Tweet
As Obama, Karzai meet, Afghan peace efforts show flickers of life
By Warren Strobel and Mehreen Zahra-Malik | Reuters
WASHINGTON/ISLAMABAD (Reuters) - President Barack Obama and Afghan President Hamid Karzai will discuss matters of war, including future U.S. troop levels and Afghanistan's army, when they meet on Friday, but matters of peace may be the most delicate item on their long agenda.
After nearly 10 months in limbo, tentative reconciliation efforts involving Taliban insurgents, the Karzai government and other major Afghan factions have shown new signs of life, resurrecting tantalizing hopes for a negotiated end to decades of war.
Pakistan, which U.S. and Afghan officials have long accused of backing the insurgents and meddling in Afghanistan, has recently signaled an apparent policy shift toward promoting its neighbor's stability as most U.S. combat troops prepare to depart, top Pakistani and Afghan officials said.
In another potentially significant development, Taliban representatives met outside Paris last month with members of the Afghan High Peace Council - although not directly with members of the Karzai government, which they have long shunned.
U.S. officials, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the developments are promising - but that major challenges remain to opening negotiations, let alone reaching an agreement on the war-ravaged country's political future.
Hopes for Afghan peace talks have been raised before, only to be dashed. Last March, the Taliban suspended months of quiet discussions with Washington aimed at getting the insurgents and the Karzai government to the peace table.
Obama is expected to press the Afghan president to bless the formal opening of a Taliban political office in the Gulf state of Qatar as a way to jump-start inter-Afghan talks.
Karzai has been lukewarm to the idea, apparently fearing his government would be sidelined in any negotiations.
TRIP AT A TURNING POINT
Karzai's meeting with Obama, at the end of a three-day visit to Washington, is shaping up to be one of the most critical encounters between the two leaders, as the White House weighs how rapidly to remove most of the roughly 66,000 U.S. troops in Afghanistan and how large a residual force to leave after 2014.
Obama, about to begin his second term in office, appears determined to wrap up U.S. military engagement in Afghanistan. On Monday, he announced as his nominee for Pentagon chief former Nebraska Senator Chuck Hagel, who appears likely to favor a sizeable U.S. troop drawdown.
Other issues on the agenda have plenty of potential for causing friction: the future size and focus of the Afghan military; a festering dispute over control of the country's largest detention center; and the future of international aid after 2014.
Karzai's trip "is one of the most important ones because the discussions we are going to have with our counterparts will define the relations between (the) United States and Afghanistan," Afghan Foreign Minister Zalmay Rassoul told the lower house of parliament this month.
No final announcement on post-2014 U.S. troop levels is expected during Karzai's visit, and the issue is further complicated by Washington's insistence on legal immunity for American troops that remain.
General John Allen, the top U.S. and NATO commander in Afghanistan, recommended keeping between roughly 6,000 and 15,000 U.S. troops in Afghanistan after 2014, but the White House is considering possibly leaving as few as 3,000 troops.
A U.S. official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the White House had asked for options to be developed for keeping between 3,000 and 9,000 troops in the country.
PAST PEACE HOPES DASHED
Last year, the Obama administration hoped to kick-start peace talks with a deal that would have seen Washington transfer five Taliban prisoners from Guantanamo Bay prison. In return, the Taliban would renounce international terrorism and state a willingness to enter talks with Karzai's representatives.
That deal never came off, and the question now is whether it, or an alternative peace process, can get under way as the U.S. military presence rapidly winds down.
Looking at developments in the last few months, "you could see that there are things happening," said one U.S. official, who was not authorized to speak for the record.
At the end of 2012, Pakistan released four Afghan Taliban prisoners who were close to the movement's reclusive leader, Mullah Mohammed Omar. It appeared to be a step toward meeting Afghanistan's long-standing insistence that Islamabad free those who could help promote reconciliation. A senior Afghan official welcomed the release.
A member of Pakistan's parliament closely involved in Afghan policy-making said there are signs of a shift in the thinking of Pakistan's powerful military. Some in the military, which has long regarded Afghanistan as a battleground in its existential conflict with rival India, are now saying that the graver threat comes from Pakistan's own militants.
"Yes, there is skepticism. The hawks are there. But the fact is that previously there were absolutely no voices in the army with this kind of positive thinking," the parliamentarian said.
"Pakistan has also realized that there won't be a complete withdrawal of the U.S. from Afghanistan," the lawmaker said. "The security establishment realizes it has to compromise somewhere. Hence the Taliban releases. ... Hence the statements from even the most skeptical Afghan officials that there is a change in Pakistani thinking."
Ghairat Baheer, who represented the Hezb-e-Islami faction at last month's peace talks in the Paris suburb of Chantilly, rejected a continued U.S. military presence in Afghanistan, but praised the Pakistan prisoner release as a sign of its good intentions.
WAITING FOR THE TALIBAN
After more than a year of frustration, Obama administration officials are skeptical about luring the Taliban to peace talks, citing what appears to be a deep fissure within the movement between moderates who favor entering the political process and hard-liners committed to ousting both NATO troops and Karzai.
The Taliban's lead negotiator, Tayeb Agha, whom the Obama administration regards as a reliable interlocutor, offered to resign last month in apparent frustration, the Daily Beast website reported.
Taliban envoys have yet to meet officially with Karzai's government, and the insurgents demand a rewriting of the Afghan constitution.
"I don't think anyone knows where (reconciliation) stands. And I mean that because there are a lot of reconciliation talks and a lot of games that are being played in a lot of places," said Fred Kagan, a military analyst at the conservative American Enterprise Institute.
"The likelihood of getting an acceptable deal that actually secures our interests is vanishingly small," he said. "But the probability that you could get the deal and have it implemented in time to make this drawdown timeline make sense is nonsense."
(Additional reporting by Phil Stewart and David Alexander in Washington, and Hamid Shalizi in Kabul. Editing by Christopher Wilson)
Afghans ask for US spy balloons after 2014 pullout
Press TV January 7, 2013
Afghanistan has asked the United States to provide them with the American spy balloons currently in service in the southern Afghan city of Kandahar, after the US-led forces leave the country by the end of 2014.
Afghan security officials voiced concerns over the country’s security after the US forces leave Afghanistan and take their balloons, laden with surveillance gear, with them, the Wall Street Journal reported.
Chief of police Niaz Mohammad said how Afghan police should provide “the eyes in the sky.” At nighttime when they [militants] want to come and put in roadside bombs for us, we can't see them. We don't have technology like balloons…and that is a big thing for us.”
The US sent soldiers to Arghandab, in central part of Kandahar, as part of the 2010 surge, taking balloons, equipped with cameras and other intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance gear. The deployment of the balloons to Afghanistan became a priority for the Pentagon by former Defense Secretary Robert Gates.
US military officers described the spy balloons as a "force multiplier" for monitoring areas and protecting operating bases from possible threats.
Afghan President Hamid Karzai is expected to raise the request for military equipment during his visit to Washington. Afghan officials said spy technology like drones, balloons, and other equipment, would be on the list of Afghanistan’s demands.
The US administration has not yet made any comment regarding the issue. However, senior US officials voiced concerns over Afghans’ focus on the equipment despite their military’s incabilities.
US Army Brigadier General Paul Nakasone, who is serving in Afghanistan, said that the balloons could be a useful asset for the Afghan military in theory, as they do not have surveillance drones.
"They are not going to have the airborne fleet that we have right now. This is a great enabler for them as they look to the future to provide persistent stare on a target,” he said.
The Afghan forces are familiar with the spy gear, as they launched the spy balloons in a trial in Arghandab in December.
Afghanistan: Obama and Karzai’s Shared Legacy
By Omar SAMAD for Afghan Analytica – January 7, 2013
When Presidents Barack Obama and Hamid Karzai meet in Washington this week, they will have yet another opportunity to deliberate on an intense bilateral agenda, including the transition process, prospects for reconciliation, the nagging insurgency, a bilateral security agreement, and the U.S. commitment to Afghanistan’s future beyond 2014.
However, this encounter will not only be a unique occasion for both men to take stock of the post 9-11 mission and concentrate on the period leading to the 2014 end-game, but more importantly, on how Afghanistan’s fate might mold their respective legacies, and how history might judge their key decisions concerning America’s longest war by the time both leaders are out of office.
There has been much talk about Karzai’s legacy when his second and last term ends in 2014 after 13 years in office, but little attention has been paid to the impact of the war on Obama’s legacy when he leaves office in 2016.
Much will depend on stability in South and Central Asia, on global security realities, on internal Afghan dynamics, and how much leverage and goodwill the U.S. will possess in a fast-evolving geo-strategic setting on the Asian continent.
Karzai, once toasted as a modern and savvy leader, has less than two years to prove that perceptions shaped at home and abroad – since his 2001 rise as interim leader – will test his strategic foresight, leadership and management styles, and accountability matrix.
He already faces an uphill battle trying to redress the top positions held by Afghanistan as the main producer of opium and most corrupt nation.
Corruption may be viewed by some observers as his Achilles heel, but it is more difficult to overcome when weaved into the complex web of nepotism, patronage and a weak judiciary.
On the other hand, compared to many past leaders, history might give him favorable ratings for his survival skills, penchant toward non-violence, public humility and political astuteness that has, in some cases, cost him political capital.
Two questions might best help analysts decipher Karzai’s legacy dilemma:
1. What mega event might shape his end-of-term standing?
2. How would he want history to remember him?
In the first instance, war and peace will play a determinant role. If a political settlement, involving his side and seen as fair and popular, is reached by the end of his term, then it may trump all other considerations and he may be remembered as a peacemaker.
The reverse could be less appealing if he leaves an unstable country on the verge of renewed civil strife, or reverting to status-quo and a stalemate with growing uncertainty.
Secondly, if the political transition results in fair and legitimate elections, and a new leader (or coalition), Karzai is bound to be remembered as the leader who oversaw a credible process and a peaceful transfer of power, regardless of whether a peace deal has been worked out or not.
However, if he is remembered as overseeing fraudulent elections or engineering the process in favor of a hand-picked successor in 2014, then not only will he jeopardize the transition process, but will, in all probability, not be viewed kindly by history.
Personally, he has yet to offer glimpses into his own desires, but there are indications that he may be drifting between three contradictory labels: “peacemaker”, “modernizer-democrat” and “nationalist”.
His inner circle has bearing on his thinking. Some with a specific agenda encourage him to make peace almost at any cost, while others want his term to be remembered as the democracy-building period. The third group, made up of ultra-nationalists, is eager to label him as the leader who restored sovereignty and pushed back to accelerate the withdrawal of foreign forces from the country.
Karzai himself may like to aim for all three, but it is unlikely that they could be attainable given the timelines before him and the perceptions that exist on all three fronts.
Obama, on the other hand, signed on to the Afghan mission as Iraq wound down and called it the “good war” and the “war of necessity”. A surge was soon followed by a withdrawal timetable as US elections approached and public opinion soured.
Since Osama Bin Laden’s spectacular killing, all attempts have shifted toward political attempts at seeking a timely formula to bring the war to an end. But serious threats within and beyond Afghan borders still persist.
Furthermore, given the American political calendar, Obama will face the first hurdle in 2014 when mid-term congressional elections take place. Then it will be 2016 as he leaves office. In both instances, Afghanistan may emerge as a foreign policy headache if the transition is problematic or perceived as a failure for the US and NATO.
However, if the transition and withdrawal programs move according to plan, then Afghanistan will emerge as a success story and help the President’s foreign and security policy record. And, if conditions allow for reconciliation to take place simultaneously, then history will be even kinder about the Afghan war record.
But what if the situation deteriorates between 2014 and 2016 and turns once more into a global security menace (as demonstrated during Talban/Al Qaida rule 1996-2001) or results into a failed state verging on civil strife?
Either way, Obama’s legacy will be tarnished.
But neither Obama nor Karzai can claim exclusive blame if Afghanistan faces a debacle of sorts. The blame for losing Afghanistan would have to be shared by many in positions of responsibility since 2001 – primarily Afghan leaders, regional spoilers and the Western alliance.
This week’s meetings in Washington offer an occasion for both sides to think beyond their time in office, and with level-headedness weigh all options when deliberating on decisions that will prove fateful.
The two leaders need to be mindful of not just immediate and intermediate tactical considerations, but also of longer-term implications and consequences affecting the future of a nation, a difficult region and two legacies.
Omar Samad is a Senior Afghan Expert at the United States Institute of Peace (USIP). He was former Afghan Ambassador to France and Canada, and Spokesperson for the Afghan Foreign Ministry. Views expressed here are his own.
Karzai's US visit sends signal to Taliban
DW 06/01/2013
Hamid Karzai's visit to the US on Monday lays bare the Afghan president's strengths and weaknesses. He still enjoys US backing, but he is worried about troop withdrawals, elections, Pakistan and the Taliban.
On his trip abroad this week, Afghan President Hamid Karzai will be spending at least a few days in the US. During that time he will be speaking at length with President Barack Obama about the troop strength of American soldiers post-2014 and about coming presidential elections in Afghanistan. Both topics will be of decisive importance for Afghanistan's future: troop strength is central to the country's security, while elections will show which path the embattled country will now take.
Other topics of interest include the economy, the relationship between Afghanistan and neighboring countries - above all, Pakistan - and talks about a potential bilateral security agreement.
After the 2014 troop withdrawal
After the next round of US troop withdrawals in 2014, experts presume that at least 30,000 US and NATO troops will remain stationed in Afghanistan. Still, many Afghans worry that the southern and eastern parts of country, which share a border with Pakistan, will once again fall into the hands of insurgents when foreign security forces are withdrawn.
That is why the Afghan government is demanding a comprehensive upgrade of its army and police forces. Aimal Faizi, spokesman to the Afghan president, said, "One of the most important points in talks between President Karzai and President Obama will be the upgrade of Afghan security forces. We have already made it clear that, with regard to our shared interests and needs, the US should train our military."
An air force for Afghanistan
One of President Karzai's particular concerns, Faizi said, is related to new equipment for an Afghan air force which, up until now, has remained poorly equipped.
Over the last 18 years, the US has been delivering fighter planes not to Afghanistan but to neighboring Pakistan. Afghanistan would like to close that gap, says the South Asia expert Conrad Schetter. He does not believe, however, that it will happen. "Due to the competitive relationship between Afghanistan and Pakistan, a delivery to the Afghan air force would cause an escalation between the two countries and would assuredly result in a deterioration of the relationship between the US and Pakistan. No one in Washington can advocate that."
Where the US has invested in Afghan security forces, it has done so primarily in light armaments for the infantry.
Signals to Pakistan and the Taliban
The trip is also intended to send a signal directed at both Pakistan and the insurgent Taliban. The latest declaration of proximity between the US and Afghanistan will put Pakistan under pressure. "For Pakistan that means it has to try to enter into an alliance in order to avoid being isolated," Schetter says.
Karzai's signal to the Taliban is different: Peace negotiations, when they come, should only be undertaken with the inclusion of Afghanistan - and not with the US alone - since Karzai now has the backing of the US: something this trip will show.
No peace without the Taliban
According to the Afghan government, the US, Afghanistan and Pakistan agree that the conflict in Afghanistan cannot be settled by war. Beyond that, many Afghan experts agree that peace without Taliban engagement isn't possible.
Afghan Foreign Minister Zalmay Rassoul recently reassured the Taliban (02.01.2013) at a press conference. "Should the Taliban take part in a peace process, and progress is achieved, then they can take part in the coming elections as a political party," he said.
Even Abdul Hamid Azer, a community leader of a municipality in the province of Kabul, supports this approach. "It's good news that the Taliban has active contact with the world at a diplomatic level. They are also Afghans, and one can't say that they're not also suffering under the conditions of war." Whether the strategy of negotiating with the Taliban works will presumably be seen after the 2014 presidential election.
The US supports peace talks with the Taliban in order to bring an end to the conflict and, with it, an end to the military deployment in Afghanistan. America is set to withdraw its troop force of 65,000 in 2014.
In spite of all the progress made with the Taliban thus far, Karzai's trip shows that the Afghan government still relies heavily on the US as its protector.
Kabul to Seek More Control Over U.S. Aid
Finance Minister, Citing 'Waste' in How Money Is Spent, Says Karzai Will Push for Added Autonomy in Washington Visit
Wall Street Journal By NATHAN HODGE January 6, 2013
KABUL - Afghanistan this week plans to ask during President Hamid Karzai's Washington visit for more U.S. assistance to be channeled directly to government coffers, the country's top finance official said.
Control over aid money has been a long-standing issue for Afghanistan, which remains largely dependent on international assistance. Donors expect the country will need as much $8 billion per year in security assistance and development aid for at least another decade.
That aid will come with strings attached: Wealthy nations led by the U.S.—the leading international contributor of aid to Afghanistan over the past decade—Europe and Japan last year agreed to provide continued funding only if Kabul makes strides to combat corruption and ensure transparency.
Finance Minister Omar Zakhilwal told The Wall Street Journal that the Afghan government would seek "a real discussion on the mode of delivery for assistance" as part of negotiations during Mr. Karzai's trip.
"We believe that the way the U.S. money is spent here, there's a lot of waste, particularly money spent through contractors and outside sources," he said. Mr. Zakhilwal added that, on average, only around 10% of U.S. development assistance has been delivered through the Afghan government's core operating budget, with the rest channeled through contractors and aid organizations. Much of that off-budget assistance, he said, was returning to the U.S. in the form of "big consultant salaries and overheads" for development groups.
Afghan officials have long maintained that their institutions can deliver aid more effectively and less expensively than highly paid expatriates. Aid experts, however, say the country still lacks a class of technocrats and administrators capable of administering many programs.
The U.S. last year committed around $1.8 billion to development aid in Afghanistan, a figure that doesn't include money spent to finance the country's military and police and Pentagon-funded reconstruction projects. According to a 2011 U.S. Agency for International Development fact sheet, less than 10% per year of the total USAID Afghanistan budget between fiscal years 2002 and 2008 went directly through the Afghan budget.
However, that "on-budget" share rose to around one-third of the total USAID Afghanistan budget in 2010 and 2011, in line with a U.S. goal to eventually direct around half of development aid directly through the Afghan government. A USAID official said that on-budget share was set to reach around 40% in 2012.
According to the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction, a U.S. watchdog agency that oversees U.S. spending here, U.S. taxpayers have paid for $89.5 billion in reconstruction programs in Afghanistan since 2001.
Mr. Zakhilwal said the Afghan government wouldn't seek additional pledges of money from Washington—"We don't expect new commitments and we don't ask for new commitments," he said—but added that Afghanistan needed help in areas including energy, transportation and agriculture. And he said the Afghan side would have a specific list of infrastructure projects it wants to see completed.
The Afghan military has readied its own wish list of weaponry and equipment ahead of the withdrawal of most international troops in 2014. U.S. and Western officials have expressed concern Afghanistan is seeking weaponry it can't afford to sustain.
Sen. Carl Levin (D., Mich.), chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, told the Journal that the Afghan military had made great strides toward taking over security, but "needs to be affordable."
Sen. Levin, who met with Mr. Karzai Saturday in Kabul, said President Barack Obama would have to weigh issues including the size of a small post-2014 U.S. presence and the kinds of equipment and support the U.S. can provide the Afghan military.
"They're going to need a lot more than we probably can provide," Sen. Levin said. "You can't just drop an air force down on them. They've got to have sustainment, which takes time."
Sen. Levin said lawmakers have worked to include provisions in defense legislation that would give commanders on the ground discretion to decide what kinds of military equipment they can hand over to Afghan forces, but he added: "They can't probably either run or sustain some of the more technologically advanced vehicles."
On reconstruction, Sen. Levin echoed the Afghan finance minister. "We haven't controlled our contractors nearly enough, as far as I'm concerned," he said. "And [there's been] a hell of a lot of waste. And there needs to be much greater emphasis on accountability of our resources."
The bill for sustaining Afghanistan's army and police is expected to run around $4.1 billion a year, a figure that is built around a total security force of 228,000 members, down from a current peak of around 344,000 soldiers and police, officials from the North Atlantic Treaty Organization have said.
Sen. Jack Reed (D., R.I.), a senior member of the Senate Armed Services Committee who traveled with Sen. Levin, said the savings for the U.S. would be considerable, even when factoring in the cost of keeping a small U.S. contingent in Afghanistan.
"If you look at the high-water mark of the surgeyou're going from $100 billion [per year] down to maybe $4 billion," he said. "And if we do it effectively, we're going to have a more stable and more sustainable force."
The drop in U.S. spending in Afghanistan, Sen. Reed added, would have an impact on the country's economy. "A huge portion of their [gross domestic product] is directly related to foreign troopsand foreign aid. So that's going to come down significantly—and they have to prepare for that."
Write to Nathan Hodge at nathan.hodge@wsj.com
6 Afghan police officers missing in Farah province
By Mirwais Adeel - January 7 2013, 1:29 pm Khaama Press
According to local authorities in western Farah province of Afghanistan, at least 6 Afghan police officers are missing from a security check post in Pusht-e-Rud district.
The Afghan police officers disappeared from the check post on Sunday evening.
Deputy provincial governor Mohammad Younis Rassouli confirmed the report however he did not disclose further information regarding the incident.
In a separate incident and Afghan security service member was killed following attack by unknown gunmen in Farah province.
Provincial governor spokesman Abdul Rahman Zhwandai said the attack took place on Monday morning, killing an Afghan security service member and injuring another one.
In the meantime local officials are saying Afghan security forces have launched a search operation to find the missing Afghan police officers.
A spokesman for the Taliban group said the police officers have joined Taliban group but the report has not been confirmed by officials in Farah yet.
Widespread Violations of the Law Should End: Khalili
TOLOnews.com By Sharif Amiry Sunday, 06 January 2013
Second Vice President Mohammed Karim Khalili warned Sunday that the rampant violations of the law in the country should stop and the Constitution should be respected.
"Considering the current situation, violating the laws of the country – be it by anyone – should be avoided," said Khalili.
"No one should have the chance [to violate the laws]," he added.
But Khalili stopped short of calling for the prosecution of those involved in corruption and illegal activity, including several high-level government officials.
Opposition parties and former government officials pointed to the rampant corruption in the government's ranks and called for appropriate action. They added that violations of the Constitution are commonplace and criticised the government's lackluster enforcement of the Constitution.
"In hundreds of cases, the country's constitution is not enforced by the government and the nation, which the president and the nation are responsible for," said Sebghatullah Mojaddedi, former head of the Senate.
Head of the National Coalition, an opposition political party, also criticised the government for constitutional violations.
"The head of the judiciary has been working for two years in violation of laws. Therefore, one pillar of the government has been working unconstitutionally," said Dr. Abdullah Abdullah, head of the National Coalition.
Abdullah was referring to Chief Justice Abdulsalam Azimi, who continues to serve although his tenure ended two years ago.
The Independent Commission for Overseeing the Implementation of Constitution said challenges remain in the way of uniform implementation of the Constitution.
"Choosing individual interests over the public interest, habitual violation of laws, and lack of attention towards a healthy management [of the government] are the main challenges," said Gol Rahman Qazi, head of the commission.
Biggest National Security Challenge is Political, Economic: Defence Ministry
TOLOnews.com By Azim Arash Sunday, 06 January 2013
The deputy minister of national defence said Sunday that Afghanistan's security following the withdrawal of international forces in 2014 depends on the political, social, and economic conditions of the country.
"If the political, social, and economic structure does not fall apart after 2014, there will be no concerns over security," said Baz Mohammad Johari, deputy defence minister for personnel and training.
Raising the capacity of the national army is a main priority for the ministry, and about 95 percent of the army's training and recruitment goals will be met by the end of 2014, Johari said.
Meanwhile, the Independent Administrative Reform and Civil Service Commission signed an agreement with the ministry of defense to make top-level defense posts civilian jobs.
The commission officials believe the implementation of this plan will prevent potential future military interferences in political affairs.
Karzai Meets Secretary of Iran's National Security Council
TOLOnews.com Sunday, 06 January 2013
President Hamid Karzai met the secretary of Iran's Supreme National Security Council, Dr. Sayed Jalili, on Saturday in Kabul, President Office said.
"At the meeting held in the Presidential Palace, the two sides discussed ways to broaden and deepen bilateral relations, and politico-economic cooperation between the two countries as well as exchanged views on regional affairs," Karzai's office said in a statement.
Sayed Jalili said that Afghanistan and Iran share a common history and culture, adding that Iran is seeking shared interests and an institutionalized relationship between the two nations.
"Agreeing in the meeting on a tripartite session between Afghanistan, Iran and India, the two sides stressed on continued collaboration, strengthening of institutions, and exchange of experiences between the two countries," he statement said.
The National Security Adviser to the President Rangin Dadfar Spanta also met Jalili and discussed security, economics and border issues.
Mr. Spanta also discussed issues related to Iran's Chabahar port and railway plans between the countries.
Mr. Jalili's visit to Kabul comes just days before President Karzai is scheduled to meet President Obama in Washington. He is expected to discuss the bilateral security agreement amd the residual US force in Afghanistan, something that is of concern to Iran.
Pakistan to Release 3,000 Afghan Trucks Stranded at Borders
TOLOnews.com By Shahla Murtazaie Sunday, 06 January 2013
Pakistani officials will release 3,000 Afghan trucks on Monday after a bilateral meeting with Afghan traders and officials, officials said.
A delegation from the Afghan Chamber of Commerce and Industries travelled to Pakistan to attend the fourth Joint Afghan-Pak Chamber of Commerce and Industries Summit aimed at easing the transit and trade issues between the two countries.
As many as 3,000 Afghan trade trucks were recently paused in Pakistan over transit issues between Afghanistan and Pakistan; however, Pakistani officials ordered the immediate release of the Afghan trucks as part of Pakistan's efforts to facilitate the implementation of APTA [Afghanistan and Pakistan Trade Agreement].
"Pakistan officials ordered the release of 3,000 Afghan trade trucks on Monday and resolved APTA's technical issues in 10 days," Deputy Chief of the Afghan Chamber of Commerce and Industries (ACCI) Janan Alokozay said at a press conference in Kabul.
Afghan traders expressed skepticism about the release of the trucks, pointing to Pakistan's previous failure to implement APTA's provisions.
"We are not optimistic of Pakistan's promises," Rahmatullah Rahmat, an Afghan factory owner, told TOLOnews.
The fourth Joint Afghan-Pak Chamber of Commerce and Industries Summit also resulted in easing visa restrictions for Afghan truck drivers transporting goods into Pakistan.
www.afghanistannewscenter.com
By Warren Strobel and Mehreen Zahra-Malik | Reuters
WASHINGTON/ISLAMABAD (Reuters) - President Barack Obama and Afghan President Hamid Karzai will discuss matters of war, including future U.S. troop levels and Afghanistan's army, when they meet on Friday, but matters of peace may be the most delicate item on their long agenda.
After nearly 10 months in limbo, tentative reconciliation efforts involving Taliban insurgents, the Karzai government and other major Afghan factions have shown new signs of life, resurrecting tantalizing hopes for a negotiated end to decades of war.
Pakistan, which U.S. and Afghan officials have long accused of backing the insurgents and meddling in Afghanistan, has recently signaled an apparent policy shift toward promoting its neighbor's stability as most U.S. combat troops prepare to depart, top Pakistani and Afghan officials said.
In another potentially significant development, Taliban representatives met outside Paris last month with members of the Afghan High Peace Council - although not directly with members of the Karzai government, which they have long shunned.
U.S. officials, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the developments are promising - but that major challenges remain to opening negotiations, let alone reaching an agreement on the war-ravaged country's political future.
Hopes for Afghan peace talks have been raised before, only to be dashed. Last March, the Taliban suspended months of quiet discussions with Washington aimed at getting the insurgents and the Karzai government to the peace table.
Obama is expected to press the Afghan president to bless the formal opening of a Taliban political office in the Gulf state of Qatar as a way to jump-start inter-Afghan talks.
Karzai has been lukewarm to the idea, apparently fearing his government would be sidelined in any negotiations.
TRIP AT A TURNING POINT
Karzai's meeting with Obama, at the end of a three-day visit to Washington, is shaping up to be one of the most critical encounters between the two leaders, as the White House weighs how rapidly to remove most of the roughly 66,000 U.S. troops in Afghanistan and how large a residual force to leave after 2014.
Obama, about to begin his second term in office, appears determined to wrap up U.S. military engagement in Afghanistan. On Monday, he announced as his nominee for Pentagon chief former Nebraska Senator Chuck Hagel, who appears likely to favor a sizeable U.S. troop drawdown.
Other issues on the agenda have plenty of potential for causing friction: the future size and focus of the Afghan military; a festering dispute over control of the country's largest detention center; and the future of international aid after 2014.
Karzai's trip "is one of the most important ones because the discussions we are going to have with our counterparts will define the relations between (the) United States and Afghanistan," Afghan Foreign Minister Zalmay Rassoul told the lower house of parliament this month.
No final announcement on post-2014 U.S. troop levels is expected during Karzai's visit, and the issue is further complicated by Washington's insistence on legal immunity for American troops that remain.
General John Allen, the top U.S. and NATO commander in Afghanistan, recommended keeping between roughly 6,000 and 15,000 U.S. troops in Afghanistan after 2014, but the White House is considering possibly leaving as few as 3,000 troops.
A U.S. official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the White House had asked for options to be developed for keeping between 3,000 and 9,000 troops in the country.
PAST PEACE HOPES DASHED
Last year, the Obama administration hoped to kick-start peace talks with a deal that would have seen Washington transfer five Taliban prisoners from Guantanamo Bay prison. In return, the Taliban would renounce international terrorism and state a willingness to enter talks with Karzai's representatives.
That deal never came off, and the question now is whether it, or an alternative peace process, can get under way as the U.S. military presence rapidly winds down.
Looking at developments in the last few months, "you could see that there are things happening," said one U.S. official, who was not authorized to speak for the record.
At the end of 2012, Pakistan released four Afghan Taliban prisoners who were close to the movement's reclusive leader, Mullah Mohammed Omar. It appeared to be a step toward meeting Afghanistan's long-standing insistence that Islamabad free those who could help promote reconciliation. A senior Afghan official welcomed the release.
A member of Pakistan's parliament closely involved in Afghan policy-making said there are signs of a shift in the thinking of Pakistan's powerful military. Some in the military, which has long regarded Afghanistan as a battleground in its existential conflict with rival India, are now saying that the graver threat comes from Pakistan's own militants.
"Yes, there is skepticism. The hawks are there. But the fact is that previously there were absolutely no voices in the army with this kind of positive thinking," the parliamentarian said.
"Pakistan has also realized that there won't be a complete withdrawal of the U.S. from Afghanistan," the lawmaker said. "The security establishment realizes it has to compromise somewhere. Hence the Taliban releases. ... Hence the statements from even the most skeptical Afghan officials that there is a change in Pakistani thinking."
Ghairat Baheer, who represented the Hezb-e-Islami faction at last month's peace talks in the Paris suburb of Chantilly, rejected a continued U.S. military presence in Afghanistan, but praised the Pakistan prisoner release as a sign of its good intentions.
WAITING FOR THE TALIBAN
After more than a year of frustration, Obama administration officials are skeptical about luring the Taliban to peace talks, citing what appears to be a deep fissure within the movement between moderates who favor entering the political process and hard-liners committed to ousting both NATO troops and Karzai.
The Taliban's lead negotiator, Tayeb Agha, whom the Obama administration regards as a reliable interlocutor, offered to resign last month in apparent frustration, the Daily Beast website reported.
Taliban envoys have yet to meet officially with Karzai's government, and the insurgents demand a rewriting of the Afghan constitution.
"I don't think anyone knows where (reconciliation) stands. And I mean that because there are a lot of reconciliation talks and a lot of games that are being played in a lot of places," said Fred Kagan, a military analyst at the conservative American Enterprise Institute.
"The likelihood of getting an acceptable deal that actually secures our interests is vanishingly small," he said. "But the probability that you could get the deal and have it implemented in time to make this drawdown timeline make sense is nonsense."
(Additional reporting by Phil Stewart and David Alexander in Washington, and Hamid Shalizi in Kabul. Editing by Christopher Wilson)
Afghans ask for US spy balloons after 2014 pullout
Press TV January 7, 2013
Afghanistan has asked the United States to provide them with the American spy balloons currently in service in the southern Afghan city of Kandahar, after the US-led forces leave the country by the end of 2014.
Afghan security officials voiced concerns over the country’s security after the US forces leave Afghanistan and take their balloons, laden with surveillance gear, with them, the Wall Street Journal reported.
Chief of police Niaz Mohammad said how Afghan police should provide “the eyes in the sky.” At nighttime when they [militants] want to come and put in roadside bombs for us, we can't see them. We don't have technology like balloons…and that is a big thing for us.”
The US sent soldiers to Arghandab, in central part of Kandahar, as part of the 2010 surge, taking balloons, equipped with cameras and other intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance gear. The deployment of the balloons to Afghanistan became a priority for the Pentagon by former Defense Secretary Robert Gates.
US military officers described the spy balloons as a "force multiplier" for monitoring areas and protecting operating bases from possible threats.
Afghan President Hamid Karzai is expected to raise the request for military equipment during his visit to Washington. Afghan officials said spy technology like drones, balloons, and other equipment, would be on the list of Afghanistan’s demands.
The US administration has not yet made any comment regarding the issue. However, senior US officials voiced concerns over Afghans’ focus on the equipment despite their military’s incabilities.
US Army Brigadier General Paul Nakasone, who is serving in Afghanistan, said that the balloons could be a useful asset for the Afghan military in theory, as they do not have surveillance drones.
"They are not going to have the airborne fleet that we have right now. This is a great enabler for them as they look to the future to provide persistent stare on a target,” he said.
The Afghan forces are familiar with the spy gear, as they launched the spy balloons in a trial in Arghandab in December.
Afghanistan: Obama and Karzai’s Shared Legacy
By Omar SAMAD for Afghan Analytica – January 7, 2013
When Presidents Barack Obama and Hamid Karzai meet in Washington this week, they will have yet another opportunity to deliberate on an intense bilateral agenda, including the transition process, prospects for reconciliation, the nagging insurgency, a bilateral security agreement, and the U.S. commitment to Afghanistan’s future beyond 2014.
However, this encounter will not only be a unique occasion for both men to take stock of the post 9-11 mission and concentrate on the period leading to the 2014 end-game, but more importantly, on how Afghanistan’s fate might mold their respective legacies, and how history might judge their key decisions concerning America’s longest war by the time both leaders are out of office.
There has been much talk about Karzai’s legacy when his second and last term ends in 2014 after 13 years in office, but little attention has been paid to the impact of the war on Obama’s legacy when he leaves office in 2016.
Much will depend on stability in South and Central Asia, on global security realities, on internal Afghan dynamics, and how much leverage and goodwill the U.S. will possess in a fast-evolving geo-strategic setting on the Asian continent.
Karzai, once toasted as a modern and savvy leader, has less than two years to prove that perceptions shaped at home and abroad – since his 2001 rise as interim leader – will test his strategic foresight, leadership and management styles, and accountability matrix.
He already faces an uphill battle trying to redress the top positions held by Afghanistan as the main producer of opium and most corrupt nation.
Corruption may be viewed by some observers as his Achilles heel, but it is more difficult to overcome when weaved into the complex web of nepotism, patronage and a weak judiciary.
On the other hand, compared to many past leaders, history might give him favorable ratings for his survival skills, penchant toward non-violence, public humility and political astuteness that has, in some cases, cost him political capital.
Two questions might best help analysts decipher Karzai’s legacy dilemma:
1. What mega event might shape his end-of-term standing?
2. How would he want history to remember him?
In the first instance, war and peace will play a determinant role. If a political settlement, involving his side and seen as fair and popular, is reached by the end of his term, then it may trump all other considerations and he may be remembered as a peacemaker.
The reverse could be less appealing if he leaves an unstable country on the verge of renewed civil strife, or reverting to status-quo and a stalemate with growing uncertainty.
Secondly, if the political transition results in fair and legitimate elections, and a new leader (or coalition), Karzai is bound to be remembered as the leader who oversaw a credible process and a peaceful transfer of power, regardless of whether a peace deal has been worked out or not.
However, if he is remembered as overseeing fraudulent elections or engineering the process in favor of a hand-picked successor in 2014, then not only will he jeopardize the transition process, but will, in all probability, not be viewed kindly by history.
Personally, he has yet to offer glimpses into his own desires, but there are indications that he may be drifting between three contradictory labels: “peacemaker”, “modernizer-democrat” and “nationalist”.
His inner circle has bearing on his thinking. Some with a specific agenda encourage him to make peace almost at any cost, while others want his term to be remembered as the democracy-building period. The third group, made up of ultra-nationalists, is eager to label him as the leader who restored sovereignty and pushed back to accelerate the withdrawal of foreign forces from the country.
Karzai himself may like to aim for all three, but it is unlikely that they could be attainable given the timelines before him and the perceptions that exist on all three fronts.
Obama, on the other hand, signed on to the Afghan mission as Iraq wound down and called it the “good war” and the “war of necessity”. A surge was soon followed by a withdrawal timetable as US elections approached and public opinion soured.
Since Osama Bin Laden’s spectacular killing, all attempts have shifted toward political attempts at seeking a timely formula to bring the war to an end. But serious threats within and beyond Afghan borders still persist.
Furthermore, given the American political calendar, Obama will face the first hurdle in 2014 when mid-term congressional elections take place. Then it will be 2016 as he leaves office. In both instances, Afghanistan may emerge as a foreign policy headache if the transition is problematic or perceived as a failure for the US and NATO.
However, if the transition and withdrawal programs move according to plan, then Afghanistan will emerge as a success story and help the President’s foreign and security policy record. And, if conditions allow for reconciliation to take place simultaneously, then history will be even kinder about the Afghan war record.
But what if the situation deteriorates between 2014 and 2016 and turns once more into a global security menace (as demonstrated during Talban/Al Qaida rule 1996-2001) or results into a failed state verging on civil strife?
Either way, Obama’s legacy will be tarnished.
But neither Obama nor Karzai can claim exclusive blame if Afghanistan faces a debacle of sorts. The blame for losing Afghanistan would have to be shared by many in positions of responsibility since 2001 – primarily Afghan leaders, regional spoilers and the Western alliance.
This week’s meetings in Washington offer an occasion for both sides to think beyond their time in office, and with level-headedness weigh all options when deliberating on decisions that will prove fateful.
The two leaders need to be mindful of not just immediate and intermediate tactical considerations, but also of longer-term implications and consequences affecting the future of a nation, a difficult region and two legacies.
Omar Samad is a Senior Afghan Expert at the United States Institute of Peace (USIP). He was former Afghan Ambassador to France and Canada, and Spokesperson for the Afghan Foreign Ministry. Views expressed here are his own.
Karzai's US visit sends signal to Taliban
DW 06/01/2013
Hamid Karzai's visit to the US on Monday lays bare the Afghan president's strengths and weaknesses. He still enjoys US backing, but he is worried about troop withdrawals, elections, Pakistan and the Taliban.
On his trip abroad this week, Afghan President Hamid Karzai will be spending at least a few days in the US. During that time he will be speaking at length with President Barack Obama about the troop strength of American soldiers post-2014 and about coming presidential elections in Afghanistan. Both topics will be of decisive importance for Afghanistan's future: troop strength is central to the country's security, while elections will show which path the embattled country will now take.
Other topics of interest include the economy, the relationship between Afghanistan and neighboring countries - above all, Pakistan - and talks about a potential bilateral security agreement.
After the 2014 troop withdrawal
After the next round of US troop withdrawals in 2014, experts presume that at least 30,000 US and NATO troops will remain stationed in Afghanistan. Still, many Afghans worry that the southern and eastern parts of country, which share a border with Pakistan, will once again fall into the hands of insurgents when foreign security forces are withdrawn.
That is why the Afghan government is demanding a comprehensive upgrade of its army and police forces. Aimal Faizi, spokesman to the Afghan president, said, "One of the most important points in talks between President Karzai and President Obama will be the upgrade of Afghan security forces. We have already made it clear that, with regard to our shared interests and needs, the US should train our military."
An air force for Afghanistan
One of President Karzai's particular concerns, Faizi said, is related to new equipment for an Afghan air force which, up until now, has remained poorly equipped.
Over the last 18 years, the US has been delivering fighter planes not to Afghanistan but to neighboring Pakistan. Afghanistan would like to close that gap, says the South Asia expert Conrad Schetter. He does not believe, however, that it will happen. "Due to the competitive relationship between Afghanistan and Pakistan, a delivery to the Afghan air force would cause an escalation between the two countries and would assuredly result in a deterioration of the relationship between the US and Pakistan. No one in Washington can advocate that."
Where the US has invested in Afghan security forces, it has done so primarily in light armaments for the infantry.
Signals to Pakistan and the Taliban
The trip is also intended to send a signal directed at both Pakistan and the insurgent Taliban. The latest declaration of proximity between the US and Afghanistan will put Pakistan under pressure. "For Pakistan that means it has to try to enter into an alliance in order to avoid being isolated," Schetter says.
Karzai's signal to the Taliban is different: Peace negotiations, when they come, should only be undertaken with the inclusion of Afghanistan - and not with the US alone - since Karzai now has the backing of the US: something this trip will show.
No peace without the Taliban
According to the Afghan government, the US, Afghanistan and Pakistan agree that the conflict in Afghanistan cannot be settled by war. Beyond that, many Afghan experts agree that peace without Taliban engagement isn't possible.
Afghan Foreign Minister Zalmay Rassoul recently reassured the Taliban (02.01.2013) at a press conference. "Should the Taliban take part in a peace process, and progress is achieved, then they can take part in the coming elections as a political party," he said.
Even Abdul Hamid Azer, a community leader of a municipality in the province of Kabul, supports this approach. "It's good news that the Taliban has active contact with the world at a diplomatic level. They are also Afghans, and one can't say that they're not also suffering under the conditions of war." Whether the strategy of negotiating with the Taliban works will presumably be seen after the 2014 presidential election.
The US supports peace talks with the Taliban in order to bring an end to the conflict and, with it, an end to the military deployment in Afghanistan. America is set to withdraw its troop force of 65,000 in 2014.
In spite of all the progress made with the Taliban thus far, Karzai's trip shows that the Afghan government still relies heavily on the US as its protector.
Kabul to Seek More Control Over U.S. Aid
Finance Minister, Citing 'Waste' in How Money Is Spent, Says Karzai Will Push for Added Autonomy in Washington Visit
Wall Street Journal By NATHAN HODGE January 6, 2013
KABUL - Afghanistan this week plans to ask during President Hamid Karzai's Washington visit for more U.S. assistance to be channeled directly to government coffers, the country's top finance official said.
Control over aid money has been a long-standing issue for Afghanistan, which remains largely dependent on international assistance. Donors expect the country will need as much $8 billion per year in security assistance and development aid for at least another decade.
That aid will come with strings attached: Wealthy nations led by the U.S.—the leading international contributor of aid to Afghanistan over the past decade—Europe and Japan last year agreed to provide continued funding only if Kabul makes strides to combat corruption and ensure transparency.
Finance Minister Omar Zakhilwal told The Wall Street Journal that the Afghan government would seek "a real discussion on the mode of delivery for assistance" as part of negotiations during Mr. Karzai's trip.
"We believe that the way the U.S. money is spent here, there's a lot of waste, particularly money spent through contractors and outside sources," he said. Mr. Zakhilwal added that, on average, only around 10% of U.S. development assistance has been delivered through the Afghan government's core operating budget, with the rest channeled through contractors and aid organizations. Much of that off-budget assistance, he said, was returning to the U.S. in the form of "big consultant salaries and overheads" for development groups.
Afghan officials have long maintained that their institutions can deliver aid more effectively and less expensively than highly paid expatriates. Aid experts, however, say the country still lacks a class of technocrats and administrators capable of administering many programs.
The U.S. last year committed around $1.8 billion to development aid in Afghanistan, a figure that doesn't include money spent to finance the country's military and police and Pentagon-funded reconstruction projects. According to a 2011 U.S. Agency for International Development fact sheet, less than 10% per year of the total USAID Afghanistan budget between fiscal years 2002 and 2008 went directly through the Afghan budget.
However, that "on-budget" share rose to around one-third of the total USAID Afghanistan budget in 2010 and 2011, in line with a U.S. goal to eventually direct around half of development aid directly through the Afghan government. A USAID official said that on-budget share was set to reach around 40% in 2012.
According to the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction, a U.S. watchdog agency that oversees U.S. spending here, U.S. taxpayers have paid for $89.5 billion in reconstruction programs in Afghanistan since 2001.
Mr. Zakhilwal said the Afghan government wouldn't seek additional pledges of money from Washington—"We don't expect new commitments and we don't ask for new commitments," he said—but added that Afghanistan needed help in areas including energy, transportation and agriculture. And he said the Afghan side would have a specific list of infrastructure projects it wants to see completed.
The Afghan military has readied its own wish list of weaponry and equipment ahead of the withdrawal of most international troops in 2014. U.S. and Western officials have expressed concern Afghanistan is seeking weaponry it can't afford to sustain.
Sen. Carl Levin (D., Mich.), chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, told the Journal that the Afghan military had made great strides toward taking over security, but "needs to be affordable."
Sen. Levin, who met with Mr. Karzai Saturday in Kabul, said President Barack Obama would have to weigh issues including the size of a small post-2014 U.S. presence and the kinds of equipment and support the U.S. can provide the Afghan military.
"They're going to need a lot more than we probably can provide," Sen. Levin said. "You can't just drop an air force down on them. They've got to have sustainment, which takes time."
Sen. Levin said lawmakers have worked to include provisions in defense legislation that would give commanders on the ground discretion to decide what kinds of military equipment they can hand over to Afghan forces, but he added: "They can't probably either run or sustain some of the more technologically advanced vehicles."
On reconstruction, Sen. Levin echoed the Afghan finance minister. "We haven't controlled our contractors nearly enough, as far as I'm concerned," he said. "And [there's been] a hell of a lot of waste. And there needs to be much greater emphasis on accountability of our resources."
The bill for sustaining Afghanistan's army and police is expected to run around $4.1 billion a year, a figure that is built around a total security force of 228,000 members, down from a current peak of around 344,000 soldiers and police, officials from the North Atlantic Treaty Organization have said.
Sen. Jack Reed (D., R.I.), a senior member of the Senate Armed Services Committee who traveled with Sen. Levin, said the savings for the U.S. would be considerable, even when factoring in the cost of keeping a small U.S. contingent in Afghanistan.
"If you look at the high-water mark of the surgeyou're going from $100 billion [per year] down to maybe $4 billion," he said. "And if we do it effectively, we're going to have a more stable and more sustainable force."
The drop in U.S. spending in Afghanistan, Sen. Reed added, would have an impact on the country's economy. "A huge portion of their [gross domestic product] is directly related to foreign troopsand foreign aid. So that's going to come down significantly—and they have to prepare for that."
Write to Nathan Hodge at nathan.hodge@wsj.com
6 Afghan police officers missing in Farah province
By Mirwais Adeel - January 7 2013, 1:29 pm Khaama Press
According to local authorities in western Farah province of Afghanistan, at least 6 Afghan police officers are missing from a security check post in Pusht-e-Rud district.
The Afghan police officers disappeared from the check post on Sunday evening.
Deputy provincial governor Mohammad Younis Rassouli confirmed the report however he did not disclose further information regarding the incident.
In a separate incident and Afghan security service member was killed following attack by unknown gunmen in Farah province.
Provincial governor spokesman Abdul Rahman Zhwandai said the attack took place on Monday morning, killing an Afghan security service member and injuring another one.
In the meantime local officials are saying Afghan security forces have launched a search operation to find the missing Afghan police officers.
A spokesman for the Taliban group said the police officers have joined Taliban group but the report has not been confirmed by officials in Farah yet.
Widespread Violations of the Law Should End: Khalili
TOLOnews.com By Sharif Amiry Sunday, 06 January 2013
Second Vice President Mohammed Karim Khalili warned Sunday that the rampant violations of the law in the country should stop and the Constitution should be respected.
"Considering the current situation, violating the laws of the country – be it by anyone – should be avoided," said Khalili.
"No one should have the chance [to violate the laws]," he added.
But Khalili stopped short of calling for the prosecution of those involved in corruption and illegal activity, including several high-level government officials.
Opposition parties and former government officials pointed to the rampant corruption in the government's ranks and called for appropriate action. They added that violations of the Constitution are commonplace and criticised the government's lackluster enforcement of the Constitution.
"In hundreds of cases, the country's constitution is not enforced by the government and the nation, which the president and the nation are responsible for," said Sebghatullah Mojaddedi, former head of the Senate.
Head of the National Coalition, an opposition political party, also criticised the government for constitutional violations.
"The head of the judiciary has been working for two years in violation of laws. Therefore, one pillar of the government has been working unconstitutionally," said Dr. Abdullah Abdullah, head of the National Coalition.
Abdullah was referring to Chief Justice Abdulsalam Azimi, who continues to serve although his tenure ended two years ago.
The Independent Commission for Overseeing the Implementation of Constitution said challenges remain in the way of uniform implementation of the Constitution.
"Choosing individual interests over the public interest, habitual violation of laws, and lack of attention towards a healthy management [of the government] are the main challenges," said Gol Rahman Qazi, head of the commission.
Biggest National Security Challenge is Political, Economic: Defence Ministry
TOLOnews.com By Azim Arash Sunday, 06 January 2013
The deputy minister of national defence said Sunday that Afghanistan's security following the withdrawal of international forces in 2014 depends on the political, social, and economic conditions of the country.
"If the political, social, and economic structure does not fall apart after 2014, there will be no concerns over security," said Baz Mohammad Johari, deputy defence minister for personnel and training.
Raising the capacity of the national army is a main priority for the ministry, and about 95 percent of the army's training and recruitment goals will be met by the end of 2014, Johari said.
Meanwhile, the Independent Administrative Reform and Civil Service Commission signed an agreement with the ministry of defense to make top-level defense posts civilian jobs.
The commission officials believe the implementation of this plan will prevent potential future military interferences in political affairs.
Karzai Meets Secretary of Iran's National Security Council
TOLOnews.com Sunday, 06 January 2013
President Hamid Karzai met the secretary of Iran's Supreme National Security Council, Dr. Sayed Jalili, on Saturday in Kabul, President Office said.
"At the meeting held in the Presidential Palace, the two sides discussed ways to broaden and deepen bilateral relations, and politico-economic cooperation between the two countries as well as exchanged views on regional affairs," Karzai's office said in a statement.
Sayed Jalili said that Afghanistan and Iran share a common history and culture, adding that Iran is seeking shared interests and an institutionalized relationship between the two nations.
"Agreeing in the meeting on a tripartite session between Afghanistan, Iran and India, the two sides stressed on continued collaboration, strengthening of institutions, and exchange of experiences between the two countries," he statement said.
The National Security Adviser to the President Rangin Dadfar Spanta also met Jalili and discussed security, economics and border issues.
Mr. Spanta also discussed issues related to Iran's Chabahar port and railway plans between the countries.
Mr. Jalili's visit to Kabul comes just days before President Karzai is scheduled to meet President Obama in Washington. He is expected to discuss the bilateral security agreement amd the residual US force in Afghanistan, something that is of concern to Iran.
Pakistan to Release 3,000 Afghan Trucks Stranded at Borders
TOLOnews.com By Shahla Murtazaie Sunday, 06 January 2013
Pakistani officials will release 3,000 Afghan trucks on Monday after a bilateral meeting with Afghan traders and officials, officials said.
A delegation from the Afghan Chamber of Commerce and Industries travelled to Pakistan to attend the fourth Joint Afghan-Pak Chamber of Commerce and Industries Summit aimed at easing the transit and trade issues between the two countries.
As many as 3,000 Afghan trade trucks were recently paused in Pakistan over transit issues between Afghanistan and Pakistan; however, Pakistani officials ordered the immediate release of the Afghan trucks as part of Pakistan's efforts to facilitate the implementation of APTA [Afghanistan and Pakistan Trade Agreement].
"Pakistan officials ordered the release of 3,000 Afghan trade trucks on Monday and resolved APTA's technical issues in 10 days," Deputy Chief of the Afghan Chamber of Commerce and Industries (ACCI) Janan Alokozay said at a press conference in Kabul.
Afghan traders expressed skepticism about the release of the trucks, pointing to Pakistan's previous failure to implement APTA's provisions.
"We are not optimistic of Pakistan's promises," Rahmatullah Rahmat, an Afghan factory owner, told TOLOnews.
The fourth Joint Afghan-Pak Chamber of Commerce and Industries Summit also resulted in easing visa restrictions for Afghan truck drivers transporting goods into Pakistan.
www.afghanistannewscenter.com