imminent international abandonment to enduring international commitment.
These decisions rest, more than anyone else, with President Obama. We have disagreed with some of his choices regarding the war in Afghanistan. But after all our nation has sacrificed in Afghanistan, we stand ready to do everything in our power to secure the same bipartisan support for this war in its twilight hours as when it began more than a decade ago.
Afghan officials likely to press for veto power over night raids in formal talks
The Washington Post By Karen DeYoung Thursday, March 22, 2012
In formal negotiations set to begin Thursday, Afghan officials are expected to press their U.S. counterparts for veto power over controversial night raids on Afghan homes as well as warrants signed by a judge before the operations are carried out.
Despite substantive differences, officials on both sides expressed confidence that they are heading toward an understanding on the raids that will allow them to complete within two months a broader accord governing the long-term military relationship between the countries.
The officials spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss the sensitive talks.
Afghan President Hamid Karzai has long insisted on an end to the raids, which U.S. commanders consider one of their most effective tools against Taliban insurgents. Karzai repeated his demand in angry remarks last week after a March 11 shooting rampage, allegedly carried out by a U.S. soldier, that left 16 Afghan civilians dead.
“We saw his comments, but we’ve been reassured . . . since then,” a senior U.S. defense official said of Karzai. This official and others attributed the easing of tensions to a Friday telephone call and other recent conversations between Karzai and President Obama.
Both sides see the shooting and its aftermath as a watershed that has gotten them to move forward on the night-raid negotiations and other issues, although for different reasons.
From Afghanistan’s perspective, the incident gave the Americans a glimpse of the kinds of disasters that were increasingly likely if the two sides remained at loggerheads.
U.S. officials view it as evidence that the relationship is sturdy enough not to collapse even under the most trying circumstances. Although the administration does not characterize its evolving positions as concessions, its rhetoric on the night raids has softened.
The White House said this week that requiring judicial warrants was a “reasonable” Afghan expectation.
Whether U.S. negotiators in Kabul will determine that Afghan veto power over the raids is similarly reasonable is uncertain. Officials declined to discuss what one of them described as Afghanistan’s opening position in the talks.
Karzai has deemed the more than 2,000 night operations conducted by U.S. Special Operations forces last year as a violation of Afghan sovereignty and culture — and a cause of civilian casualties. U.S. commanders have said that all the raids are conducted in partnership with Afghan forces as part of the gradual transition to Afghan security control throughout the country, due to be completed next year.
In congressional testimony this month, Adm. William H. McRaven, head of the Special Operations Command, said, “Afghan special forces are in the lead on all of our night operations . . . surrounding a particular compound, trying to call out the specific individual — and the first forces through the door.”
Afghan officials say that they are “in the lead” in about 60 percent of the raids but that U.S. troops are effectively in control of all of them because they provide the intelligence on which targets are selected and which operations are planned, often without giving that information to Afghan partners in advance.
U.S. forces also provide the logistics, including specialized helicopters, that make the raids possible.
Without these capabilities, the Afghans say, the only way they can be in charge of the operations, with U.S. forces in a supporting role, is with full information that allows them to approve, or veto, the raids in advance.
Karzai also called for U.S. withdrawal from Afghan towns and villages where small Special Operations units are organizing local protection forces.
But in subsequent explanations, Afghan officials have said that they see this pullback as part of the ongoing transition process, in which U.S. troops would withdraw from villages as Afghan units grow capable of standing on their own.
Although opinion polls show that a majority of Americans now favor an early withdrawal from Afghanistan, the Afghans say they do not want to speed the overall departure of foreign troops.
Instead, they say, they want to accelerate the transition process so they can test their security wings while foreign troops remain to back them up.
This month, U.S. and Afghan officials signed a memorandum of understanding on a process to transfer detainees and American-run prisons to Afghanistan’s control. A similar agreement on night raids would remove the remaining stumbling block to the separate, long-term strategic partnership agreement.
Obama has said that he hopes the long-term accord can be signed before a NATO summit scheduled for May in Chicago. That agreement will set the terms for a U.S. military presence in Afghanistan beyond NATO’s planned withdrawal of all international combat troops by the end of 2014.
Pentagon officials are planning for a follow-on force, numbering 5,000 to 30,000 troops, including training, support and counterterrorism units that would be based inside military posts flying Afghan flags.
The agreement, assuming it is ready by mid-May, is unlikely to contain any troop numbers, officials said. Instead, it will commit the two sides to negotiating the details of a 10-year, renewable security arrangement before the December 2014 NATO deadline.
Avalanche claims 18 lives in NE. Afghan province
FAIZABAD, Afghanistan, March 22 (Xinhua) -- Eighteen people lost their lives as an avalanche struck a village in Wakhan district of Badakhshan province, 315 km northeast of capital city Kabul Wednesday night, a local official said Thursday.
"The tragic incident happened in Ark village of Wakhan district late Wednesday night during which several houses were smashed and 18 people including women and children were killed," Director of the Counter-Natural Disaster Department in Badakhshan province Sanaullah Amiri told Xinhua.
However, local people said 21 people have lost their lives in the natural tragic incident.
Meantime, Syed Piroz, the governor of Wakhan district when approached confirmed the incident, but he did not give the figure, saying a rescue operation is going on.
The mountainous Badakhsan province has received heavy snowfalls over the past two months. More than 100 people, according to local officials, have lost their lives in avalanches and freezing weather in the far-flanged mountainous villages of Badakhshan over the past two months.
NATO soldier dies in Afghanistan
KABUL, March 22 (Xinhua) -- A soldier with the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force died in Afghanistan on Thursday, a press release of the alliance issued here said.
"An International Security Assistance Force service member died as a result of a non-battle related injury in eastern Afghanistan today," the press release confirmed without giving details.
This is the second NATO soldier has lost life in Afghanistan over the past two days.
Another NATO soldier lost his life in a roadside bombing in the southern Afghan region on Wednesday.
More than 80 soldiers with the NATO-led troops have been killed in Afghanistan since the beginning of this year.
British Watchdog Group Urges Scrutiny On Aid To Afghanistan
March 22, 2012 Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty
Britain's Independent Commission for Aid Impact is calling on the British government to tighten oversight of its aid program for Afghanistan.
The watchdog organization said there were insufficient monitoring systems in place to prevent "the loss or diversion of aid monies away from the intended beneficiaries as a result of theft, fraud or corruption."
The commission said Britain's Department for International Development that handles distribution of aid to Afghanistan needs to strengthen its grip and reduce risk by deploying people with more financial and procurement skills.
The British government created the Independent Commission for Aid Impact in 2011 to ensure foreign aid money is spent as intended.
Based on Reuters reporting
Clinton Opposes Any Afghan Peace That Shortchanges Women
Bloomberg By Indira A.R. Lakshmanan Mar 22, 2012
Any peace deal in Afghanistan that excludes women or tries to roll back their rights is doomed to fail, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said.
Speaking at an event yesterday in Washington marking the 10th anniversary of the U.S.-Afghan Women’s Council, Clinton pledged the U.S. will defend the advances Afghan women have made since the fall of the Taliban. Any peace deal that may emerge from exploratory talks with insurgents must abide by the Afghan constitution, which enshrines rights for women, she said.
“We will not waver on this point,” Clinton assured guests at the event, including Afghan officials and U.S. business leaders who have supported programs for Afghan women. A peace agreement “excluding more than half the population is no peace at all. It’s a figment that will not last,” she said to applause.
The Obama administration is seeking negotiations between the Afghan government and the Taliban to help bring an end to a military conflict that began in October 2001. Exploratory talks have gone slowly, stymied most recently by disagreements over a potential U.S. transfer of Taliban detainees from the military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
Clinton met yesterday with visiting Afghan Foreign Minister Zalmai Rassoul, whose government has insisted on the same “red lines” for reconciliation talks with the Taliban as the Obama administration: insurgents must renounce violence, cut ties with al-Qaeda and abide by the Afghan constitution.
Still, Afghan women activists and some in the U.S. government have expressed concern that the Afghan government, in its desire to take insurgents off the battlefield and end the war, might bend to Taliban demands to curtail women’s advances. Under the Taliban in the 1990s, Afghan women were largely prevented from attending school, holding jobs, participating in government or leaving home without male escorts. Women’s Worries
“Many are worried that in whatever future negotiations that might occur, women -- their rights, their roles, their concerns -- will be sacrificed and the old days will return,” Clinton said.
“The United States cannot and will not let that happen,” she said. “Let there be no doubt that even as the U.S. role in Afghanistan changes during the next few years of transition,” with the drawdown of U.S. combat troops, “it’s absolutely critical we protect” women’s gains and expand on them, said Clinton, a longtime advocate of women’s rights. “We will continue to stand with and work closely with Afghan women.”
Clinton cited a list of achievements for women since the fall of the Taliban, from most basic health and social indicators to accomplishments in politics and industry. Female Education
The average life expectancy for Afghan women in 2001 was 44; now it is 62, Clinton said. Back then, girls were prohibited from attending government schools; now, almost 3 million do, representing a third of primary and secondary school students, she said. She said 100,000 have graduated from high school, and 15,000 enrolled in universities in the last decade.
Rassoul cited the advances of women in government. There were no female politicians under the Taliban; now they make up about 28 percent of parliament and serve on provincial councils nationwide. One in four government workers are women, as were 40 percent of the voters in the last election, Rassoul said. On the Afghan High Peace Council, nine of the 70 members are women, according to the peace council.
Vartan Gregorian, president of the Carnegie Corporation of New York, joined Clinton at the State Department to praise those advances and announced the foundation was pledging $1 million in grants for higher education for women at Afghan universities. Business Opportunities
Former First Lady Laura Bush, who was instrumental in establishing the U.S-Afghan Women’s Council a decade ago, highlighted the accomplishments of women in commerce. Under the Taliban, women were barred from owning or operating businesses. Today, she said, there are hundreds of women-owned businesses, from artisan workshops to financial services and engineering firms. A third of the workforce is made up of women, Bush said.
Melanne Verveer, ambassador-at-large for global women’s issues, said yesterday that several companies have invested in training and education for Afghan women, including Goldman Sachs Group Inc. (GS), automaker Daimler AG (DAI) and Kate Spade New York, a designer fashion company.
“There are still problems” including violence against women, Verveer said in an interview. “The biggest fear today is will there be rollback and will they have a seat at the table” for peace talks, she said. She praised the Afghan government for pledging not to allow that to happen.
“This isn’t a favor to women,” she said. “If women are silenced, that potential for peace will be stymied.”
To contact the reporter on this story: Indira A.R. Lakshmanan in Washington at ilakshmanan@bloomberg.net
To contact the editor responsible for this story: John Walcott at jwalcott9@bloomberg.net
Karzai repeats call for halting night raid operations
KABUL, March 22 (Xinhua) -- Afghanistan President Hamid Karzai once again repeated his call for halting night raid operations by NATO-led forces in the militancy-plagued country on Wednesday.
"We are working to stop the night raid operations," President Karzai said in his speech at a graduation ceremony in the National Military Academy here in Kabul.
He made this remarks just after couple of weeks that the United States agreed to hand over the control of Bagram detention center to Afghan administration.
Bagram detention center, 50 km north of Afghan capital Kabul where hundreds of suspected Taliban and al-Qaida operatives have been held, is located in Bagram airbase, the main U.S. military center in Afghanistan.
After signing agreement with the United States which occurred two weeks ago in Kabul, no foreigners would have detention center in Afghanistan, President Karzai said, adding the night raid operations would also be halted and Afghans would take over the whole security of their country.
Running detention center by U.S. military in Afghanistan and conducting night raids by foreign troops against suspected Taliban insurgents in villages have been opposed by Afghan government.
Afghan government believes that running prison by U.S. troops is a violation of Afghan national sovereignty and night raid operations often harm the civilians.
In his address, President Karzai said that Afghanistan would sign the strategic partnership with the United States and progress has been made in this regard.
However, he noted his government would move very cautiously in inking the proposed strategic pact to safeguard the national interests and sovereignty of Afghanistan.
The United States and the allied nations contributing troops in Afghanistan have agreed to support Afghan national security forces with 4.1 billion U.S. dollars for 10 years, after 2014 when the security transition to Afghan forces completes and NATO-led forces leave the country.
President Karzai in his address to the newly graduated officers also emphasized for self-reliance, urging them to serve the war- torn nation until it stands on its feet.
Afghanistan Expects 'Swift, Transparent' Probe into Kandahar Killings
VOA News March 21, 2012 Scott Stearns | The State Department
Afghan officials said the United States needs a swift, transparent investigation into the burning of Korans and the killing of civilians, in order to restore public confidence in the NATO-led security force there. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton met Wednesday with Afghan Foreign Minister Zalmai Rassoul.
Secretary Clinton said it has been a difficult period in U.S.-Afghan relations following the burning of Korans at a U.S. air base and the suspected killing of 16 civilians by U.S. Staff Sergeant Robert Bales near Kandahar.
“This has been very personally painful to me and to the president. It does not represent who the United States is, who the American people are, and we appreciate the understanding and response of the Afghan government and the Afghan people.”
Foreign Minister Rassoul said Afghans expect a credible inquiry into the violence as a way to improve relations between Kabul and Washington.
“We are awaiting the swift and transparent investigation of this case and the punishment of anyone involved," Rassoul said. "That will greatly reinforce the Afghan people's confidence in the existing strong friendship and partnership with the United States.”
Clinton and Rassoul discussed the state of ongoing negotiations on a strategic partnership agreement between the United States and Afghanistan, including the issue of night raids by U.S. troops.
The Afghan foreign minister said he is confident that an agreement can be concluded despite recent setbacks.
“The great shared sacrifices in blood and treasure that the American and Afghan people have given in Afghanistan in the past decade in the fight against terrorism and for the country's peace development and young democracy have created solid foundation for a close, long-term friendship and partnership between our two government and two nations," Rassoul added. "I have no doubt about that.”
The top U.S. and NATO commander in Afghanistan, Marine Corps General John Allen, told U.S. lawmakers this week that coalition forces remain on track to deny al-Qaida safe haven in the country.
General Allen says he will not recommend any further reductions of U.S. troops in Afghanistan until late this year. All American forces are scheduled to be withdrawn by the end of 2014.
Clinton: U.S., Afghanistan 'On Track' To Sign Partnership Deal
March 21, 2012 Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty
WASHINGTON -- U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton says the United States and Afghanistan are "on track" to sign a strategic partnership agreement charting their future relations during or before a NATO summit in late May.
The top U.S. diplomat was speaking alongside Afghan Foreign Minister Zalmay Rasul after a meeting in Washington.
Rasul said that "solid foundations" had been laid for partnership with Washington beyond the withdrawal of all U.S. combat troops by the end of 2014 and cited "a lot of progress" on U.S. night raids and the transfer of detainees.
Clinton also described last month's Koran burnings on a U.S. military base and the deadly shooting spree by a U.S. soldier in Afghanistan last week as "personally painful" to both herself and to U.S. President Barack Obama.
With Reuters reporting
Afghan pull-out set to save £2.4bn
Financial Times By James Blitz, Defence and Diplomatic Editor March 21, 2012
George Osborne has for the first time spelt out the financial savings Britain will make by withdrawing its forces from Afghanistan over the next three years, announcing in the Budget that the UK will cut some £2.4bn from projected costs on the mission between now and 2015.
When he unveiled the four-year comprehensive spending review in 2010, the chancellor projected significant spending on Afghanistan operations from the Treasury’s Special Reserve. Initial projections were for the UK to spend £3.8bn on the Afghanistan operation in 2012-13, £3.8bn in 2013-14 and £3.5bn in 2014-15, when the UK plans to withdraw fully.
In the Budget, Mr Osborne has now revised those annual figures down significantly. The Treasury now plans to spend £3.7bn on Afghan operations in 2012-13, £3bn in 2013-14 and £2bn in 2014-15.
Treasury and Ministry of Defence officials insisted on Wednesday that the reduced spending profile reflected the fact that UK political and military leaders were planning to scale back operations. The officials said reduced spending did not imply a Treasury decision to underfund the mission in any way.
The cuts in projected spending reflect recent UK decisions to scale back operations more quickly than had been anticipated. Last week, Downing Street indicated that UK troops would move to a support role in Helmand in the middle of 2013 and not at the end of next year as had been earlier mooted. This will allow the Afghan national army and police to take the lead security role more quickly than planned.
David Cameron, the prime minister, underscored the possibility of UK troops moving to this support role on Wednesday when he referred to talks he held last week with President Barack Obama in Washington.
“If there are opportunities to change the nature of the mission and be more in support rather than a direct combat role, then that’s something that I think everyone will want to see,’’ he said at Prime Minister’s Questions.
The Afghanistan mission is the most financially costly military operation that the UK has undertaken in its recent history and is far in excess of what was spent in the Iraq conflict.
According to the latest Treasury data, Britain will end up spending £25.2bn in Afghanistan between 2006 – the year when operations were ramped up – and 2014, the year of departure. By contrast Britain spent a total of £8.4bn over the six years of military operations in Iraq, according to MoD figures. Total spending on last year’s Libya operation was £212m, the MoD said last year.
Mr Osborne took the opportunity to announce that while spending on Afghanistan was being cut back, some of the savings would be used to support serving military personnel.
The government said it would reinvest £100m of the reduction in the Special Reserve provision in 2013-14 to improve accommodation for up to 1,275 military personnel. Some £3m will be reinvested each year to double the council tax rebate, from 50 per cent to 100 per cent, for around 9,500 deployed military personnel. A further £2m will be reinvested each year to double the rate of the families welfare grant, benefiting the families of around 20,000 deployed troops.
Pakistani president to visit Tajikistan on March 25
ISLAMABAD, March 22 (Xinhua) -- Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari will visit Tajikistan at the invitation of his Tajik counterpart Imamali Rahman to attend Nauroz celebrations in Dushanbe on Sunday, said a foreign office spokesman on Thursday.
Foreign Office Spokesman Abdul Basit said that the visit would provide an opportunity to the two leaders to review all aspects of bilateral relations.
The two leaders will also discuss the measures to further enhance bilateral political, economic, defence and security relations.
He said that they would also reflect on the development of rail and road infrastructure and air connectivity between the two countries.
During the visit, Zardari will attend a quadrilateral summit with the leaders of Tajikistan, Iran and Afghanistan on March 26 to discuss the Afghan situation and economic cooperation, said the spokesman.
First S. Asian Weightlifting Competition taking place in Nepal
KATHMANDU, March 22 (Xinhua) -- The inaugural South Asian Weightlifting Competition is taking place in Nepalgunj in mid-western Nepal from Thursday.
According to Nepal Weightlifting Association Central General Secretary Partha Sarathi Sen, 60 players from Nepal, India, Afghanistan, Sri Lanka, Pakistan and Bangladesh will compete for 135 medals under both the women's and men's categories.
Among the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) members, Bhutan and the Maldives are not participating in the competition.
A SAARC-level conference of the weightlifting associations is to be organized here Thursday, said Association Central Chairman Ratan Tandan.
Pakistan 'does not want Taliban to seize control of Afghanistan'
Pakistan does not want the Taliban to seize control of Afghanistan when international forces pull out, according to a leaked account of a meeting with the recently retired head of its intelligence service.
Telegraph.co.uk By Rob Crilly 21 Mar 2012
Islamabad - The country's shadowy Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) agency has long been accused of siding with the Taliban as part of a strategy to ensure a friendly government in Kabul and to ensure arch-rival India cannot gain a foothold.
However, this year its civilian government has taken pains to insist that any political settlement must be part of an Afghan-led process.
Now, details of an interview with Lieutenant-General Ahmad Shuja Pasha, who stepped down as ISI director general last weekend, give an insight into the agency's secretive world and its position on Afghanistan.
The account of the meeting in April last year – written by a researcher with the private intelligence firm Stratfor and obtained by WikiLeaks – suggests the ISI fears that a Taliban takeover would have dangerous implications for Pakistan's security.
"We do not wish to see the Talibs dominate Afghanistan," he said. "On the contrary, we want to see a broad-based government that can end the civil war in that country, which has had a disastrous fallout for us. Of course the Talibs will be a key player in a post-Nato Afghanistan, which we feel is necessary for true peace to take place."
Well-placed observers in Islamabad suggest Pakistan's Afghan policy is undergoing a period of "evolution".
Having worked closely with Jihadi groups to oust Soviet forces from Afghanistan in the 1980s and then helped the Taliban to power, Pakistan's security forces have suffered huge losses in recent years as some militant groups turned against Islamabad.
That concern about violent blowback remains balanced, for now, with the knowledge that Taliban allies could still prove useful in negotiating a favourable deal in Afghanistan.
The military has so far resisted US pressure to launch an offensive in North Waziristan, where the feared Haqqani network is headquartered and from where it launches attacks against Nato forces in Afghanistan.
In the meeting, General Pasha apparently said the military wanted to move into North Waziristan, but was still trying to secure neighbouring areas.
"The only way to mount an offensive in NW is through South Waziristan, which we are trying to stabilise with the building of roads and resettlement of locals," he said
www.afghanistannewscenter.com