Tweet
'Insider killings' challenge US exit strategy in Afghanistan
The Pentagon wants to know whether the recent spike in 'insider killings' – Afghan forces targeting US and NATO forces – reflects 'infiltration, impersonation, and coercion' or is mainly just personal.
Christian Science Monitor By Anna Mulrine, Staff writer August 24, 2012
Washington - What is the reason for the growing number of “insider” attacks on US troops by the Afghan security forces that they are charged with training?
It is a troubling topic that the commander of US troops in Afghanistan, Gen. John Allen, attempted to tackle this week.
There have been 32 confirmed insider attacks so far this year, with at least 40 NATO troops killed – including 26 Americans.
Training Afghan security forces is meant to be the US exit strategy in the country – as these forces stand up, the oft-repeated Pentagon credo goes, US forces can stand down.
Afghan President Hamid Karzai offered his own explanation for the recent spate of insider killings, blaming the Pakistani intelligence services for brainwashing Afghan recruits.
To this, General Allen sounded somewhat skeptical. “I’m looking forward to Afghanistan providing us with the intelligence that permits them to come to that conclusion," he said in a Pentagon briefing Thursday.
The Pentagon for its part has insisted that the vast majority of these killings are the result of personal grievances, “social difficulties,” and arguments gone awry with US forces.
Only 10 percent of these killings, they say, are the result of Taliban infiltration.
Allen offered that the figure might be higher, suggesting that Taliban “infiltration, impersonation, coercion” could account for “about 25 percent or so” of the killings.
Others, he said, may be due to “radicalization or having become susceptible to extremist ideology.”
As for the rest, “We’re trying to understand what may have caused each case, but also in the aggregate why these attacks have occurred,” he said.
He pointed to the stress of Ramadan, the Muslim holy month of fasting, which came in the middle of the fighting season this year, “during the harshest time for the climate in much of the region.”
He continued: “The daily pressures that are on some of these troops, compounded by the sacrifice associated with fasting, the nature of our operational tempo ... and they’ve been in combat now for years. We believe that the combination of many of these particular factors may have come together during the last several weeks to generate the larger numbers that you point to.”
Analysts have pointed out that Ramadan fell during the summer fighting season last year as well, yet with fewer "insider killings."
In short, the question of insider threats “still requites a lot of analysis,” Allen acknowledged.
In the meantime, will this threat imperil the US strategy in Afghanistan, which hinges on intensive training of these forces?
“At this particular moment, I don’t believe that we need to contemplate reducing our contact with the Afghans,” he said.
He suggested that instead forging closer ties with Afghan forces may be the key. “What we have learned is that the closer the relationship with them – indeed, the more we can foster a relationship of brotherhood – the more secure that we are.”
In the meantime, troops at NATO headquarters and other bases around Afghanistan have been instructed to carry loaded weapons with them at all times. Coalition troops will need to “be more careful about our force protection,” Allen added, “be more watchful of the emergence of a threat.”
We can build a durable peace in Afghanistan
Washington Post By John R. Allen Opinion August 24, 2012
John R. Allen is commander of the NATO International Security Assistance Force and U.S. forces in Afghanistan.
We can achieve what we set out to do in Afghanistan, defeating al-Qaeda and denying it a haven, but that depends on achieving an Afghanistan that can stand on its own.
I recently attended a celebration here to commemorate Afghanistan’s 93rd year of independence. I was struck by the hope and the strengthening of the Afghans’ national identity and their determination to grip their country’s future. Most Americans do not get to see Afghans’ commitment to their country or the improving security that has emerged from our fight together. But I do. And I am confident that, with the international community’s commitment, we can consolidate our gains and build a durable peace in a part of the world vital to U.S. national security.
This moment in Afghan history has arrived not by accident or luck but in the wake of powerful events: the growing strength and capability of Afghan security forces; the signing of bilateral and multilateral strategic partnerships; and the international community’s pledge of substantial support for the next decade.
These accomplishments have been borne on the backs of remarkable allied and Afghan forces — those serving today and those who have gone before. Their tremendous sacrifices are creating security conditions that, finally, are bringing a real sense of confidence to the Afghan people.
We will not allow our efforts to be derailed by the so-called “green-on-blue” attacks — Afghans shooting coalition troops — that have received so much attention recently. Each instance is a tragedy, and we mourn every loss. I have stood on the ramps of airfields here as we’ve sent home our fallen heroes. I take personally the loss of every member of the International Security Assistance Force. Afghan and international leaders at all levels are devoting unprecedented time and effort to reduce this threat. We have implemented measures to better protect our troops; we have helped build an Afghan force of close to 350,000; and Afghans are leading security operations in three-quarters of the country. This momentum is irreversible.
But the real story here is green andblue. Every day, hundreds of thousands of Afghan soldiers and police across this nation work and fight side by side with coalition troops to defeat our common enemies and protect the civilian population. We interact closely on numerous operations, extending security for the Afghan people.
The focus on “green-on-blue” attacks obscures the callous slaughter of Afghan civilians by insurgents led by Mohammad Omar. He has the blood of innocents on his hands even though he hypocritically tells his subordinates not to attack civilians. Either he is out of touch, or his forces are out of control. Perhaps that should be no surprise. Omar lives in Pakistan, as do many of his “commanders.” From that safe vantage point, they’ve sent hundreds of young, impressionable, largely spiritual and helpless youths to their deaths and detention in Afghanistan. For this, they must forfeit their honor and any claim to Islamic virtue.
This is playing out in another important color combination: white on red. The Afghan population is organizing to drive the hated Taliban from their villages. This movement is emerging in areas where the heavy hand of the Taliban has created a popular groundswell against the insurgents.
These trends speak well for the future of Afghanistan, but the international community should know these gains are fragile, and reversible, if we lose our will to succeed.
U.S., allied and Afghan security forces will continue to deal with “green-on-blue” attacks. We will mourn our precious dead, but we will not permit this threat to derail the progress being made by coalition and Afghan forces. We also resolve to protect the civilian population, the “white,” from the scourge of the Taliban, the “red.”
This struggle is far from over, but the solution will be found in our growing strength and will not be defined by incidents of “green-on-blue” violence. Our cause is right, our determination is clear and our sacrifices have not been in vain. We are, in fact, prevailing.
Militant Leader Believed Dead in Pakistan Drone Strike
New York Times By DECLAN WALSH and ERIC SCHMITT August 24, 2012
ISLAMABAD, Pakistan - A volley of C.I.A. drone strikes in Pakistan’s tribal belt early Friday killed at least 18 people, security officials said, capping a week of missile attacks that have renewed tensions between Pakistan and the United States, but may have killed a major militant leader.
Senior American officials said they had strong indications that Badruddin Haqqani, the operational commander of the Haqqani network, which is responsible for some of the most spectacular assaults on American bases and Afghan cities in recent years, was killed in a drone strike this week.
“There are indications that Haqqani has met his demise,” a senior United States official said in Washington on Friday. He said that officials were waiting to sift through evidence, including information on jihadist Web sites, before they could be certain that Mr. Haqqani had been killed.
The caution stems from previous erroneous claims by American and Pakistani officials about militant deaths in Waziristan, a notoriously difficult place to get reliable information. But if confirmed, Mr. Haqqani’s death would be a major benefit to the military coalition in Afghanistan.
Thought to be in his mid-30s, Mr. Haqqani runs the Haqqani network’s day-to-day militant operations, handles high-profile kidnappings and manages its lucrative smuggling operations, according to a recent report by the Combating Terrorism Center, an independent, privately financed research and educational institution at West Point.
He is considered second in seniority to the Haqqani network’s leader, his older brother Sirajuddin Haqqani. Both men are believed to direct operations in Afghanistan from their haven in North Waziristan, where they have allied with local warlords and enjoy longstanding clan ties.
In August 2011, Afghan intelligence released intercepts of Badruddin Haqqani directing a daring assault on Kabul’s Intercontinental Hotel; three years before that he held a reporter for The New York Times, David Rohde, hostage.
“Badruddin Haqqani has been at the center of coalition attacks in Afghanistan as well as mischief in Pakistan,” said the American official, speaking on the condition of anonymity because of the delicate nature of the subject.
By Friday evening, reports of Mr. Haqqani’s death were circulating in Pakistan’s tribal belt. In Washington, the C.I.A., which carries out armed drone missions in Pakistan, declined to comment, as did the White House.
The last major successful drone strike in Pakistan was the assassination of the Al Qaeda deputy leader, Abu Yahya al-Libi, in June.
Early Friday, C.I.A. drones fired at least six missiles at three locations in the Shawal Valley, destroying mud-walled compounds and at least two vehicles, said two Pakistani security officials and a local Taliban commander. Among the 18 people reported to have been killed was Emeti Yakuf, a senior leader of the East Turkestan Islamic Movement, a group from western China whose members are Chinese Uighur Muslim militants.
On Thursday, the Pakistani Foreign Office summoned an American Embassy official to officially protest the sudden surge in drone strikes — the eighth such protest issued by Pakistan over the past 12 months, according to a senior Pakistani official.
Although Pakistan and the United States patched up their differences over NATO supply routes in July, the drone campaign is a major impediment to a resumption of normal relations.
Pakistan’s military has proposed that it carry out the strikes itself using its fleet of American-built F-16 warplanes. The Obama administration has rejected those demands, saying the covert campaign offers the most effective tool against militants in an area where the Pakistani state has largely lost control.
Tensions are complicated by the Haqqani network, which American officials say has uncomfortably close ties to Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence directorate. The ISI denies any operational link to the group.
Under pressure from Congress, the Obama administration must decide by Sept. 9 whether to declare the Haqqani network a terrorist entity — a move that could further complicate relations between the two countries.
But most of the Haqqani leadership, including Mr. Haqqani, his brothers and uncles, have already been individually designated as “global terrorists.” In May 2011 the State Department said Mr. Haqqani “helps lead insurgents and foreign fighters in attacks against targets in southeastern Afghanistan.”
Another American official, who also insisted on anonymity, said Mr. Haqqani was believed to have died in a “signature” strike — an attack on militants based on their pattern of activity and location, rather than intelligence about any one individual.
Human rights groups say signature strikes inflict unacceptable collateral damage, but the official said that if Mr. Haqqani was killed, his death and those of other “high-value targets” would show how such strikes had “consistently degraded Al Qaeda and its allies” in Pakistan.
Declan Walsh reported from Islamabad, and Eric Schmitt from Washington. Ihsanullah Tipu Mehsud contributed reporting from Islamabad, and Ismail Khan from Peshawar, Pakistan.
US general says his forces carried out cyberattacks on opponents in Afghanistan
Associated Press August 24 , 2012
Marine Lt. Gen. Richard P. Mills’ comments came last week at a conference in Baltimore during which he explained how U.S. commanders considered cyber weapons an important part of their arsenal.
“I can tell you that as a commander in Afghanistan in the year 2010, I was able to use my cyber operations against my adversary with great impact,” Mills said. “I was able to get inside his nets, infect his command-and-control, and in fact defend myself against his almost constant incursions to get inside my wire, to affect my operations.”
Mills, now a deputy commandant with the Marine Corps, was in charge of international forces in southwestern Afghanistan between 2010 and 2011, according to his official biography. He didn’t go into any further detail as to the nature or scope of his forces’ attacks, but experts said that such a public admission that they were being carried out was itself striking.
“This is news,” said James Lewis, a cyber-security analyst with the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies. He said that while it was generally known in defense circles that cyberattacks had been carried out by U.S. forces in Afghanistan, he had never seen a senior officer take credit for them in such a way.
“It’s not secret,” Lewis said in a telephone interview, but he added: “I haven’t seen as explicit a statement on this as the one” Mills made.
Pentagon spokesman Lt. Col. Damien Pickart declined to elaborate on Mills’ comments, saying in an email that “for reasons of security . we do not provide specific information regarding our intentions, plans, capabilities or operations.”
The email said that the Pentagon’s cyber operations were properly authorized and that they took place within the bounds of international law and the “confines of existing policy.”
U.S. defense planners have spent the past few years debating that policy, asking how and under what circumstances the Pentagon would launch a cyberattack against its enemies, but it’s only recently become apparent that a sophisticated program of U.S.-backed cyberattacks is already under way.
A book by The New York Times reporter David Sanger recently recounted how President Barack Obama ordered a wave of electronic incursions aimed at physically sabotaging Iran’s disputed atomic energy program. Subsequent reports have linked the program to a virus dubbed Flame, which prompted a temporary Internet blackout across Iran’s oil industry in April, and another virus called Gauss, which appeared to have been aimed at stealing information from customers of Lebanese banks. An earlier report alleged that U.S. forces in Iraq had hacked into a terrorist group’s computer there to lure its members into an ambush.
Herbert Lin, a cyber expert at the National Research Council, agreed that Mills’ comments were unusual in terms of the fact that they were made publicly. But Lin said that the United States was, little by little, opening up about the fact that its military was launching attacks across the Internet.
“The U.S. military is starting to talk more and more in terms of what it’s doing and how it’s doing it,” he said. “A couple of years ago it was hard to get them to acknowledge that they were doing offense at all — even as a matter of policy, let alone in specific theaters or specific operations.”
Mills’ brief comments about cyberattacks in Afghanistan were delivered to the TechNet Land Forces East conference in Baltimore on Aug. 15, but they did not appear to have attracted much attention at the time. Footage of the speech was only recently posted to the Internet by conference organizers.
NATO airstrike kills 12 militants in eastern Afghanistan
Associated Press August 24 , 2012
KABUL, Afghanistan - A NATO airstrike in eastern Afghanistan targeting a group of insurgents near the Pakistani border killed at least 12 militants Friday, the international military coalition said.
Pakistani intelligence and Afghan officials said Mullah Dadullah, the self-proclaimed leader of the Pakistani Taliban in Pakistan’s Bajur tribal area was killed, although they offered conflicting reports on the exact location of the strike. NATO could not confirm that a senior militant had been killed.
Coalition spokesman Maj. Adam Wojack said the attack took place late Friday afternoon in Kunar province near the Pakistan border, killing 12 militants.
Conflicting reports out of the rugged and remote regions along the Afghan-Pakistan border are common shortly after an attack.
Kunar provincial official Aslam Gul Mujahid said the airstrike killed 20 people, including Dadullah. Pakistani intelligence officials said Dadullah and 19 others were killed, but they said the airstrike took place in Pakistan’s Bajur region, just across the border from Kunar.
The Pakistani intelligence officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to brief the media, said the strike occurred after a cross-border attack by Pakistani Taliban militants who came from Afghanistan.
Jahangir Azam Khattak, a local Pakistani government official, said dozens of militants attacked a Pakistani post manned by anti-Taliban militiamen in the Salarzai area of Bajur. He said six militants were killed and four tribesmen were wounded.
Two Pakistani militiamen also were killed, local tribesmen said on condition of anonymity out of fear for their safety.
The Pakistani intelligence officials said the militiamen and army soldiers fought the militants for hours but eventually repelled the attack.
Pakistani Taliban spokesman Ahsanullah Ahsan claimed responsibility for the attack on the outpost in a telephone call to The Associated Press.
It was unclear whether Pakistani and coalition officials coordinated the strike or whether NATO fired on the militants after noticing activity on the border.
Pakistan has criticized Afghan and U.S.-led coalition forces for not doing enough to stop cross-border attacks by Taliban militants against targets inside Pakistan.
The U.S. and Afghanistan have long criticized Pakistan for its failure to prevent militants from carrying out attacks in the opposite direction.
Also in the east, authorities said Friday that insurgents kidnapped three Afghan soldiers and another man from a bus in eastern Afghanistan and killed all four.
Militants stopped the bus as it was traveling in Paktia province’s Ahmad Khil district and forced the four men off the vehicle Thursday, provincial deputy police chief Mohammad Zaman said. Their bullet-ridden bodies were found lying on a road later in the day.
Three of the men were off-duty soldiers who were traveling to see their families, and the fourth victim’s identity was unclear, Zaman said.
The Taliban and their allies frequently kill Afghan police and soldiers to counter the plan to strengthen national security forces. They are due to take over main responsibility for fighting militants after international combat troops leave in 2014.
Elsewhere in Afghanistan, six civilians were killed when their vehicle hit a roadside bomb as they traveled in the southern province of Kandahar, police said.
The civilians were riding on a motorcycle-drawn cart when it hit the bomb Thursday in the town of Spin Boldak, provincial police chief Abdul Razaq said.
Roadside bombs are a favorite Taliban weapon to target international and Afghan forces, but the explosives often kill ordinary Afghans instead.
A U.N. report says 1,145 civilians were killed during the first half of the year, 80 percent of them by militants. Insurgent-placed homemade bombs continued to be the biggest killer of civilians, accounting for 29 percent of all noncombatant deaths during the first six months of 2012.
___
Anwarullah Khan in Khar, Pakistan and Amir Shah in Kabul contributed to this report.
Taliban attempts to kidnap family of jailed CIA informant in Pakistan
FoxNews.com By Dominic Di-Natale August 24, 2012
PESHAWAR - The Taliban attempted to kidnap the brother and other relatives of the Pakistani doctor jailed for helping the CIA hunt down Usama Bin Laden, members of the family told Fox News.
The alleged attempted abduction happened on Monday, according to Qamar Afridi, a cousin of Dr. Shakil Afridi, when a man identifying himself as a representative of Afghan President Hamid Karzai met with a family lawyer in Peshawar to discuss the case. The man reportedly said the Afghan leader wanted to help the Afridi family, and was willing to offer them financial support in their efforts to free the doctor.
The man, who identified himself as Haji Hukam Khan and said he was “very close to Karzai,” asked the lawyer to bring Jamil (Dr. Afridi’s brother) and other family members to Kabul, Afghanistan to meet Karzai. “He wants to aid you,” Qamar said the man told the lawyer.
The family reacted to the offer with alarm because the Karzai government has shown no interest in the Afridi case. An Afghan official confirmed those suspicions on Friday, saying “no one from the Karzai administration has reached out to Afridi, nor do they intend to."
Qamar said he had little doubt about who was behind what he is convinced was an attempted abduction.
“We believe it was the Taliban. It has to be We firmly believe this is the Taliban trying to get us.”
Afridi was sentenced to 33 years in jail on May 23, 2012, a year to the day after his arrest. He was convicted of supporting and financing a terror network, in what the U.S. government considers to be trumped-up charges. The Taliban and their supporters in Pakistan have also declared Afridi a “sworn enemy.”
The attempted abduction is the latest in what has been a series of difficult ordeals facing the Afridi family. They have not been able to visit the surgeon in his jail cell in Peshawar since Aug. 2, only their third visit permitted since he was jailed in May. They were not allowed to talk him without senior prison officials present.
The doctor has also told his family that for the first six months after his arrest, he was kept handcuffed and in total darkness – attempts, he told his family, that were meant to leave him paralyzed and permanently blind. “Shakil told us that as a doctor he knew what long-term impact his body would suffer from prolonged physical restraint and by having no exposure to light,” said Qamar.
Afridi said that because of his knowledge of anatomy as a physician, he would try and do exercises to mitigate some of the harmful physical effects. All the same, Qamar said, the doctor now has “deeply sunken eyes in his head,” and his arms and hands have clearly been physically affected.
Afridi was moved from confinement by Pakistan’s intelligence service, the ISI, after his conviction in May. He was able to see that he had been held in a private residential property in what he recognized as the capital, Islamabad. He described it as being near Pakistan’s Supreme Court, in the very heart of the city.
The location and style of property bear similarities with that in which Bin Laden's wives were housed after they were arrested by the ISI, Pakistan's intelligence agency, following the U.S. raid on the Bin Laden complex at Abbottabad. The ISI held the women in a private residence a stone’s throw away from the same court complex, in a leafy, well-heeled neighborhood on the edge of the government quarter, close to a number of foreign embassies.
Afridi was then transferred to a Peshawar jail, where he was informed of his sentence by an assistant to tribal court judge, referred to as a political agent. That meeting lasted around 15 to 30 minutes. It is the only personal encounter he has had with any judicial official since he was apprehended by the ISI.
A ruling on Afridi's appeal is expected by mid-September. Prosecution and defense lawyers will have an opportunity to present final arguments in the case at an Aug 30 hearing.
Afridi’s family says they have been denied access to the original prosecution file against him by the tribal court system. They also said there are 15 pages noticeably missing from the file that they did receive, including the verdict by the ruling jirga, a four-man group of tribal elders who heard his case.
The family says if the original verdict is not presented, it will be a fatal flaw in the prosecution’s case and would mean that, in theory, Shakil would have to be released. But they are not optimistic that would happen due to interference by the ISI.
The Afridis say they have also found themselves ostracized and in dire financial difficulties amid mounting legal costs. Afridi’s wife, who Qamar says is now in hiding somewhere in Punjab, is set to be fired from her job as a college principal in one of Pakistan’s most dangerous tribal towns.
Notices were published in the Pakistani media that informed of her imminent dismissal due to her prolonged absence.
The family says it cannot raise the $50,000 dollars it says is needed to fight the case and also to support the family’s basic needs. Shakil’s brother, Jamil, earns just $84 dollars a month as an 8th grade teacher in Multan.
The Afridi case has caught the attention of a handful of lawmakers on Capitol Hill, though political conventions and the presidential campaign have distracted from Afridi’s plight. Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., is pushing for a vote on a bill that would strip Pakistan of all U.S. aid unless Afridi is released.
On the House side, Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, R-Calif., has been pressing Afridi's case for months, but has expressed concern about the administration’s commitment to Afridi’s freedom.
"It doesn't appear that other people are taking this case seriously," Rohrabacher said earlier this year. "If we let that person just hang on a limb and forget him, now that he's put himself in danger for us -- well shame on us."
www.afghanistannewscenter.com
The Pentagon wants to know whether the recent spike in 'insider killings' – Afghan forces targeting US and NATO forces – reflects 'infiltration, impersonation, and coercion' or is mainly just personal.
Christian Science Monitor By Anna Mulrine, Staff writer August 24, 2012
Washington - What is the reason for the growing number of “insider” attacks on US troops by the Afghan security forces that they are charged with training?
It is a troubling topic that the commander of US troops in Afghanistan, Gen. John Allen, attempted to tackle this week.
There have been 32 confirmed insider attacks so far this year, with at least 40 NATO troops killed – including 26 Americans.
Training Afghan security forces is meant to be the US exit strategy in the country – as these forces stand up, the oft-repeated Pentagon credo goes, US forces can stand down.
Afghan President Hamid Karzai offered his own explanation for the recent spate of insider killings, blaming the Pakistani intelligence services for brainwashing Afghan recruits.
To this, General Allen sounded somewhat skeptical. “I’m looking forward to Afghanistan providing us with the intelligence that permits them to come to that conclusion," he said in a Pentagon briefing Thursday.
The Pentagon for its part has insisted that the vast majority of these killings are the result of personal grievances, “social difficulties,” and arguments gone awry with US forces.
Only 10 percent of these killings, they say, are the result of Taliban infiltration.
Allen offered that the figure might be higher, suggesting that Taliban “infiltration, impersonation, coercion” could account for “about 25 percent or so” of the killings.
Others, he said, may be due to “radicalization or having become susceptible to extremist ideology.”
As for the rest, “We’re trying to understand what may have caused each case, but also in the aggregate why these attacks have occurred,” he said.
He pointed to the stress of Ramadan, the Muslim holy month of fasting, which came in the middle of the fighting season this year, “during the harshest time for the climate in much of the region.”
He continued: “The daily pressures that are on some of these troops, compounded by the sacrifice associated with fasting, the nature of our operational tempo ... and they’ve been in combat now for years. We believe that the combination of many of these particular factors may have come together during the last several weeks to generate the larger numbers that you point to.”
Analysts have pointed out that Ramadan fell during the summer fighting season last year as well, yet with fewer "insider killings."
In short, the question of insider threats “still requites a lot of analysis,” Allen acknowledged.
In the meantime, will this threat imperil the US strategy in Afghanistan, which hinges on intensive training of these forces?
“At this particular moment, I don’t believe that we need to contemplate reducing our contact with the Afghans,” he said.
He suggested that instead forging closer ties with Afghan forces may be the key. “What we have learned is that the closer the relationship with them – indeed, the more we can foster a relationship of brotherhood – the more secure that we are.”
In the meantime, troops at NATO headquarters and other bases around Afghanistan have been instructed to carry loaded weapons with them at all times. Coalition troops will need to “be more careful about our force protection,” Allen added, “be more watchful of the emergence of a threat.”
We can build a durable peace in Afghanistan
Washington Post By John R. Allen Opinion August 24, 2012
John R. Allen is commander of the NATO International Security Assistance Force and U.S. forces in Afghanistan.
We can achieve what we set out to do in Afghanistan, defeating al-Qaeda and denying it a haven, but that depends on achieving an Afghanistan that can stand on its own.
I recently attended a celebration here to commemorate Afghanistan’s 93rd year of independence. I was struck by the hope and the strengthening of the Afghans’ national identity and their determination to grip their country’s future. Most Americans do not get to see Afghans’ commitment to their country or the improving security that has emerged from our fight together. But I do. And I am confident that, with the international community’s commitment, we can consolidate our gains and build a durable peace in a part of the world vital to U.S. national security.
This moment in Afghan history has arrived not by accident or luck but in the wake of powerful events: the growing strength and capability of Afghan security forces; the signing of bilateral and multilateral strategic partnerships; and the international community’s pledge of substantial support for the next decade.
These accomplishments have been borne on the backs of remarkable allied and Afghan forces — those serving today and those who have gone before. Their tremendous sacrifices are creating security conditions that, finally, are bringing a real sense of confidence to the Afghan people.
We will not allow our efforts to be derailed by the so-called “green-on-blue” attacks — Afghans shooting coalition troops — that have received so much attention recently. Each instance is a tragedy, and we mourn every loss. I have stood on the ramps of airfields here as we’ve sent home our fallen heroes. I take personally the loss of every member of the International Security Assistance Force. Afghan and international leaders at all levels are devoting unprecedented time and effort to reduce this threat. We have implemented measures to better protect our troops; we have helped build an Afghan force of close to 350,000; and Afghans are leading security operations in three-quarters of the country. This momentum is irreversible.
But the real story here is green andblue. Every day, hundreds of thousands of Afghan soldiers and police across this nation work and fight side by side with coalition troops to defeat our common enemies and protect the civilian population. We interact closely on numerous operations, extending security for the Afghan people.
The focus on “green-on-blue” attacks obscures the callous slaughter of Afghan civilians by insurgents led by Mohammad Omar. He has the blood of innocents on his hands even though he hypocritically tells his subordinates not to attack civilians. Either he is out of touch, or his forces are out of control. Perhaps that should be no surprise. Omar lives in Pakistan, as do many of his “commanders.” From that safe vantage point, they’ve sent hundreds of young, impressionable, largely spiritual and helpless youths to their deaths and detention in Afghanistan. For this, they must forfeit their honor and any claim to Islamic virtue.
This is playing out in another important color combination: white on red. The Afghan population is organizing to drive the hated Taliban from their villages. This movement is emerging in areas where the heavy hand of the Taliban has created a popular groundswell against the insurgents.
These trends speak well for the future of Afghanistan, but the international community should know these gains are fragile, and reversible, if we lose our will to succeed.
U.S., allied and Afghan security forces will continue to deal with “green-on-blue” attacks. We will mourn our precious dead, but we will not permit this threat to derail the progress being made by coalition and Afghan forces. We also resolve to protect the civilian population, the “white,” from the scourge of the Taliban, the “red.”
This struggle is far from over, but the solution will be found in our growing strength and will not be defined by incidents of “green-on-blue” violence. Our cause is right, our determination is clear and our sacrifices have not been in vain. We are, in fact, prevailing.
Militant Leader Believed Dead in Pakistan Drone Strike
New York Times By DECLAN WALSH and ERIC SCHMITT August 24, 2012
ISLAMABAD, Pakistan - A volley of C.I.A. drone strikes in Pakistan’s tribal belt early Friday killed at least 18 people, security officials said, capping a week of missile attacks that have renewed tensions between Pakistan and the United States, but may have killed a major militant leader.
Senior American officials said they had strong indications that Badruddin Haqqani, the operational commander of the Haqqani network, which is responsible for some of the most spectacular assaults on American bases and Afghan cities in recent years, was killed in a drone strike this week.
“There are indications that Haqqani has met his demise,” a senior United States official said in Washington on Friday. He said that officials were waiting to sift through evidence, including information on jihadist Web sites, before they could be certain that Mr. Haqqani had been killed.
The caution stems from previous erroneous claims by American and Pakistani officials about militant deaths in Waziristan, a notoriously difficult place to get reliable information. But if confirmed, Mr. Haqqani’s death would be a major benefit to the military coalition in Afghanistan.
Thought to be in his mid-30s, Mr. Haqqani runs the Haqqani network’s day-to-day militant operations, handles high-profile kidnappings and manages its lucrative smuggling operations, according to a recent report by the Combating Terrorism Center, an independent, privately financed research and educational institution at West Point.
He is considered second in seniority to the Haqqani network’s leader, his older brother Sirajuddin Haqqani. Both men are believed to direct operations in Afghanistan from their haven in North Waziristan, where they have allied with local warlords and enjoy longstanding clan ties.
In August 2011, Afghan intelligence released intercepts of Badruddin Haqqani directing a daring assault on Kabul’s Intercontinental Hotel; three years before that he held a reporter for The New York Times, David Rohde, hostage.
“Badruddin Haqqani has been at the center of coalition attacks in Afghanistan as well as mischief in Pakistan,” said the American official, speaking on the condition of anonymity because of the delicate nature of the subject.
By Friday evening, reports of Mr. Haqqani’s death were circulating in Pakistan’s tribal belt. In Washington, the C.I.A., which carries out armed drone missions in Pakistan, declined to comment, as did the White House.
The last major successful drone strike in Pakistan was the assassination of the Al Qaeda deputy leader, Abu Yahya al-Libi, in June.
Early Friday, C.I.A. drones fired at least six missiles at three locations in the Shawal Valley, destroying mud-walled compounds and at least two vehicles, said two Pakistani security officials and a local Taliban commander. Among the 18 people reported to have been killed was Emeti Yakuf, a senior leader of the East Turkestan Islamic Movement, a group from western China whose members are Chinese Uighur Muslim militants.
On Thursday, the Pakistani Foreign Office summoned an American Embassy official to officially protest the sudden surge in drone strikes — the eighth such protest issued by Pakistan over the past 12 months, according to a senior Pakistani official.
Although Pakistan and the United States patched up their differences over NATO supply routes in July, the drone campaign is a major impediment to a resumption of normal relations.
Pakistan’s military has proposed that it carry out the strikes itself using its fleet of American-built F-16 warplanes. The Obama administration has rejected those demands, saying the covert campaign offers the most effective tool against militants in an area where the Pakistani state has largely lost control.
Tensions are complicated by the Haqqani network, which American officials say has uncomfortably close ties to Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence directorate. The ISI denies any operational link to the group.
Under pressure from Congress, the Obama administration must decide by Sept. 9 whether to declare the Haqqani network a terrorist entity — a move that could further complicate relations between the two countries.
But most of the Haqqani leadership, including Mr. Haqqani, his brothers and uncles, have already been individually designated as “global terrorists.” In May 2011 the State Department said Mr. Haqqani “helps lead insurgents and foreign fighters in attacks against targets in southeastern Afghanistan.”
Another American official, who also insisted on anonymity, said Mr. Haqqani was believed to have died in a “signature” strike — an attack on militants based on their pattern of activity and location, rather than intelligence about any one individual.
Human rights groups say signature strikes inflict unacceptable collateral damage, but the official said that if Mr. Haqqani was killed, his death and those of other “high-value targets” would show how such strikes had “consistently degraded Al Qaeda and its allies” in Pakistan.
Declan Walsh reported from Islamabad, and Eric Schmitt from Washington. Ihsanullah Tipu Mehsud contributed reporting from Islamabad, and Ismail Khan from Peshawar, Pakistan.
US general says his forces carried out cyberattacks on opponents in Afghanistan
Associated Press August 24 , 2012
Marine Lt. Gen. Richard P. Mills’ comments came last week at a conference in Baltimore during which he explained how U.S. commanders considered cyber weapons an important part of their arsenal.
“I can tell you that as a commander in Afghanistan in the year 2010, I was able to use my cyber operations against my adversary with great impact,” Mills said. “I was able to get inside his nets, infect his command-and-control, and in fact defend myself against his almost constant incursions to get inside my wire, to affect my operations.”
Mills, now a deputy commandant with the Marine Corps, was in charge of international forces in southwestern Afghanistan between 2010 and 2011, according to his official biography. He didn’t go into any further detail as to the nature or scope of his forces’ attacks, but experts said that such a public admission that they were being carried out was itself striking.
“This is news,” said James Lewis, a cyber-security analyst with the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies. He said that while it was generally known in defense circles that cyberattacks had been carried out by U.S. forces in Afghanistan, he had never seen a senior officer take credit for them in such a way.
“It’s not secret,” Lewis said in a telephone interview, but he added: “I haven’t seen as explicit a statement on this as the one” Mills made.
Pentagon spokesman Lt. Col. Damien Pickart declined to elaborate on Mills’ comments, saying in an email that “for reasons of security . we do not provide specific information regarding our intentions, plans, capabilities or operations.”
The email said that the Pentagon’s cyber operations were properly authorized and that they took place within the bounds of international law and the “confines of existing policy.”
U.S. defense planners have spent the past few years debating that policy, asking how and under what circumstances the Pentagon would launch a cyberattack against its enemies, but it’s only recently become apparent that a sophisticated program of U.S.-backed cyberattacks is already under way.
A book by The New York Times reporter David Sanger recently recounted how President Barack Obama ordered a wave of electronic incursions aimed at physically sabotaging Iran’s disputed atomic energy program. Subsequent reports have linked the program to a virus dubbed Flame, which prompted a temporary Internet blackout across Iran’s oil industry in April, and another virus called Gauss, which appeared to have been aimed at stealing information from customers of Lebanese banks. An earlier report alleged that U.S. forces in Iraq had hacked into a terrorist group’s computer there to lure its members into an ambush.
Herbert Lin, a cyber expert at the National Research Council, agreed that Mills’ comments were unusual in terms of the fact that they were made publicly. But Lin said that the United States was, little by little, opening up about the fact that its military was launching attacks across the Internet.
“The U.S. military is starting to talk more and more in terms of what it’s doing and how it’s doing it,” he said. “A couple of years ago it was hard to get them to acknowledge that they were doing offense at all — even as a matter of policy, let alone in specific theaters or specific operations.”
Mills’ brief comments about cyberattacks in Afghanistan were delivered to the TechNet Land Forces East conference in Baltimore on Aug. 15, but they did not appear to have attracted much attention at the time. Footage of the speech was only recently posted to the Internet by conference organizers.
NATO airstrike kills 12 militants in eastern Afghanistan
Associated Press August 24 , 2012
KABUL, Afghanistan - A NATO airstrike in eastern Afghanistan targeting a group of insurgents near the Pakistani border killed at least 12 militants Friday, the international military coalition said.
Pakistani intelligence and Afghan officials said Mullah Dadullah, the self-proclaimed leader of the Pakistani Taliban in Pakistan’s Bajur tribal area was killed, although they offered conflicting reports on the exact location of the strike. NATO could not confirm that a senior militant had been killed.
Coalition spokesman Maj. Adam Wojack said the attack took place late Friday afternoon in Kunar province near the Pakistan border, killing 12 militants.
Conflicting reports out of the rugged and remote regions along the Afghan-Pakistan border are common shortly after an attack.
Kunar provincial official Aslam Gul Mujahid said the airstrike killed 20 people, including Dadullah. Pakistani intelligence officials said Dadullah and 19 others were killed, but they said the airstrike took place in Pakistan’s Bajur region, just across the border from Kunar.
The Pakistani intelligence officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to brief the media, said the strike occurred after a cross-border attack by Pakistani Taliban militants who came from Afghanistan.
Jahangir Azam Khattak, a local Pakistani government official, said dozens of militants attacked a Pakistani post manned by anti-Taliban militiamen in the Salarzai area of Bajur. He said six militants were killed and four tribesmen were wounded.
Two Pakistani militiamen also were killed, local tribesmen said on condition of anonymity out of fear for their safety.
The Pakistani intelligence officials said the militiamen and army soldiers fought the militants for hours but eventually repelled the attack.
Pakistani Taliban spokesman Ahsanullah Ahsan claimed responsibility for the attack on the outpost in a telephone call to The Associated Press.
It was unclear whether Pakistani and coalition officials coordinated the strike or whether NATO fired on the militants after noticing activity on the border.
Pakistan has criticized Afghan and U.S.-led coalition forces for not doing enough to stop cross-border attacks by Taliban militants against targets inside Pakistan.
The U.S. and Afghanistan have long criticized Pakistan for its failure to prevent militants from carrying out attacks in the opposite direction.
Also in the east, authorities said Friday that insurgents kidnapped three Afghan soldiers and another man from a bus in eastern Afghanistan and killed all four.
Militants stopped the bus as it was traveling in Paktia province’s Ahmad Khil district and forced the four men off the vehicle Thursday, provincial deputy police chief Mohammad Zaman said. Their bullet-ridden bodies were found lying on a road later in the day.
Three of the men were off-duty soldiers who were traveling to see their families, and the fourth victim’s identity was unclear, Zaman said.
The Taliban and their allies frequently kill Afghan police and soldiers to counter the plan to strengthen national security forces. They are due to take over main responsibility for fighting militants after international combat troops leave in 2014.
Elsewhere in Afghanistan, six civilians were killed when their vehicle hit a roadside bomb as they traveled in the southern province of Kandahar, police said.
The civilians were riding on a motorcycle-drawn cart when it hit the bomb Thursday in the town of Spin Boldak, provincial police chief Abdul Razaq said.
Roadside bombs are a favorite Taliban weapon to target international and Afghan forces, but the explosives often kill ordinary Afghans instead.
A U.N. report says 1,145 civilians were killed during the first half of the year, 80 percent of them by militants. Insurgent-placed homemade bombs continued to be the biggest killer of civilians, accounting for 29 percent of all noncombatant deaths during the first six months of 2012.
___
Anwarullah Khan in Khar, Pakistan and Amir Shah in Kabul contributed to this report.
Taliban attempts to kidnap family of jailed CIA informant in Pakistan
FoxNews.com By Dominic Di-Natale August 24, 2012
PESHAWAR - The Taliban attempted to kidnap the brother and other relatives of the Pakistani doctor jailed for helping the CIA hunt down Usama Bin Laden, members of the family told Fox News.
The alleged attempted abduction happened on Monday, according to Qamar Afridi, a cousin of Dr. Shakil Afridi, when a man identifying himself as a representative of Afghan President Hamid Karzai met with a family lawyer in Peshawar to discuss the case. The man reportedly said the Afghan leader wanted to help the Afridi family, and was willing to offer them financial support in their efforts to free the doctor.
The man, who identified himself as Haji Hukam Khan and said he was “very close to Karzai,” asked the lawyer to bring Jamil (Dr. Afridi’s brother) and other family members to Kabul, Afghanistan to meet Karzai. “He wants to aid you,” Qamar said the man told the lawyer.
The family reacted to the offer with alarm because the Karzai government has shown no interest in the Afridi case. An Afghan official confirmed those suspicions on Friday, saying “no one from the Karzai administration has reached out to Afridi, nor do they intend to."
Qamar said he had little doubt about who was behind what he is convinced was an attempted abduction.
“We believe it was the Taliban. It has to be We firmly believe this is the Taliban trying to get us.”
Afridi was sentenced to 33 years in jail on May 23, 2012, a year to the day after his arrest. He was convicted of supporting and financing a terror network, in what the U.S. government considers to be trumped-up charges. The Taliban and their supporters in Pakistan have also declared Afridi a “sworn enemy.”
The attempted abduction is the latest in what has been a series of difficult ordeals facing the Afridi family. They have not been able to visit the surgeon in his jail cell in Peshawar since Aug. 2, only their third visit permitted since he was jailed in May. They were not allowed to talk him without senior prison officials present.
The doctor has also told his family that for the first six months after his arrest, he was kept handcuffed and in total darkness – attempts, he told his family, that were meant to leave him paralyzed and permanently blind. “Shakil told us that as a doctor he knew what long-term impact his body would suffer from prolonged physical restraint and by having no exposure to light,” said Qamar.
Afridi said that because of his knowledge of anatomy as a physician, he would try and do exercises to mitigate some of the harmful physical effects. All the same, Qamar said, the doctor now has “deeply sunken eyes in his head,” and his arms and hands have clearly been physically affected.
Afridi was moved from confinement by Pakistan’s intelligence service, the ISI, after his conviction in May. He was able to see that he had been held in a private residential property in what he recognized as the capital, Islamabad. He described it as being near Pakistan’s Supreme Court, in the very heart of the city.
The location and style of property bear similarities with that in which Bin Laden's wives were housed after they were arrested by the ISI, Pakistan's intelligence agency, following the U.S. raid on the Bin Laden complex at Abbottabad. The ISI held the women in a private residence a stone’s throw away from the same court complex, in a leafy, well-heeled neighborhood on the edge of the government quarter, close to a number of foreign embassies.
Afridi was then transferred to a Peshawar jail, where he was informed of his sentence by an assistant to tribal court judge, referred to as a political agent. That meeting lasted around 15 to 30 minutes. It is the only personal encounter he has had with any judicial official since he was apprehended by the ISI.
A ruling on Afridi's appeal is expected by mid-September. Prosecution and defense lawyers will have an opportunity to present final arguments in the case at an Aug 30 hearing.
Afridi’s family says they have been denied access to the original prosecution file against him by the tribal court system. They also said there are 15 pages noticeably missing from the file that they did receive, including the verdict by the ruling jirga, a four-man group of tribal elders who heard his case.
The family says if the original verdict is not presented, it will be a fatal flaw in the prosecution’s case and would mean that, in theory, Shakil would have to be released. But they are not optimistic that would happen due to interference by the ISI.
The Afridis say they have also found themselves ostracized and in dire financial difficulties amid mounting legal costs. Afridi’s wife, who Qamar says is now in hiding somewhere in Punjab, is set to be fired from her job as a college principal in one of Pakistan’s most dangerous tribal towns.
Notices were published in the Pakistani media that informed of her imminent dismissal due to her prolonged absence.
The family says it cannot raise the $50,000 dollars it says is needed to fight the case and also to support the family’s basic needs. Shakil’s brother, Jamil, earns just $84 dollars a month as an 8th grade teacher in Multan.
The Afridi case has caught the attention of a handful of lawmakers on Capitol Hill, though political conventions and the presidential campaign have distracted from Afridi’s plight. Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., is pushing for a vote on a bill that would strip Pakistan of all U.S. aid unless Afridi is released.
On the House side, Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, R-Calif., has been pressing Afridi's case for months, but has expressed concern about the administration’s commitment to Afridi’s freedom.
"It doesn't appear that other people are taking this case seriously," Rohrabacher said earlier this year. "If we let that person just hang on a limb and forget him, now that he's put himself in danger for us -- well shame on us."
www.afghanistannewscenter.com