Tweet
Kabul Pins Attacks on Foreign Spies
U.S. Officials Contest Karzai's Claim Most Afghan Troops Who Killed Coalition Soldiers Were Sent by Regional 'Agencies'
Wall Street Journal By MARIA ABI-HABIB August 22, 2012
KABUL - The majority of the Afghan soldiers and police behind recent killings of U.S.-led forces were recruited for the job by foreign spy agencies, Afghanistan's government said Wednesday, an account that is likely to heighten tensions between Kabul and the U.S.-led coalition.
Afghan President Hamid Karzai led an extraordinary national-security meeting to discuss a wave of attacks on international forces by their Afghan counterparts, the most recent of which claimed the lives of at least 10 U.S. troops this month.
"The hands behind these events are the foreign spy agencies using the Taliban," a spokesman for Mr. Karzai, Aimal Faizi, told reporters. An Afghan investigation into these shootings, released Wednesday, "further highlighted that foreign spy agencies are growlingly fearful of the empowerment of Afghan security agencies," he said.
The countries behind the attacks were from the region, said Mr. Faizi, who declined to name them or provide proof. The Afghan government has frequently accused Iran and Pakistan of aiding the insurgency and stoking unrest, allegations that both have denied.
U.S. defense officials said they don't share the Afghan government's assessment that the attacks were perpetrated by foreign-run Taliban infiltrators. "It's our understanding that these attacks aren't the work of foreign intelligence services," said a senior U.S. defense official, citing U.S. investigations of the incidents. "They're typically Afghans who themselves decide to conduct them, and some Afghans might have help on occasion from insurgent networks."
The coalition has said it believes that only about one of every 10 insider attacks is committed by Taliban infiltrators. Overwhelmingly, it has said, the so-called green-on-blue attacks are perpetrated by Afghan security members who are culturally offended by or have personal disputes with their international counterparts.
Any appearance that the Afghan government is attempting to dodge responsibility could further stoke tension, a Western diplomat and a military official in Kabul said.
Some European countries have threatened to accelerate their withdrawals earlier than 2014—when most foreign forces are expected to leave—according to a Western diplomat in Kabul. It is getting harder to convince constituents at home to keep troops in Afghanistan, the diplomat said, when Afghan forces are turning on their international colleagues and many European economies are struggling.
"If this continues, some countries will walk," the diplomat said, adding that Kabul needs to work to stop the killings.
The Afghan government is under enormous pressure from the coalition to stem insider attacks. The chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Martin Dempsey, discussed the issue with Afghan officials during a visit to Kabul on Monday.
When an Afghan soldier killed four French troops in eastern Kapisa province this year, France decided to speed up its withdrawal to the end of 2012 from 2014. France is one of the largest contributing nations to the military coalition in Afghanistan. New Zealand this week became the latest country to announce a quicker drawdown, after five of its troops were killed this month.
Tensions with the U.S.-led coalition are likely to grow, Western officials say, as Kabul deflects responsibility.
"It's a mutual responsibility," Mr. Faizi said of the attacks, saying that some of the shootings have occurred because of international troops insulting Afghans. In February, U.S. troops burned copies of the Quran, sparking countrywide unrest and leading to two U.S. officers being shot inside the Ministry of Interior.
The rapid drive to build up Afghanistan's army and police has made it easier for agents of foreign governments to infiltrate these forces, Mr. Faizi said, adding the trend will reverse after national security forces reach peak numbers this fall. Up to 15,000 new recruits were joining the security forces each month, Mr. Faizi added, but that number has fallen to 5,000 new recruits a month.
In an attempt to stem infiltration, Afghans are introducing biometric identifications for all new and existing members of the Afghan national security forces, to make sure they aren't previously captured or registered insurgents. New recruits and existing Afghan troops and police—and their families—will be scrutinized, and the intelligence arms of the interior and defense ministries will be strengthened, Mr. Faizi said.
The chairman of the House Committee on Homeland Security, Rep. Peter King (R-N.Y.) called for the director of National Intelligence to "lead an interagency counterintelligence survey of Afghan security forces on an expedited basis to address 'green-on-blue' shootings."
"I am reliably informed that reporting on counterintelligence problems in Afghan units advised and trained by U.S. forces has been suppressed, out of a misplaced fear of reflecting badly upon those units' American advisers and trainers," Mr. King wrote in a letter to Gen. James Clapper, the National Intelligence director, which was posted on the Department of Homeland Security website. "Such concerns must now plainly come second to addressing a growing crisis for our mission in Afghanistan, posed by green on blue shootings." —Siobhan Gorman and Nathan Hodge contributed to this article.
Write to Maria Abi-Habib at maria.habib@dowjones.com
Afghanistan, Contradicting NATO, Blames Foreign Spies for Insider Attacks
New York Times By GRAHAM BOWLEY and RICHARD A. OPPEL Jr. August 22, 2012
KABUL, Afghanistan - Even as the Afghan government said on Wednesday that it would take new measures to counter a wave of deadly insider killings of Western troops by Afghan security forces, President Hamid Karzai’s office asserted for the first time that foreign spy agencies were behind most of the attacks, putting it directly at odds with NATO’s assessment of the crisis.
After a special meeting of the president’s security advisers, Mr. Karzai’s spokesman, Aimal Faizi, said Afghan authorities were studying every known insider attack, also known as green-on-blue attacks. He said that based on interrogations of attackers who had been detained, and other evidence like letters and records of phone calls, the government had concluded that the main culprits in the killings had been put in place by intelligence services from neighboring countries. He did not name them, but the government frequently accuses Pakistan and Iran of meddling.
“The investigation done so far shows there is infiltration by foreign spy agencies,” Mr. Faizi said. “There is no doubt there is infiltration.”
NATO’s recent assessment, however, was that only about 1 in 10 of the insider killings were directly linked to infiltration, which it describes as Taliban insurgents who pose as soldiers or police officers, or active Afghan service members who have been won over to the Taliban cause. Roughly 90 percent of the attacks were concluded to have stemmed from personal disputes, stress or cultural clashes.
Many Western officials here, and American officials at the Pentagon, were surprised by the government’s assertions, and some privately sought to discount the spokesman’s remarks.
“We don’t have indications that foreign entities are the locus of sponsorship for insider-attack threats,” said a senior Pentagon official, who spoke on condition of anonymity to avoid publicly differing with the Afghan president.
The Afghan government allowed that some of the attacks were also motivated by outrage over actions by American troops, including the burning of Korans at an American base and the video images of Marines urinating on dead insurgents. But Afghan officials said that the Taliban and other insurgent groups were the ones mainly responsible, and that these were to a large extent directed by foreign countries’ intelligence agencies, though they did not offer specific evidence.
A senior Pakistani security official reached by telephone called the insinuation “hogwash” and said that the Afghan government always tried to blame the Inter-Services Intelligence, Pakistan’s military spy agency.
The idea that the Pakistani ISI has directly supported attacks in Afghanistan against American targets is not new. Western military and intelligence officials have long acknowledged the role in the Afghan conflict of the Haqqani network, the militant group behind several high-profile attacks on Western military sites, whose leaders shelter in Pakistan. They consider the network, a Taliban affiliate, as a strategic asset of Pakistan’s spy agency.
Though the Afghan claims of foreign involvement in insider attacks go beyond any evidence presented by coalition officials, some would not rule it out entirely.
Col. David A. Lapan, a spokesman for the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Martin E. Dempsey, said that General Dempsey spoke with Mr. Karzai by phone on Tuesday morning while both were in Afghanistan and that Mr. Karzai committed to working with the United States to examine potential causes for the attacks, including whether they might be the work of outside spy agencies.
“We certainly don’t see this as the one” reason, Colonel Lapan said Wednesday. Nonetheless, he said, “we don’t know what’s causing them, and we’re looking at everything.”
Analysts saw the Afghan assertions as being rooted in the need to be seen as taking more urgent measures to address the insider attacks, which are threatening cooperation between Afghan and coalition forces at a crucial time in the conflict.
As the death toll has risen — 40 NATO service members have been reported killed in insider attacks this year — so has the pressure on Mr. Karzai. In recent days, he has received calls from General Dempsey and Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta about the issue.
And President Obama expressed growing concern this week about insider killings, saying he would personally call Mr. Karzai about them in the coming days. One Western official said that General Dempsey had brought no specific warning or threat of consequences to Mr. Karzai if more was not done.
But an Obama administration official emphasized that the wave of insider attacks was seen as a significant threat to the American exit strategy of turning over security to Afghan forces. “The public reactions you’re seeing from us and the palace are indicative of just how concerning this is to all of us,” the administration official said.
On Wednesday, Mr. Karzai appeared to respond to that concern by announcing measures to improve vetting of Afghans recruited into the security forces, although the details remained sketchy.
These measures include reviewing the files of more than 340,000 police officers and soldiers already recruited, a long-awaited biometric database of service members and a much more detailed examination of their backgrounds and family connections. The Interior and Defense Ministries, given responsibility for coming up with the details, would also get stronger intelligence capabilities to monitor their own forces.
But Anthony H. Cordesman, a defense expert at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, was skeptical that intensified vetting would solve the crisis.
“There are no vetting procedures that can eliminate green-blue attacks in a country where there are no real records, vetting relies heavily on tribal and local sources who care more about family and local politics, and where interviews and polygraphs present major language problems,” he said.
Elisabeth Bumiller contributed reporting from Washington.
Three New Zealand soldiers killed in Afghanistan return home
WELLINGTON, Aug. 23 (Xinhua) -- The bodies of the three New Zealand soldiers killed in Afghanistan have been brought home.
Corporal Luke Tamatea, Lance Corporal Jacinda Baker and Private Richard Harris arrived in New Zealand South Island city of Christchurch on Thursday afternoon for an emotional and sombre military ceremony.
Military chiefs, comrades and family members watched on from the tarmac as the caskets were covered in the New Zealand ensign.
Members of the three grieving families were the first allowed on to the aircraft.
The soldiers, all members of the Second First Battalion, were killed instantly in a roadside bomb blast in Afghanistan five days ago.
The army paid their respects as pallbearers carried the bodies out in a sombre ramp ceremony.
A commemorative service is likely to be held on Saturday at Burnham Military Camp before the soldiers are returned to their families for private funerals.
Ten New Zealand soldiers have lost their lives while serving in Afghanistan since they were first deployed in 2003.
On Aug. 4, two New Zealand soldiers were killed in Bamyan by insurgents during an ambush and they were also from the Burnham- based regiment.
Russian Police Seize 200 Kilograms Of Heroin
August 23, 2012 Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty
Russia's Federal Narcotics Control Service has announced the seizure of more than 200 kilograms of heroin from Afghanistan in the Moscow region.
Agency chief Vasily Yurchenko said on August 23 that police received a tip that the heroin was coming to the Russian capital aboard a train from Tajikistan's capital, Dushanbe.
He said the seizure had helped dismantle a Tajik criminal group that was trafficking heroin into Russia.
Yurchenko said it was the largest single seizure of heroin in Russia in several years.
Based on reporting by Interfax and ITAR-TASS
Kabul Blames 'Foreign Spies' For Insider Attacks
August 22, 2012 Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty
The Afghan government is blaming "infiltration by foreign spy agencies" into Afghanistan's security forces for a rise in attacks by Afghan soldiers on NATO troops.
U.S. President Barack Obama and top U.S. military officials have expressed concern over a rise in insider attacks, which have cost the lives of 10 soldiers, mostly Americans, in the past two weeks.
Presidential spokesman Aimal Faizi said intelligence services, including those in neighboring countries, play a part in most insider attacks.
He did not name them.
Faizi was speaking after President Hamid Karzai met with the country's National Security Council.
In the past, Kabul has accused intelligence services in Pakistan and Iran of enabling Afghan insurgents to destabilize the country.
Based on reporting by AFP and AP
Mullah Omar's Eid Message Read in Nangarhar Mosques: MP
TOLOnews.com Wednesday, 22 August 2012
Mullah Omar's message for Eid al-Fitr was read out in most of the mosques across several districts of eastern Nangarhar province, according to first deputy house speaker of Afghan parliament Zaher Qadir.
Qadir said that the reading out of the Taliban leader's Eid message in mosques was a cause for concern and should have been prevented by provincial officials as a security risk.
"Instead of saying the Eid message from the central government, Mullah Omar's message was read at mosques in several Nangarhar districts. What does this mean for security?" Qadir told TOLOnews, urging Afghan President Hamid Karzai to appoint more qualified provincial officials.
Nangarhar provincial spokesman Abdul Rahim Abdulzai rejected the claims saying he did not have any reports in this regard.
"There are claims that some mullah's have read the Eid message issued by the militants, but we don't have any reports in this regard. I directly talked with the provincial Haji director on this matter and he also denied the report," Abdulzai told TOLOnews Wednesday.
Nangarhar is one of Afghanistan's main eastern provinces which borders Pakistan and contains the most important transit route to Pakistan passing through to Torkham port. The province has seen rising insecurity and insurgent activity in recent months.
An Iraq Vet Commanding In Afghanistan?
TIME By Douglas A. Ollivant August 22, 2012
A new general’s name emerges in the Afghanistan context. Julian Barnes of the Wall Street Journal reports (sub. req.) that Defense Secretary Leon Panetta has forwarded Marine Corps General Joseph Dunford’s name to the White House to be the next U.S. (and NATO) Commander in Afghanistan (COMISAF), confirming the insider gossip of some weeks.
Barnes’ piece interprets the recommendation (if approved by the President) as putting a solid stamp on the President’s policy. He notes that “Gen. Dunford is a firm supporter of the Afghan war strategy of Mr. Obama, who has called for continued drawdowns of U.S. forces through the end of 2014.”
All this is fine and good. General Dunford, the current Assistant Commandant of the Marine Corps, comes with a great reputation. Full stop.
So without commenting on Dunford’s military competence, we can still ask one quite obvious question:
Why is General Dunford being nominated as the COMISAF when, as the story concedes (in paragraph seven), “Gen. Dunford has served in Iraq but has never served a tour of duty in Afghanistan.”
Really? Ten years in Afghanistan, and almost three years after the President’s West Point speech, and we can’t find a commander who has served in Afghanistan before? Is the cupboard really that empty? As one who made the Iraq to Afghanistan transition, I can assure you that it’s neither simple, nor easy. Afghanistan is exponentially more complex—and harder.
This is a very sensitive time in a very sensitive operation—and very few observers think it’s going very well. This is no time to have a commander doing “discovery learning,” no matter how talented he may be. To put it bluntly, there are American soldiers and Marines in firefights with the Taliban every day. They deserve a leader who knows Afghanistan—or at least a major part of it—intimately on the day he flies in.
Inexperience may have been unavoidable earlier in the conflict, but that is simply not the case anymore. There are a number of eligible three and four star candidates—in the Army, Navy, and the Marines—who have served in—and understand the incredibly complex human, cultural and physical geography of—Afghanistan.
Surely at least one of them also believes in the President’s policy of “responsible transition”?
If not, then there is a more serious problem.
Douglas A. Ollivant is a Senior National Security Fellow at the New America Foundation. A retired Army officer, his last assignment was Director for Iraq at the National Security Council, after two tours in Baghdad. He also spent a year in Afghanistan as a Senior Counterinsurgency Advisor. He holds a Ph.D. in Political Science from Indiana University and is on Twitter at @DouglasOllivant.
Book Will Describe Raid That Killed Bin Laden
New York Times By JULIE BOSMAN August 22, 2012
A detailed first-person account of the raid that killed Osama bin Laden, written by a member of the Navy SEALs who participated in the mission and was present at Bin Laden’s death, will be released next month, the publisher said on Wednesday.
A closely held secret within Penguin, the publishing house that is planning to release it on Sept. 11, the book promises to be one of the biggest titles of the year, with the potential to rattle the presidential campaign in the final weeks before the Nov. 6 election.
Titled “No Easy Day: The Firsthand Account of the Mission That Killed Osama bin Laden,” the book was written by a member of the SEALs who is using the pseudonym Mark Owen. Dutton, the imprint of Penguin that acquired the book, said he used a pen name and changed the names of other SEAL members for security reasons.
The author, a former member of SEAL Team 6, was a leader in the operation that resulted in the death of Bin Laden in Abbottabad, Pakistan, on May 2, 2011. According to a description of the book provided by the publisher, the author gives a “blow-by-blow narrative of the assault, beginning with the helicopter crash that could have ended Owen’s life straight through to the radio call confirming Bin Laden’s death.” It describes the book as “an essential piece of modern history.”
He also recalls his childhood in Alaska, the grueling preparation to become a member of the SEALs and his other previously unreported SEAL missions. He has completed 13 combat deployments since the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, and he retired within the past year.
A co-writer, Kevin Maurer, is the author of four books and was embedded with Special Forces in Afghanistan six times.
Penguin officials would not address whether they sought approval to publish the material from any government agencies. Rear Adm. John Kirby, the Navy’s chief spokesman, said in an e-mail: “The author did not seek Navy support/approval for this book. We have no record of any request from an author associated with that book company.”
Tommy Vietor, a spokesman for the National Security Council, said in response to questions: “We learned about this book today from press reports. We haven’t reviewed it and don’t know what it says.”
George Little, the Pentagon press secretary, said he had not read the book and was unaware that anyone in the department had reviewed it.
The book could get caught up in the politically charged arena of the presidential campaign, similar to what occurred with another planned narrative account of the raid, a film by Kathryn Bigelow and Mark Boal called “Zero Dark Thirty.” That film was originally scheduled for release in October, but was moved to December after Republicans said it would help dramatize one of the president’s signature achievements right before the election. The project also prompted complaints from some Republicans that the administration had provided improper access about the raid to the filmmakers, an accusation the White House denied.
In August 2011, The New Yorker published an account of the raid that was so detailed it included information about what the pilot of a Black Hawk helicopter was thinking as the aircraft was on the verge of crashing. That article relied on interviews with officials who had debriefed members of the SEAL team, not with the individuals themselves.
“No Easy Day” joins a crop of books by other former members of the Navy SEALs who have turned their experiences into literary drama and landed coveted spots on best-seller lists. Last year, Chuck Pfarrer, a former SEAL commander, wrote “SEAL Target Geronimo,” an account of the Bin Laden raid based on interviews with members of the Navy SEALs.
The publisher is expecting a major best seller, with a planned print run of 300,000 copies in hardcover.
Because the book is written under a pseudonym, the author will appear in disguise during television interviews to promote the book, and his voice will be altered. At least one major network prime-time appearance has been planned, a publishing executive familiar with the plans said.
The book will go head-to-head with another blockbuster fall release: the latest nonfiction tome by Bob Woodward, which is also being published on Sept. 11. Mr. Woodward’s book, “The Price of Politics,” will look at the attempts by President Obama and the Congressional leadership to fix the economy during Mr. Obama’s first term.
Bookstores have been kept guessing about the book about the Bin Laden raid for weeks. One independent bookstore owner said in July that she was told by Dutton, the publisher, only that it had added a “big, major book” written by an anonymous author to its fall list, and that she should prepare by ordering dozens of copies in advance.
Cathy Langer, the lead book buyer for the Tattered Cover bookstore in Denver, predicted Wednesday that the book could be an unusually big seller.
“This sort of book is too often what I call a F.I.P., flash in the pan, with good sales for a week or so after the initial publicity,” she said in an e-mail. “But this one may have legs into the holidays.”
Thom Shanker and Mark Landler contributed reporting.
US Indictment for Fraud, Bribery in Afghanistan
VOA News August 22, 2012
The U.S. Department of Justice has indicted three people and a corporation on charges of fraud and bribery, accusing them of conspiring to use protected contract information to get an unfair advantage over other companies seeking government contract work in Afghanistan.
The department Wednesday said one of the men was an active military reservist who used his position in the U.S. Army to get information about a contract related to logistics and weapons maintenance support for Afghan military units. The indictment says he suggested a Massachusetts company, AISC, as one of a limited number of bidders.
The Justice Department says that company won the six-month contract and several extensions after submitting a bid that closely matched the military's price estimate. It says AISC received about $54 million from the contract, and the alleged co-conspirators distributed more than $20 million among themselves.
Wednesday's indictment contains a notice of intent to seek forfeiture of real and personal property including more than $6 million in funds; 20 houses in the states of Utah, Florida, Arizona, and New Hampshire; motor vehicles, a boat and an airplane, and hundreds of gold coins.
One of the men has been arrested in the state of Utah. AISC and the other two men are expected to be summoned to a U.S. District Court in Salt Lake City.
Why Afghans are pushing for democratic elections soon
Security has been the main focus in Afghanistan, but many say preparations for democratic elections are equally important if the country is to succeed after 2014.
Christian Science Monitor By Halima Kazem, Correspondent August 22, 2012
Kabul, Afghanistan - As election debates heat up in the US, another election halfway around the world in Afghanistan is not picking up the steam that may be needed to keep the county from backpedaling into civil war, say some Afghans.
Afghanistan has two transitions scheduled for 2014, and both will determine the fate of the country: a security transition that will transfer the country’s security from US and NATO forces to Afghan forces, and a political transition that will elect a new president. And though much has been discussed about the look and feel of the security transition, many within Afghanistan are worried that if the way is not paved for democratic elections, security in the end may not matter.
“We don’t see the movement right now on preparations for the elections. These early stages are critical for ensuring the processes work later on and the Afghan people elect a president that will lead the country through a critical transition,” says Ahmad Nader Nadery, chairman of the Free and Fair Election Foundation of Afghanistan, an election observer organization.
“In order to have a lasting impact, we need to prepare the groundwork for free and fair elections right now. There are groups inside and outside of the Afghan government trying to cling to power and sabotage the 2014 elections,” says Taj Ayubi, a top-level adviser on international relations to Afghan President Hamid Karzai.
Although Mr. Ayubi wouldn’t name anyone specifically, he said that there is a push by some groups to isolate Afghanistan from the international community.
“These Afghans are the same ones that are involved in high-level corruption schemes and part of the drug mafias. They have a lot to lose and are using the rhetoric of nationalism and sovereignty as an excuse to push the international community away from monitoring and being involved in the 2014 presidential and provincial council elections,” Ayubi says.
Ayubi, Mr. Nadery, and leaders of opposition political parties in Afghanistan are calling for increased monitoring by Afghan and international organizations starting now, in the early stages of the election process.
These processes include setting the election date, approving a new electoral law, and establishing mechanisms to monitor campaign finance contributions and interference of government officials in the elections.
“If the processes around the elections are not prioritized immediately, the chaos can lead to transnational terrorist groups surfacing in Afghanistan and trying to take over the government, a state of emergency being declared, or civil war breaking out,” Ayubi says.
Major point of contention
President Karzai's term expires in May 2014, and the constitution says elections must be held 30 to 60 days before an incumbent leaves office. But setting the date has been a major point of contention in the election process.
Leading opposition figures have criticized Karzai for using and manipulating the Independent Election Commission, Afghanistan’s constitutionally mandated body that administers elections, to support his political agenda. The National Coalition of Afghanistan, a coalition of more than 10 opposition political parties, has called for the IEC and Karzai to finalize the election date as soon as possible in order to mitigate the possibility of any last-minute political disputes that have occurred in previous elections.
“Members of the coalition are worried that the current government is delaying the election date and other processes to give themselves a lead and advance their own candidate and political agenda,” says Sayed Fazel Sancharaki, the spokesperson for the National Coalition of Afghanistan.
Noor Mohammad Noor, a spokesman for the IEC, says every attempt will be made to keep the election within the constitutionally mandated time but that several factors affect the date of the elections, including levels of violence and insecurity, how voter registration will be handled, and securing $150 million to pay for the elections.
However, Nadery says, the IEC must work to build public confidence in the commission and be transparent in all of its activities. The commission’s independence came into question in January when Karzai appointed five new commissioners to the IEC. Opposition groups criticized the IEC for allowing Karzai to appoint only supporters to the commission.
'We are running the risk of doing this again'
The timeline for other election activities and processes depends on the election date. A new version of the election law, which election experts say will require extensive discussion, is currently under review by the Afghan Ministry of Justice.
The draft will then be submitted to the council of ministers, go through both houses of parliament, and be signed by the president.
“In Parliament there isn’t much movement in taking the election law and electoral reform as a priority. The current election law was rushed in 2004 and as a result has a lot of problems and wasn’t widely debated by all sectors of civil society. We are running the risk of doing this again and not fully thinking through the election law before the 2014 elections,” says Nadery.
Complaints
The new electoral law has many controversial points, including suggestions for changing the voting system and reforming the Electoral Complaints Commission (ECC), the electoral watchdog that comes into power four months before the election date and receives complaints about electoral issues.
In the 2009 presidential elections, the United Nations-backed ECC was the primary institution to investigate allegations of electoral fraud and threw out close to a million votes for Karzai.
Three main views exist on how the ECC should be reformed, and Nadery says each view is supported by the people who would benefit most from it.
“One view is to fold the complaints commission into the IEC and let it become an adjudicating body under the main election commission. Another view is to have it be part of the judiciary, and a third view is to have it be a completely independent and permanent body,” Nadery says.
The third option of making the ECC into an independent and permanent body could extend the work of the commission to include consistent monitoring of campaign finances and interference of government employees in campaigns.
This would give political parties and other members of civil society a forum to report and address their concerns at a very early stage of the elections.
Authorities Deny Pul-e-Charkhi Prison Break Saying Guards Foiled Attempt
TOLOnews.com Wednesday, 22 August 2012
Afghanistan's top prison official quashed reports of a Taliban break-out from the country's maximum security prison on Monday night, saying that an escape was attempted but all potential escapees were recaptured.
The Central Prison Directorate chief Gen. Amir Mohammad Jamshid told TOLOnews that eight prisoners attempted to escape using the more lenient security within the prison during the Eid holiday, but the prisoners were identified and stopped.
"No one has managed to escape," Jamshid said. "To respect Eid, we wanted to provide a facility for the prisoners to congratulate each other during the Eid days and we opened the doors of the cells. Taking advantage of this, eight prisoners managed to reach the prison yard but they were then identified and detained by the security guards."
TOLOnews earlier reported on Wednesday morning that as many as 15 Taliban commanders on death row had escaped from cell three of block six at Pul-e-Charkhi prison, after a prison official anonymously confirmed a Taliban statement relaying news of the escape.
The Taliban had also released the names of 12 of those said to have escaped, saying they had "already rejoined their [Taliban] groups and returned to their families."
Jamshid confirmed that there is a large number of Pul-e-Charkhi prisoners awaiting the death sentence. He said that up to 100 of the prison's 2,000 inmates were sentenced to death by the Afghan High Court, pending approval from Afghan President Hamid Karzai.
Meanwhile, Karzai has issued a pardon decree on the occasion of Eid al-Fitr which, according to Jamshid, will see the release of some 2,000 prisoners who have already served half their sentences.
There is an estimated 24,000 prisoners in prisons across Afghanistan.
This comes as last year more than 500 prisoners managed to escape Kandahar jail after digging a 320 meter long tunnel to the outside, allegedly helped by some of the prison officials.
Karzai's Support for Taliban ‘Name' Harms Peace Process: Analysts
TOLOnews.com Wednesday, 22 August 2012
Afghan political experts said on Wednesday that Afghan President Hamid Karzai's seemingly supportive statements on the Taliban could harm the peace and reconciliation process.
The experts' comments come after Karzai on Sunday and Tuesday called on the Taliban to admit whether they were behind recent deadly bomb attacks which saw scores of civilians killed, saying "raise your voice because your name is being misused".
"If the Taliban and their leaders have not committed these deadly incidents, [which] the other enemies of Afghanistan might have done, then raise your voice and say you haven't done this cruelty. If you don't do so then it will be done in your name," Karzai said Tuesday at the memorial ceremony for those killed in Nimroz province by suicide bombers on August 14.
Karzai made a similar statement on Sunday, the first day of Eid al-Fitr, after the Eid morning prayer.
Analysts believe that such comments could prove dangerous for the future of Afghanistan.
"Such statements could bring a long-term crisis in Afghanistan and harm the reconciliation process," Afghanistan Research and Evaluation Unit deputy director Mir Ahmad Joyenda told TOLOnews on Wednesday.
Almost all the suicide attacks were attributed as being the Taliban's work, along with support from neighboring countries.
"Taliban attacks are being conducted in close collaboration with [Pakistan intelligence agency] ISI, al-Qaeda and Haqqani networks. Karzai's statement could bring major threats to Afghanistan," Political analyst Jawed Kohistani told TOLOnews.
This is not the first time that Afghan president has conveyed pro-Taliban statements which were condemned by the Afghan experts and civil society organs.
For Afghans, London Games Brings More Than Olympics Glory
The Huffington Post By Ahmad Shafi and Najib Sharifi 22/08/2012
Olympic Games often bring national euphoria as nations cheer when their teams win, and some cry when they lose.
But in Afghanistan -- a country often equated more with violence than with winning in sports -- the London Games evoked emotions many in the country had not felt for a long time. And it wasn't because Afghan athletes racked up a pile of medals. In fact, the country only won its second bronze since first participating in 1936 Berlin Olympics.
It was the Olympic saga of three Afghan athletes which brought about a sense of national unity and inspired long lines of praise and poetry. And the youth of the country went "bananas" as one online activist, @ahmadshuja, tweeted.
The Olympic journey of the team also unfolded like s script from a Hollywood movie.
It began with Tahmina Kohistani -- the team's only female sprinter. She did not win any medals but for many Afghans -- especially women -- she achieved something beyond national pride. Parwiz Kawa, the editor of 8AM newspaper -- a widely circulated paper in Afghanistan -- wrote (in Dari), "Tahmina ran for equality and freedom, and she won!" On the men's side -- the story was no different.
Competing in men's 68kg Taekwondo, 25-year-old Rohullah Nikpai won bronze after facing off against his British opponent Martin Stamper. Millions of Afghans -- across all ethnic and political groups -- were glued to their TV sets as they watched him score the final victory point.
Being from a long-persecuted ethnic minority and growing up as a refugee in Iran, Nikpai achieved what many Afghan leaders and politicians have long failed: He united his country in one kick.
The U.S. embassy in Kabul realized the importance of his achievement. They sent a congratulatory tweet, "@USEmbassyKabul: Congratulations to Roohullah Nikpai, who won a bronze medal for Afghanistan at the Olympics in taekwondo!"
The final and the most dramatic moment came when Nisar Ahmad Bahawi -- competing in men's 80kg Taekwondo -- fought back despite injuries to his leg.
He was widely expected to win Afghanistan's first gold medal.
The 28-year-old did not win any medals, but it was his match against his Argentinean opponent that captured the imagination of his people, especially the youth of the country. He struggled to keep himself up while visibly in pain. He threw kicks and did not let his opponent give him a knockout. And this struck a chord with millions of Afghans. But his match also exposed how corruption has not even left the national team unscathed.
The Afghan team did not have any doctors to attend to Bahawi's injuries. Many in the country blamed this on the corruption that has remained rampant across all government institutions. Others were outraged as one Afghan BBC reporter, Bilal Sarwary (@bsarwary) tweeted about it: "Even sports & Olympics not safe from patronage, corruption & bad governance."
More tweets and comments filled the Afghan blogsphere and the country's growing media, calling on their leaders to tackle corruption.
But others said they hoped the world would take notice of the moment.
Sulaiman Qyamat -- a 31-year-old activist -- said he hopes the story of the three athletes could be a reminder to U.S. policymakers and the international community to invest in the youth of the country -- who make up over 60 percent of the population. "U.S. policymakers should tap on the Afghan youths' potential and optimism instead of relying on the traditional power brokers."
What the trio in the Afghan team achieved may not alter the outcome of the conflict as U.S.-led NATO troops prepare to leave the country in 2014. But it allowed young Afghans who grew up in the last 20 years to see their country briefly united for the first time in their lives.
India-Pakistan-Afghanistan Triangle
The Huffington Post By Aparna Pande Research Fellow & Director, Hudson Institute's Initiative on Future of India & South Asia 22/08/2012
When Secretary of Defense, Leon Panetta, stated that the cooperation of both India and Pakistan was required for a stable Afghanistan he was recognizing that India has always been the unacknowledged elephant in the room during talks between Pakistan and the U.S.
Pakistan's fears about India-Afghan ties are both ideological and strategic. As I lay out in my book Explaining Pakistan's Foreign Policy: Escaping India, (Routledge, 2011) Pakistan's leaders crafted an ideology-driven national identity for Pakistan at the heart of which lay both religious nationalism and anti-India sentiment. Hence, Pakistan, a state built on ideology, felt challenged by two neighbors -- India and Afghanistan -- both of whom shared historical and civilizational ties, seemed hostile to its very existence and emphasized their ethno-linguistic identities.
Further, Pakistan's strategists have always feared a 'pincer movement' or strategic encirclement if India and Afghanistan become allies. To prevent such an eventuality, Pakistan has sought a pro-Pakistan Afghan regime which does not have close ties with India. Any ties between Afghanistan and India have been seen extremely dangerous to Pakistan's very survival.
As early as 1950, India and Afghanistan signed a treaty of friendship. For both New Delhi and Kabul, close ties were seen as important. From the point of view of India, there were not only historical and civilizational ties with Afghanistan but strategic and economic ones. India has always sought close ties with its neighborhood which includes not only its immediate neighbors but countries all the way from the east coast of Africa to South East Asia and beyond.
For Indian policymakers, realpolitik dictated that antagonistic relations with Pakistan meant close ties with Afghanistan were critical. During the anti-Soviet Afghan jihad of the 1980s India did not support any of the mujahideen groups but during the civil war India built ties with leaders in the Northern Alliance, including Ahmad Shah Massoud and Burhanuddin Rabbani.
Today India is one of the leading regional donors to Afghanistan, providing around $2 billion in aid since 2002. Primarily out of Pakistani concern (read 'fear') India has limited its Afghan aid and assistance to areas like infrastructure (building highways, roads and government buildings) health (health clinics and doctors) and education (scholarships for Afghan students to study in India), an area not new in India-Afghan ties. For decades Afghans have studied in India, including President Hamid Karzai and former presidential candidate and foreign minister Abdullah Abdullah.
Pakistan has repeatedly objected to India maintaining four consulates in Afghanistan in addition to an embassy in Kabul. What Pakistan ignores is that these Indian consulates date back to the 1960s (though they were re-established after 2002) and all of Afghanistan's neighbors have as many consulates.
The following speech by India's first Prime Minister, Jawaharlal Nehru, could just as well have been made in 2012 as in 1950: "May I say in this connection that, because of the great tension between Pakistan and Afghanistan over various matters, we are continually being charged with having secret intrigues with Afghanistan and bringing pressure upon her to adopt a policy in regard to Pakistan which she might not otherwise have done?"
In October 2011, India and Afghanistan signed a strategic partnership agreement, the first Afghanistan signed with any country. India has trained some Afghan military officers previously at its defense colleges and is considering an Afghan request to help with training of security forces. As Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh stated, "Our cooperation with Afghanistan is an open book. We have civilizational links, and we are both here to stay. India will stand by the people of Afghanistan as they prepare to assume the responsibility for their governance and security after the withdrawal of international forces in 2014."
Trade is a key part of India-Afghan ties both for bilateral reasons but also because for India, Afghanistan is the gateway to Central Asian markets and energy resources. Unfortunately, since Pakistan has not yet allowed open transit trade between India and Afghanistan, India has been forced to trade via Iran. Indian companies have invested in Afghanistan and a consortium of Indian steel companies led by Steel Authority of India Limited (SAIL) was recently awarded a block in the Hajigak iron ore mines.
From Kabul's vantage point, India provides a counterweight to Pakistan. Pakistan's strategists have always viewed Afghanistan as their British predecessors did: a buffer or neutral zone for the British, an ally who allowed 'strategic depth' for the Pakistanis. Pakistan's leaders like General Ayub Khan hoped that Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iran and Turkey would form one confederation of like-minded territorially linked Muslim countries. The belief was that this would help Pakistan stand up to India. However, none of the other countries, especially Afghanistan, wanted to be part of any such arrangement or alliance.
Afghan leaders have always resented the Pakistani view that the Pakistanis know what is better for Afghanistan. Afghan support for Pashtun and Baluch irredentism as well as its ties with India has always been Afghanistan's way of standing up to a neighbor they believe interferes in their country. It shouldn't be too difficult for Pakistan to understand what it is like to be next-door to a larger neighbor. And yet, despite Pakistan's fears, Afghanistan has always supported Pakistan, not India, during all the wars India and Pakistan fought and has never taken advantage of Pakistan's vulnerabilities during those wars.
India's aid to Afghanistan and the strategic agreement has to do with how both countries view the region and the future. Both India and Afghanistan are concerned about a significant withdrawal of American and NATO forces from Afghanistan by 2014 and both fear the return of the Taliban. Both India and Afghanistan also want to grow economically: Indian investment in Afghanistan as well as talks about the TAPI (Turkmenistan, Afghanistan, Pakistan, India) pipeline are reflective of this desire.
At the same time, both Kabul and New Delhi realize that ties with Rawalpindi-Islamabad are critical for peace in Afghanistan.This is reflected in Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's oft-repeated statement that someday soon he would like to have breakfast in Amritsar, lunch in Lahore and dinner in Kabul. Similarly, President Karzai has repeatedly stated, "Pakistan is our twin brother, India is a great friend. The agreement we signed with our friend will not affect our brother."
Pakistan has no reason to fear close ties between India and Afghanistan, as both countries benefit -- strategically and economically -- from and seek a stable, democratic and prosperous Pakistan. However, in trying to prevent India and Afghanistan from building close ties -- especially in the economic arena -- Pakistan may end up being left behind, instead of being encircled.
Pakistan's fear of a strategic encirclement if India and Afghanistan develop close ties has led Pakistan's military-intelligence establishment to use proxies to implement their foreign policy goals in Afghanistan. However, proxies like the Haqqani Network or the Hekmatyar group, may have a militant network but they do not have a political base in Afghanistan to ensure a stake in a future Afghan government. The Afghan Taliban, which has some political base, may decide at some stage to build ties with India, if only to counterbalance Pakistani involvement.
Maybe it is time Pakistan's strategists reassessed which of their allies and proxies are really going to help them achieve something in Afghanistan. And instead of seeking a regime in Kabul which is pro-Pakistan, maybe Pakistan would benefit by befriending the existing regime in Kabul.
www.afghanistannewscenter.com
U.S. Officials Contest Karzai's Claim Most Afghan Troops Who Killed Coalition Soldiers Were Sent by Regional 'Agencies'
Wall Street Journal By MARIA ABI-HABIB August 22, 2012
KABUL - The majority of the Afghan soldiers and police behind recent killings of U.S.-led forces were recruited for the job by foreign spy agencies, Afghanistan's government said Wednesday, an account that is likely to heighten tensions between Kabul and the U.S.-led coalition.
Afghan President Hamid Karzai led an extraordinary national-security meeting to discuss a wave of attacks on international forces by their Afghan counterparts, the most recent of which claimed the lives of at least 10 U.S. troops this month.
"The hands behind these events are the foreign spy agencies using the Taliban," a spokesman for Mr. Karzai, Aimal Faizi, told reporters. An Afghan investigation into these shootings, released Wednesday, "further highlighted that foreign spy agencies are growlingly fearful of the empowerment of Afghan security agencies," he said.
The countries behind the attacks were from the region, said Mr. Faizi, who declined to name them or provide proof. The Afghan government has frequently accused Iran and Pakistan of aiding the insurgency and stoking unrest, allegations that both have denied.
U.S. defense officials said they don't share the Afghan government's assessment that the attacks were perpetrated by foreign-run Taliban infiltrators. "It's our understanding that these attacks aren't the work of foreign intelligence services," said a senior U.S. defense official, citing U.S. investigations of the incidents. "They're typically Afghans who themselves decide to conduct them, and some Afghans might have help on occasion from insurgent networks."
The coalition has said it believes that only about one of every 10 insider attacks is committed by Taliban infiltrators. Overwhelmingly, it has said, the so-called green-on-blue attacks are perpetrated by Afghan security members who are culturally offended by or have personal disputes with their international counterparts.
Any appearance that the Afghan government is attempting to dodge responsibility could further stoke tension, a Western diplomat and a military official in Kabul said.
Some European countries have threatened to accelerate their withdrawals earlier than 2014—when most foreign forces are expected to leave—according to a Western diplomat in Kabul. It is getting harder to convince constituents at home to keep troops in Afghanistan, the diplomat said, when Afghan forces are turning on their international colleagues and many European economies are struggling.
"If this continues, some countries will walk," the diplomat said, adding that Kabul needs to work to stop the killings.
The Afghan government is under enormous pressure from the coalition to stem insider attacks. The chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Martin Dempsey, discussed the issue with Afghan officials during a visit to Kabul on Monday.
When an Afghan soldier killed four French troops in eastern Kapisa province this year, France decided to speed up its withdrawal to the end of 2012 from 2014. France is one of the largest contributing nations to the military coalition in Afghanistan. New Zealand this week became the latest country to announce a quicker drawdown, after five of its troops were killed this month.
Tensions with the U.S.-led coalition are likely to grow, Western officials say, as Kabul deflects responsibility.
"It's a mutual responsibility," Mr. Faizi said of the attacks, saying that some of the shootings have occurred because of international troops insulting Afghans. In February, U.S. troops burned copies of the Quran, sparking countrywide unrest and leading to two U.S. officers being shot inside the Ministry of Interior.
The rapid drive to build up Afghanistan's army and police has made it easier for agents of foreign governments to infiltrate these forces, Mr. Faizi said, adding the trend will reverse after national security forces reach peak numbers this fall. Up to 15,000 new recruits were joining the security forces each month, Mr. Faizi added, but that number has fallen to 5,000 new recruits a month.
In an attempt to stem infiltration, Afghans are introducing biometric identifications for all new and existing members of the Afghan national security forces, to make sure they aren't previously captured or registered insurgents. New recruits and existing Afghan troops and police—and their families—will be scrutinized, and the intelligence arms of the interior and defense ministries will be strengthened, Mr. Faizi said.
The chairman of the House Committee on Homeland Security, Rep. Peter King (R-N.Y.) called for the director of National Intelligence to "lead an interagency counterintelligence survey of Afghan security forces on an expedited basis to address 'green-on-blue' shootings."
"I am reliably informed that reporting on counterintelligence problems in Afghan units advised and trained by U.S. forces has been suppressed, out of a misplaced fear of reflecting badly upon those units' American advisers and trainers," Mr. King wrote in a letter to Gen. James Clapper, the National Intelligence director, which was posted on the Department of Homeland Security website. "Such concerns must now plainly come second to addressing a growing crisis for our mission in Afghanistan, posed by green on blue shootings." —Siobhan Gorman and Nathan Hodge contributed to this article.
Write to Maria Abi-Habib at maria.habib@dowjones.com
Afghanistan, Contradicting NATO, Blames Foreign Spies for Insider Attacks
New York Times By GRAHAM BOWLEY and RICHARD A. OPPEL Jr. August 22, 2012
KABUL, Afghanistan - Even as the Afghan government said on Wednesday that it would take new measures to counter a wave of deadly insider killings of Western troops by Afghan security forces, President Hamid Karzai’s office asserted for the first time that foreign spy agencies were behind most of the attacks, putting it directly at odds with NATO’s assessment of the crisis.
After a special meeting of the president’s security advisers, Mr. Karzai’s spokesman, Aimal Faizi, said Afghan authorities were studying every known insider attack, also known as green-on-blue attacks. He said that based on interrogations of attackers who had been detained, and other evidence like letters and records of phone calls, the government had concluded that the main culprits in the killings had been put in place by intelligence services from neighboring countries. He did not name them, but the government frequently accuses Pakistan and Iran of meddling.
“The investigation done so far shows there is infiltration by foreign spy agencies,” Mr. Faizi said. “There is no doubt there is infiltration.”
NATO’s recent assessment, however, was that only about 1 in 10 of the insider killings were directly linked to infiltration, which it describes as Taliban insurgents who pose as soldiers or police officers, or active Afghan service members who have been won over to the Taliban cause. Roughly 90 percent of the attacks were concluded to have stemmed from personal disputes, stress or cultural clashes.
Many Western officials here, and American officials at the Pentagon, were surprised by the government’s assertions, and some privately sought to discount the spokesman’s remarks.
“We don’t have indications that foreign entities are the locus of sponsorship for insider-attack threats,” said a senior Pentagon official, who spoke on condition of anonymity to avoid publicly differing with the Afghan president.
The Afghan government allowed that some of the attacks were also motivated by outrage over actions by American troops, including the burning of Korans at an American base and the video images of Marines urinating on dead insurgents. But Afghan officials said that the Taliban and other insurgent groups were the ones mainly responsible, and that these were to a large extent directed by foreign countries’ intelligence agencies, though they did not offer specific evidence.
A senior Pakistani security official reached by telephone called the insinuation “hogwash” and said that the Afghan government always tried to blame the Inter-Services Intelligence, Pakistan’s military spy agency.
The idea that the Pakistani ISI has directly supported attacks in Afghanistan against American targets is not new. Western military and intelligence officials have long acknowledged the role in the Afghan conflict of the Haqqani network, the militant group behind several high-profile attacks on Western military sites, whose leaders shelter in Pakistan. They consider the network, a Taliban affiliate, as a strategic asset of Pakistan’s spy agency.
Though the Afghan claims of foreign involvement in insider attacks go beyond any evidence presented by coalition officials, some would not rule it out entirely.
Col. David A. Lapan, a spokesman for the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Martin E. Dempsey, said that General Dempsey spoke with Mr. Karzai by phone on Tuesday morning while both were in Afghanistan and that Mr. Karzai committed to working with the United States to examine potential causes for the attacks, including whether they might be the work of outside spy agencies.
“We certainly don’t see this as the one” reason, Colonel Lapan said Wednesday. Nonetheless, he said, “we don’t know what’s causing them, and we’re looking at everything.”
Analysts saw the Afghan assertions as being rooted in the need to be seen as taking more urgent measures to address the insider attacks, which are threatening cooperation between Afghan and coalition forces at a crucial time in the conflict.
As the death toll has risen — 40 NATO service members have been reported killed in insider attacks this year — so has the pressure on Mr. Karzai. In recent days, he has received calls from General Dempsey and Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta about the issue.
And President Obama expressed growing concern this week about insider killings, saying he would personally call Mr. Karzai about them in the coming days. One Western official said that General Dempsey had brought no specific warning or threat of consequences to Mr. Karzai if more was not done.
But an Obama administration official emphasized that the wave of insider attacks was seen as a significant threat to the American exit strategy of turning over security to Afghan forces. “The public reactions you’re seeing from us and the palace are indicative of just how concerning this is to all of us,” the administration official said.
On Wednesday, Mr. Karzai appeared to respond to that concern by announcing measures to improve vetting of Afghans recruited into the security forces, although the details remained sketchy.
These measures include reviewing the files of more than 340,000 police officers and soldiers already recruited, a long-awaited biometric database of service members and a much more detailed examination of their backgrounds and family connections. The Interior and Defense Ministries, given responsibility for coming up with the details, would also get stronger intelligence capabilities to monitor their own forces.
But Anthony H. Cordesman, a defense expert at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, was skeptical that intensified vetting would solve the crisis.
“There are no vetting procedures that can eliminate green-blue attacks in a country where there are no real records, vetting relies heavily on tribal and local sources who care more about family and local politics, and where interviews and polygraphs present major language problems,” he said.
Elisabeth Bumiller contributed reporting from Washington.
Three New Zealand soldiers killed in Afghanistan return home
WELLINGTON, Aug. 23 (Xinhua) -- The bodies of the three New Zealand soldiers killed in Afghanistan have been brought home.
Corporal Luke Tamatea, Lance Corporal Jacinda Baker and Private Richard Harris arrived in New Zealand South Island city of Christchurch on Thursday afternoon for an emotional and sombre military ceremony.
Military chiefs, comrades and family members watched on from the tarmac as the caskets were covered in the New Zealand ensign.
Members of the three grieving families were the first allowed on to the aircraft.
The soldiers, all members of the Second First Battalion, were killed instantly in a roadside bomb blast in Afghanistan five days ago.
The army paid their respects as pallbearers carried the bodies out in a sombre ramp ceremony.
A commemorative service is likely to be held on Saturday at Burnham Military Camp before the soldiers are returned to their families for private funerals.
Ten New Zealand soldiers have lost their lives while serving in Afghanistan since they were first deployed in 2003.
On Aug. 4, two New Zealand soldiers were killed in Bamyan by insurgents during an ambush and they were also from the Burnham- based regiment.
Russian Police Seize 200 Kilograms Of Heroin
August 23, 2012 Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty
Russia's Federal Narcotics Control Service has announced the seizure of more than 200 kilograms of heroin from Afghanistan in the Moscow region.
Agency chief Vasily Yurchenko said on August 23 that police received a tip that the heroin was coming to the Russian capital aboard a train from Tajikistan's capital, Dushanbe.
He said the seizure had helped dismantle a Tajik criminal group that was trafficking heroin into Russia.
Yurchenko said it was the largest single seizure of heroin in Russia in several years.
Based on reporting by Interfax and ITAR-TASS
Kabul Blames 'Foreign Spies' For Insider Attacks
August 22, 2012 Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty
The Afghan government is blaming "infiltration by foreign spy agencies" into Afghanistan's security forces for a rise in attacks by Afghan soldiers on NATO troops.
U.S. President Barack Obama and top U.S. military officials have expressed concern over a rise in insider attacks, which have cost the lives of 10 soldiers, mostly Americans, in the past two weeks.
Presidential spokesman Aimal Faizi said intelligence services, including those in neighboring countries, play a part in most insider attacks.
He did not name them.
Faizi was speaking after President Hamid Karzai met with the country's National Security Council.
In the past, Kabul has accused intelligence services in Pakistan and Iran of enabling Afghan insurgents to destabilize the country.
Based on reporting by AFP and AP
Mullah Omar's Eid Message Read in Nangarhar Mosques: MP
TOLOnews.com Wednesday, 22 August 2012
Mullah Omar's message for Eid al-Fitr was read out in most of the mosques across several districts of eastern Nangarhar province, according to first deputy house speaker of Afghan parliament Zaher Qadir.
Qadir said that the reading out of the Taliban leader's Eid message in mosques was a cause for concern and should have been prevented by provincial officials as a security risk.
"Instead of saying the Eid message from the central government, Mullah Omar's message was read at mosques in several Nangarhar districts. What does this mean for security?" Qadir told TOLOnews, urging Afghan President Hamid Karzai to appoint more qualified provincial officials.
Nangarhar provincial spokesman Abdul Rahim Abdulzai rejected the claims saying he did not have any reports in this regard.
"There are claims that some mullah's have read the Eid message issued by the militants, but we don't have any reports in this regard. I directly talked with the provincial Haji director on this matter and he also denied the report," Abdulzai told TOLOnews Wednesday.
Nangarhar is one of Afghanistan's main eastern provinces which borders Pakistan and contains the most important transit route to Pakistan passing through to Torkham port. The province has seen rising insecurity and insurgent activity in recent months.
An Iraq Vet Commanding In Afghanistan?
TIME By Douglas A. Ollivant August 22, 2012
A new general’s name emerges in the Afghanistan context. Julian Barnes of the Wall Street Journal reports (sub. req.) that Defense Secretary Leon Panetta has forwarded Marine Corps General Joseph Dunford’s name to the White House to be the next U.S. (and NATO) Commander in Afghanistan (COMISAF), confirming the insider gossip of some weeks.
Barnes’ piece interprets the recommendation (if approved by the President) as putting a solid stamp on the President’s policy. He notes that “Gen. Dunford is a firm supporter of the Afghan war strategy of Mr. Obama, who has called for continued drawdowns of U.S. forces through the end of 2014.”
All this is fine and good. General Dunford, the current Assistant Commandant of the Marine Corps, comes with a great reputation. Full stop.
So without commenting on Dunford’s military competence, we can still ask one quite obvious question:
Why is General Dunford being nominated as the COMISAF when, as the story concedes (in paragraph seven), “Gen. Dunford has served in Iraq but has never served a tour of duty in Afghanistan.”
Really? Ten years in Afghanistan, and almost three years after the President’s West Point speech, and we can’t find a commander who has served in Afghanistan before? Is the cupboard really that empty? As one who made the Iraq to Afghanistan transition, I can assure you that it’s neither simple, nor easy. Afghanistan is exponentially more complex—and harder.
This is a very sensitive time in a very sensitive operation—and very few observers think it’s going very well. This is no time to have a commander doing “discovery learning,” no matter how talented he may be. To put it bluntly, there are American soldiers and Marines in firefights with the Taliban every day. They deserve a leader who knows Afghanistan—or at least a major part of it—intimately on the day he flies in.
Inexperience may have been unavoidable earlier in the conflict, but that is simply not the case anymore. There are a number of eligible three and four star candidates—in the Army, Navy, and the Marines—who have served in—and understand the incredibly complex human, cultural and physical geography of—Afghanistan.
Surely at least one of them also believes in the President’s policy of “responsible transition”?
If not, then there is a more serious problem.
Douglas A. Ollivant is a Senior National Security Fellow at the New America Foundation. A retired Army officer, his last assignment was Director for Iraq at the National Security Council, after two tours in Baghdad. He also spent a year in Afghanistan as a Senior Counterinsurgency Advisor. He holds a Ph.D. in Political Science from Indiana University and is on Twitter at @DouglasOllivant.
Book Will Describe Raid That Killed Bin Laden
New York Times By JULIE BOSMAN August 22, 2012
A detailed first-person account of the raid that killed Osama bin Laden, written by a member of the Navy SEALs who participated in the mission and was present at Bin Laden’s death, will be released next month, the publisher said on Wednesday.
A closely held secret within Penguin, the publishing house that is planning to release it on Sept. 11, the book promises to be one of the biggest titles of the year, with the potential to rattle the presidential campaign in the final weeks before the Nov. 6 election.
Titled “No Easy Day: The Firsthand Account of the Mission That Killed Osama bin Laden,” the book was written by a member of the SEALs who is using the pseudonym Mark Owen. Dutton, the imprint of Penguin that acquired the book, said he used a pen name and changed the names of other SEAL members for security reasons.
The author, a former member of SEAL Team 6, was a leader in the operation that resulted in the death of Bin Laden in Abbottabad, Pakistan, on May 2, 2011. According to a description of the book provided by the publisher, the author gives a “blow-by-blow narrative of the assault, beginning with the helicopter crash that could have ended Owen’s life straight through to the radio call confirming Bin Laden’s death.” It describes the book as “an essential piece of modern history.”
He also recalls his childhood in Alaska, the grueling preparation to become a member of the SEALs and his other previously unreported SEAL missions. He has completed 13 combat deployments since the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, and he retired within the past year.
A co-writer, Kevin Maurer, is the author of four books and was embedded with Special Forces in Afghanistan six times.
Penguin officials would not address whether they sought approval to publish the material from any government agencies. Rear Adm. John Kirby, the Navy’s chief spokesman, said in an e-mail: “The author did not seek Navy support/approval for this book. We have no record of any request from an author associated with that book company.”
Tommy Vietor, a spokesman for the National Security Council, said in response to questions: “We learned about this book today from press reports. We haven’t reviewed it and don’t know what it says.”
George Little, the Pentagon press secretary, said he had not read the book and was unaware that anyone in the department had reviewed it.
The book could get caught up in the politically charged arena of the presidential campaign, similar to what occurred with another planned narrative account of the raid, a film by Kathryn Bigelow and Mark Boal called “Zero Dark Thirty.” That film was originally scheduled for release in October, but was moved to December after Republicans said it would help dramatize one of the president’s signature achievements right before the election. The project also prompted complaints from some Republicans that the administration had provided improper access about the raid to the filmmakers, an accusation the White House denied.
In August 2011, The New Yorker published an account of the raid that was so detailed it included information about what the pilot of a Black Hawk helicopter was thinking as the aircraft was on the verge of crashing. That article relied on interviews with officials who had debriefed members of the SEAL team, not with the individuals themselves.
“No Easy Day” joins a crop of books by other former members of the Navy SEALs who have turned their experiences into literary drama and landed coveted spots on best-seller lists. Last year, Chuck Pfarrer, a former SEAL commander, wrote “SEAL Target Geronimo,” an account of the Bin Laden raid based on interviews with members of the Navy SEALs.
The publisher is expecting a major best seller, with a planned print run of 300,000 copies in hardcover.
Because the book is written under a pseudonym, the author will appear in disguise during television interviews to promote the book, and his voice will be altered. At least one major network prime-time appearance has been planned, a publishing executive familiar with the plans said.
The book will go head-to-head with another blockbuster fall release: the latest nonfiction tome by Bob Woodward, which is also being published on Sept. 11. Mr. Woodward’s book, “The Price of Politics,” will look at the attempts by President Obama and the Congressional leadership to fix the economy during Mr. Obama’s first term.
Bookstores have been kept guessing about the book about the Bin Laden raid for weeks. One independent bookstore owner said in July that she was told by Dutton, the publisher, only that it had added a “big, major book” written by an anonymous author to its fall list, and that she should prepare by ordering dozens of copies in advance.
Cathy Langer, the lead book buyer for the Tattered Cover bookstore in Denver, predicted Wednesday that the book could be an unusually big seller.
“This sort of book is too often what I call a F.I.P., flash in the pan, with good sales for a week or so after the initial publicity,” she said in an e-mail. “But this one may have legs into the holidays.”
Thom Shanker and Mark Landler contributed reporting.
US Indictment for Fraud, Bribery in Afghanistan
VOA News August 22, 2012
The U.S. Department of Justice has indicted three people and a corporation on charges of fraud and bribery, accusing them of conspiring to use protected contract information to get an unfair advantage over other companies seeking government contract work in Afghanistan.
The department Wednesday said one of the men was an active military reservist who used his position in the U.S. Army to get information about a contract related to logistics and weapons maintenance support for Afghan military units. The indictment says he suggested a Massachusetts company, AISC, as one of a limited number of bidders.
The Justice Department says that company won the six-month contract and several extensions after submitting a bid that closely matched the military's price estimate. It says AISC received about $54 million from the contract, and the alleged co-conspirators distributed more than $20 million among themselves.
Wednesday's indictment contains a notice of intent to seek forfeiture of real and personal property including more than $6 million in funds; 20 houses in the states of Utah, Florida, Arizona, and New Hampshire; motor vehicles, a boat and an airplane, and hundreds of gold coins.
One of the men has been arrested in the state of Utah. AISC and the other two men are expected to be summoned to a U.S. District Court in Salt Lake City.
Why Afghans are pushing for democratic elections soon
Security has been the main focus in Afghanistan, but many say preparations for democratic elections are equally important if the country is to succeed after 2014.
Christian Science Monitor By Halima Kazem, Correspondent August 22, 2012
Kabul, Afghanistan - As election debates heat up in the US, another election halfway around the world in Afghanistan is not picking up the steam that may be needed to keep the county from backpedaling into civil war, say some Afghans.
Afghanistan has two transitions scheduled for 2014, and both will determine the fate of the country: a security transition that will transfer the country’s security from US and NATO forces to Afghan forces, and a political transition that will elect a new president. And though much has been discussed about the look and feel of the security transition, many within Afghanistan are worried that if the way is not paved for democratic elections, security in the end may not matter.
“We don’t see the movement right now on preparations for the elections. These early stages are critical for ensuring the processes work later on and the Afghan people elect a president that will lead the country through a critical transition,” says Ahmad Nader Nadery, chairman of the Free and Fair Election Foundation of Afghanistan, an election observer organization.
“In order to have a lasting impact, we need to prepare the groundwork for free and fair elections right now. There are groups inside and outside of the Afghan government trying to cling to power and sabotage the 2014 elections,” says Taj Ayubi, a top-level adviser on international relations to Afghan President Hamid Karzai.
Although Mr. Ayubi wouldn’t name anyone specifically, he said that there is a push by some groups to isolate Afghanistan from the international community.
“These Afghans are the same ones that are involved in high-level corruption schemes and part of the drug mafias. They have a lot to lose and are using the rhetoric of nationalism and sovereignty as an excuse to push the international community away from monitoring and being involved in the 2014 presidential and provincial council elections,” Ayubi says.
Ayubi, Mr. Nadery, and leaders of opposition political parties in Afghanistan are calling for increased monitoring by Afghan and international organizations starting now, in the early stages of the election process.
These processes include setting the election date, approving a new electoral law, and establishing mechanisms to monitor campaign finance contributions and interference of government officials in the elections.
“If the processes around the elections are not prioritized immediately, the chaos can lead to transnational terrorist groups surfacing in Afghanistan and trying to take over the government, a state of emergency being declared, or civil war breaking out,” Ayubi says.
Major point of contention
President Karzai's term expires in May 2014, and the constitution says elections must be held 30 to 60 days before an incumbent leaves office. But setting the date has been a major point of contention in the election process.
Leading opposition figures have criticized Karzai for using and manipulating the Independent Election Commission, Afghanistan’s constitutionally mandated body that administers elections, to support his political agenda. The National Coalition of Afghanistan, a coalition of more than 10 opposition political parties, has called for the IEC and Karzai to finalize the election date as soon as possible in order to mitigate the possibility of any last-minute political disputes that have occurred in previous elections.
“Members of the coalition are worried that the current government is delaying the election date and other processes to give themselves a lead and advance their own candidate and political agenda,” says Sayed Fazel Sancharaki, the spokesperson for the National Coalition of Afghanistan.
Noor Mohammad Noor, a spokesman for the IEC, says every attempt will be made to keep the election within the constitutionally mandated time but that several factors affect the date of the elections, including levels of violence and insecurity, how voter registration will be handled, and securing $150 million to pay for the elections.
However, Nadery says, the IEC must work to build public confidence in the commission and be transparent in all of its activities. The commission’s independence came into question in January when Karzai appointed five new commissioners to the IEC. Opposition groups criticized the IEC for allowing Karzai to appoint only supporters to the commission.
'We are running the risk of doing this again'
The timeline for other election activities and processes depends on the election date. A new version of the election law, which election experts say will require extensive discussion, is currently under review by the Afghan Ministry of Justice.
The draft will then be submitted to the council of ministers, go through both houses of parliament, and be signed by the president.
“In Parliament there isn’t much movement in taking the election law and electoral reform as a priority. The current election law was rushed in 2004 and as a result has a lot of problems and wasn’t widely debated by all sectors of civil society. We are running the risk of doing this again and not fully thinking through the election law before the 2014 elections,” says Nadery.
Complaints
The new electoral law has many controversial points, including suggestions for changing the voting system and reforming the Electoral Complaints Commission (ECC), the electoral watchdog that comes into power four months before the election date and receives complaints about electoral issues.
In the 2009 presidential elections, the United Nations-backed ECC was the primary institution to investigate allegations of electoral fraud and threw out close to a million votes for Karzai.
Three main views exist on how the ECC should be reformed, and Nadery says each view is supported by the people who would benefit most from it.
“One view is to fold the complaints commission into the IEC and let it become an adjudicating body under the main election commission. Another view is to have it be part of the judiciary, and a third view is to have it be a completely independent and permanent body,” Nadery says.
The third option of making the ECC into an independent and permanent body could extend the work of the commission to include consistent monitoring of campaign finances and interference of government employees in campaigns.
This would give political parties and other members of civil society a forum to report and address their concerns at a very early stage of the elections.
Authorities Deny Pul-e-Charkhi Prison Break Saying Guards Foiled Attempt
TOLOnews.com Wednesday, 22 August 2012
Afghanistan's top prison official quashed reports of a Taliban break-out from the country's maximum security prison on Monday night, saying that an escape was attempted but all potential escapees were recaptured.
The Central Prison Directorate chief Gen. Amir Mohammad Jamshid told TOLOnews that eight prisoners attempted to escape using the more lenient security within the prison during the Eid holiday, but the prisoners were identified and stopped.
"No one has managed to escape," Jamshid said. "To respect Eid, we wanted to provide a facility for the prisoners to congratulate each other during the Eid days and we opened the doors of the cells. Taking advantage of this, eight prisoners managed to reach the prison yard but they were then identified and detained by the security guards."
TOLOnews earlier reported on Wednesday morning that as many as 15 Taliban commanders on death row had escaped from cell three of block six at Pul-e-Charkhi prison, after a prison official anonymously confirmed a Taliban statement relaying news of the escape.
The Taliban had also released the names of 12 of those said to have escaped, saying they had "already rejoined their [Taliban] groups and returned to their families."
Jamshid confirmed that there is a large number of Pul-e-Charkhi prisoners awaiting the death sentence. He said that up to 100 of the prison's 2,000 inmates were sentenced to death by the Afghan High Court, pending approval from Afghan President Hamid Karzai.
Meanwhile, Karzai has issued a pardon decree on the occasion of Eid al-Fitr which, according to Jamshid, will see the release of some 2,000 prisoners who have already served half their sentences.
There is an estimated 24,000 prisoners in prisons across Afghanistan.
This comes as last year more than 500 prisoners managed to escape Kandahar jail after digging a 320 meter long tunnel to the outside, allegedly helped by some of the prison officials.
Karzai's Support for Taliban ‘Name' Harms Peace Process: Analysts
TOLOnews.com Wednesday, 22 August 2012
Afghan political experts said on Wednesday that Afghan President Hamid Karzai's seemingly supportive statements on the Taliban could harm the peace and reconciliation process.
The experts' comments come after Karzai on Sunday and Tuesday called on the Taliban to admit whether they were behind recent deadly bomb attacks which saw scores of civilians killed, saying "raise your voice because your name is being misused".
"If the Taliban and their leaders have not committed these deadly incidents, [which] the other enemies of Afghanistan might have done, then raise your voice and say you haven't done this cruelty. If you don't do so then it will be done in your name," Karzai said Tuesday at the memorial ceremony for those killed in Nimroz province by suicide bombers on August 14.
Karzai made a similar statement on Sunday, the first day of Eid al-Fitr, after the Eid morning prayer.
Analysts believe that such comments could prove dangerous for the future of Afghanistan.
"Such statements could bring a long-term crisis in Afghanistan and harm the reconciliation process," Afghanistan Research and Evaluation Unit deputy director Mir Ahmad Joyenda told TOLOnews on Wednesday.
Almost all the suicide attacks were attributed as being the Taliban's work, along with support from neighboring countries.
"Taliban attacks are being conducted in close collaboration with [Pakistan intelligence agency] ISI, al-Qaeda and Haqqani networks. Karzai's statement could bring major threats to Afghanistan," Political analyst Jawed Kohistani told TOLOnews.
This is not the first time that Afghan president has conveyed pro-Taliban statements which were condemned by the Afghan experts and civil society organs.
For Afghans, London Games Brings More Than Olympics Glory
The Huffington Post By Ahmad Shafi and Najib Sharifi 22/08/2012
Olympic Games often bring national euphoria as nations cheer when their teams win, and some cry when they lose.
But in Afghanistan -- a country often equated more with violence than with winning in sports -- the London Games evoked emotions many in the country had not felt for a long time. And it wasn't because Afghan athletes racked up a pile of medals. In fact, the country only won its second bronze since first participating in 1936 Berlin Olympics.
It was the Olympic saga of three Afghan athletes which brought about a sense of national unity and inspired long lines of praise and poetry. And the youth of the country went "bananas" as one online activist, @ahmadshuja, tweeted.
The Olympic journey of the team also unfolded like s script from a Hollywood movie.
It began with Tahmina Kohistani -- the team's only female sprinter. She did not win any medals but for many Afghans -- especially women -- she achieved something beyond national pride. Parwiz Kawa, the editor of 8AM newspaper -- a widely circulated paper in Afghanistan -- wrote (in Dari), "Tahmina ran for equality and freedom, and she won!" On the men's side -- the story was no different.
Competing in men's 68kg Taekwondo, 25-year-old Rohullah Nikpai won bronze after facing off against his British opponent Martin Stamper. Millions of Afghans -- across all ethnic and political groups -- were glued to their TV sets as they watched him score the final victory point.
Being from a long-persecuted ethnic minority and growing up as a refugee in Iran, Nikpai achieved what many Afghan leaders and politicians have long failed: He united his country in one kick.
The U.S. embassy in Kabul realized the importance of his achievement. They sent a congratulatory tweet, "@USEmbassyKabul: Congratulations to Roohullah Nikpai, who won a bronze medal for Afghanistan at the Olympics in taekwondo!"
The final and the most dramatic moment came when Nisar Ahmad Bahawi -- competing in men's 80kg Taekwondo -- fought back despite injuries to his leg.
He was widely expected to win Afghanistan's first gold medal.
The 28-year-old did not win any medals, but it was his match against his Argentinean opponent that captured the imagination of his people, especially the youth of the country. He struggled to keep himself up while visibly in pain. He threw kicks and did not let his opponent give him a knockout. And this struck a chord with millions of Afghans. But his match also exposed how corruption has not even left the national team unscathed.
The Afghan team did not have any doctors to attend to Bahawi's injuries. Many in the country blamed this on the corruption that has remained rampant across all government institutions. Others were outraged as one Afghan BBC reporter, Bilal Sarwary (@bsarwary) tweeted about it: "Even sports & Olympics not safe from patronage, corruption & bad governance."
More tweets and comments filled the Afghan blogsphere and the country's growing media, calling on their leaders to tackle corruption.
But others said they hoped the world would take notice of the moment.
Sulaiman Qyamat -- a 31-year-old activist -- said he hopes the story of the three athletes could be a reminder to U.S. policymakers and the international community to invest in the youth of the country -- who make up over 60 percent of the population. "U.S. policymakers should tap on the Afghan youths' potential and optimism instead of relying on the traditional power brokers."
What the trio in the Afghan team achieved may not alter the outcome of the conflict as U.S.-led NATO troops prepare to leave the country in 2014. But it allowed young Afghans who grew up in the last 20 years to see their country briefly united for the first time in their lives.
India-Pakistan-Afghanistan Triangle
The Huffington Post By Aparna Pande Research Fellow & Director, Hudson Institute's Initiative on Future of India & South Asia 22/08/2012
When Secretary of Defense, Leon Panetta, stated that the cooperation of both India and Pakistan was required for a stable Afghanistan he was recognizing that India has always been the unacknowledged elephant in the room during talks between Pakistan and the U.S.
Pakistan's fears about India-Afghan ties are both ideological and strategic. As I lay out in my book Explaining Pakistan's Foreign Policy: Escaping India, (Routledge, 2011) Pakistan's leaders crafted an ideology-driven national identity for Pakistan at the heart of which lay both religious nationalism and anti-India sentiment. Hence, Pakistan, a state built on ideology, felt challenged by two neighbors -- India and Afghanistan -- both of whom shared historical and civilizational ties, seemed hostile to its very existence and emphasized their ethno-linguistic identities.
Further, Pakistan's strategists have always feared a 'pincer movement' or strategic encirclement if India and Afghanistan become allies. To prevent such an eventuality, Pakistan has sought a pro-Pakistan Afghan regime which does not have close ties with India. Any ties between Afghanistan and India have been seen extremely dangerous to Pakistan's very survival.
As early as 1950, India and Afghanistan signed a treaty of friendship. For both New Delhi and Kabul, close ties were seen as important. From the point of view of India, there were not only historical and civilizational ties with Afghanistan but strategic and economic ones. India has always sought close ties with its neighborhood which includes not only its immediate neighbors but countries all the way from the east coast of Africa to South East Asia and beyond.
For Indian policymakers, realpolitik dictated that antagonistic relations with Pakistan meant close ties with Afghanistan were critical. During the anti-Soviet Afghan jihad of the 1980s India did not support any of the mujahideen groups but during the civil war India built ties with leaders in the Northern Alliance, including Ahmad Shah Massoud and Burhanuddin Rabbani.
Today India is one of the leading regional donors to Afghanistan, providing around $2 billion in aid since 2002. Primarily out of Pakistani concern (read 'fear') India has limited its Afghan aid and assistance to areas like infrastructure (building highways, roads and government buildings) health (health clinics and doctors) and education (scholarships for Afghan students to study in India), an area not new in India-Afghan ties. For decades Afghans have studied in India, including President Hamid Karzai and former presidential candidate and foreign minister Abdullah Abdullah.
Pakistan has repeatedly objected to India maintaining four consulates in Afghanistan in addition to an embassy in Kabul. What Pakistan ignores is that these Indian consulates date back to the 1960s (though they were re-established after 2002) and all of Afghanistan's neighbors have as many consulates.
The following speech by India's first Prime Minister, Jawaharlal Nehru, could just as well have been made in 2012 as in 1950: "May I say in this connection that, because of the great tension between Pakistan and Afghanistan over various matters, we are continually being charged with having secret intrigues with Afghanistan and bringing pressure upon her to adopt a policy in regard to Pakistan which she might not otherwise have done?"
In October 2011, India and Afghanistan signed a strategic partnership agreement, the first Afghanistan signed with any country. India has trained some Afghan military officers previously at its defense colleges and is considering an Afghan request to help with training of security forces. As Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh stated, "Our cooperation with Afghanistan is an open book. We have civilizational links, and we are both here to stay. India will stand by the people of Afghanistan as they prepare to assume the responsibility for their governance and security after the withdrawal of international forces in 2014."
Trade is a key part of India-Afghan ties both for bilateral reasons but also because for India, Afghanistan is the gateway to Central Asian markets and energy resources. Unfortunately, since Pakistan has not yet allowed open transit trade between India and Afghanistan, India has been forced to trade via Iran. Indian companies have invested in Afghanistan and a consortium of Indian steel companies led by Steel Authority of India Limited (SAIL) was recently awarded a block in the Hajigak iron ore mines.
From Kabul's vantage point, India provides a counterweight to Pakistan. Pakistan's strategists have always viewed Afghanistan as their British predecessors did: a buffer or neutral zone for the British, an ally who allowed 'strategic depth' for the Pakistanis. Pakistan's leaders like General Ayub Khan hoped that Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iran and Turkey would form one confederation of like-minded territorially linked Muslim countries. The belief was that this would help Pakistan stand up to India. However, none of the other countries, especially Afghanistan, wanted to be part of any such arrangement or alliance.
Afghan leaders have always resented the Pakistani view that the Pakistanis know what is better for Afghanistan. Afghan support for Pashtun and Baluch irredentism as well as its ties with India has always been Afghanistan's way of standing up to a neighbor they believe interferes in their country. It shouldn't be too difficult for Pakistan to understand what it is like to be next-door to a larger neighbor. And yet, despite Pakistan's fears, Afghanistan has always supported Pakistan, not India, during all the wars India and Pakistan fought and has never taken advantage of Pakistan's vulnerabilities during those wars.
India's aid to Afghanistan and the strategic agreement has to do with how both countries view the region and the future. Both India and Afghanistan are concerned about a significant withdrawal of American and NATO forces from Afghanistan by 2014 and both fear the return of the Taliban. Both India and Afghanistan also want to grow economically: Indian investment in Afghanistan as well as talks about the TAPI (Turkmenistan, Afghanistan, Pakistan, India) pipeline are reflective of this desire.
At the same time, both Kabul and New Delhi realize that ties with Rawalpindi-Islamabad are critical for peace in Afghanistan.This is reflected in Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's oft-repeated statement that someday soon he would like to have breakfast in Amritsar, lunch in Lahore and dinner in Kabul. Similarly, President Karzai has repeatedly stated, "Pakistan is our twin brother, India is a great friend. The agreement we signed with our friend will not affect our brother."
Pakistan has no reason to fear close ties between India and Afghanistan, as both countries benefit -- strategically and economically -- from and seek a stable, democratic and prosperous Pakistan. However, in trying to prevent India and Afghanistan from building close ties -- especially in the economic arena -- Pakistan may end up being left behind, instead of being encircled.
Pakistan's fear of a strategic encirclement if India and Afghanistan develop close ties has led Pakistan's military-intelligence establishment to use proxies to implement their foreign policy goals in Afghanistan. However, proxies like the Haqqani Network or the Hekmatyar group, may have a militant network but they do not have a political base in Afghanistan to ensure a stake in a future Afghan government. The Afghan Taliban, which has some political base, may decide at some stage to build ties with India, if only to counterbalance Pakistani involvement.
Maybe it is time Pakistan's strategists reassessed which of their allies and proxies are really going to help them achieve something in Afghanistan. And instead of seeking a regime in Kabul which is pro-Pakistan, maybe Pakistan would benefit by befriending the existing regime in Kabul.
www.afghanistannewscenter.com