Tweet
Karzai to Ban Afghan Forces from Requesting Airstrikes
VOA News February 16, 2013
Afghanistan's President Hamid Karzai says Afghan security forces will be banned from asking NATO forces to carry out airstrikes on residential areas.
In an address to officers at a military academy in Kabul, Karzai said he will issue a decree on Sunday stating that under no circumstances can Afghan forces request airstrikes on homes or villages.
His announcement was in apparent reference to a NATO airstrike that killed 10 people, including women and children, in Kunar province on Wednesday. Afghan forces requested the airstrike during a joint Afghan-U.S. operation targeting Taliban fighters in the region.
At least three Taliban militants with links to al-Qaida died in the raid.
Civilian casualties have been a major source of friction between Afghanistan and the U.S.-led international coalition during the 11-year war in the country. Mr. Karzai regularly condemns the killing of civilians.
Afghan forces ready to secure country after 2014: president
KABUL, Feb. 16 (Xinhua) -- Afghan President Hamid Karzai reiterated Saturday that the Afghan security forces are entirely ready to ensure national security after NATO-led forces withdraw from the country by the end of 2014.
"Once the foreigners leave, Afghans will demonstrate to the world that they are able to secure the country and provide security for the nations," Karzai said in his speech delivered at an army officers's gathering at Afghan National Military Academy.
"Our national security forces are entirely ready to take security charge by the end of 2014," Karzai said. "Afghans do not need foreign forces for the defense of their country."
Transition of security responsibilities from NATO-led forces to Afghan army and police began in mid-2011 and lasts till 2014 when Afghanistan is due to take over its full security duties from U.S. and NATO-led forces.
Currently there are about 100,000-strong foreign forces, with nearly 66,000 of them Americans in the country.
Under the U.S. President Barack Obama's withdrawal plan 33,000 U.S. troops already pulled out of Afghanistan in September last year and another 34,000 will return home within one year.
The Afghan leader also called on Taliban and other insurgent groups to renounce violence and join the government-initiated peace and reconciliation process.
The Taliban, whose regime was ousted by a U.S.-led invasion in late 2001, has renewed armed insurgency since then, staging roadside and suicide bomb attacks, killing combatants as well as civilians.
However, the Taliban has repeatedly turned down government's offer for peace talks, saying there will be no dialogue with the government in the presence of foreign troops in the country.
According to Karzai, even if the NATO-led forces leave Afghanistan, international financial support for the war-ravaged country will stay.
During an international aid conference in Japan in July last year, the donor countries pledged more than 16 billion U.S. dollars in development aid for Afghanistan through 2015.
The U.S. and its NATO allies also promised almost the same amount to support Afghan army and police after pullout of their troops.
As Afghan army gets cash to buy its own supplies, some worry about corruption
McClatchy Newspapers By Jay Price Friday, February 15, 2013
KABUL, Afghanistan - The Afghan army is one of the least corrupt parts of a society where more than two-thirds of the citizens think it’s fine for bureaucrats to take bribes. Now that reputation is getting its biggest test: access to more money. Billions of dollars more.
For most of the war, equipment and supplies for the Afghans have been supplied primarily by the foreign militaries operating here. But as the United States and NATO fulfill a vow to withdraw the vast majority of their troops by the end of 2014, Afghan security officials will be expected to do their own purchasing, giving them more opportunities for the kind of bribery and embezzlement that perpetually has Afghanistan ranked among the worst two or three nations on Earth for corruption..
"It is a delicate moment, because if there is a high level of corruption in the military it means that institution will not work, because it will lose the confidence of the people," said Yama Torabi, the director of Integrity Watch Afghanistan, an Afghan group that monitors corruption. "It means, basically, the beginning of collapse of the army."
With the country consumed with anxiety about next year, which features a pivotal presidential election and the complete handover of security to Afghan forces, it’s crucial that the military’s reputation remains sturdy, he said.
"The army is what ensures we won’t slide into civil war,” he said, “but if we are not confident in the army holding together as an institution, but rather being corrupt and easily penetrated by patronage and other corrupting influences, it won’t hold together. It will disappear."
Observers inside and outside Afghanistan have long echoed those views. A study of the Afghan army last year by the RAND Corp., for example, said beating the insurgency required the Afghan public’s continued support and that would require confidence not only in its fighting ability but also in its relative lack of corruption. In short, whether people could trust it.
For most of the war, NATO and other coalition nations have bought the vast majority of vehicles, weapons, aircraft, communications equipment, clothing and individual equipment that the Afghan army and the national police use.
The foreign forces already have transferred the purchasing of food, clothing, individual equipment and service contracts to the Afghan security ministries, said Jamie Graybeal, a spokesman for the U.S. and NATO forces. They expect the transition to full Afghan control to be largely complete by the end of this year.
That’s raised the focus on what the likelihood of corruption will be. A new survey of corruption risk among the world’s militaries by the Berlin-based watchdog group Transparency International found that Afghanistan wasn’t among the two or three worst-ranked countries – relatively good news. But the risk still was rated "very high."
The most vulnerable area, said Mark Pyman, the director of Transparency International’s defense and security program, lies in military procurement. He estimated that the amount Afghan military-procurement officers will have authority over soon will go from hundred of millions of dollars to perhaps $4 billion a year.
That’s a huge increase for any organization to handle properly, particularly in a place where corruption is essentially part of the culture.
"The acid test here will be does the international community leave in place sufficient safeguards and mechanisms with Ministry of Defense’s procurement so that when it’s in charge, there are ways and means for the international community to assist them in dealing with this significant increase in spending?" Pyman said.
His group found positives for Afghanistan compared with other countries that face huge challenges with corruption. For example, in some countries, the military takes control of mines or oil fields and siphons off the proceeds.
That’s not happening in Afghanistan.
Also, he said, the military’s budget is published publicly in enough detail for corruption to be spotted. He said there seemed to be relatively good controls on the payroll system and no indications of corruption involving companies owned by the military.
The Defense Ministry has established an internal committee to fight corruption that seems to be working. For one thing, it’s determined that there should be a panel from outside the ministry to scrutinize contracts for supplies and equipment.
Transparency International places the risk for corruption within Afghanistan’s security services in the same league as those in India, Turkey and Pakistan, one level up from the worst of the 83 countries studied, which include Algeria, Angola, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Egypt, Syria and Yemen.
Torabi, the Integrity Watch Afghanistan director, who also is a member of a national panel that makes recommendations on measures to control corruption, agreed that there’s reason for at least mild optimism about how the military will handle the flood of cash.
But there’s also no doubt that corruption exists in the military, and that some will try to take advantage of the new opportunities.
He said he knew of two business owners who were considering placing bids for supplying the military, and who already had been asked for bribes. He described the bribes solicited as being up to $10 million.
"These are really big contracts, and the size of the bribe reflects that," he said.
Another area of vulnerability is hiring. It’s routine in Afghanistan to pay bribes to get a job.
A U.N. survey earlier this month found that even getting a basic government position here often involved corruption. More than half of schoolteachers and members of the national police reported having paid bribes to help secure their jobs.
Recommendations from Transparency International include that the government allow groups such as Torabi’s to participate in oversight.
"They need to make sure you have civil society in their monitoring," Torabi said. "You can have other government agencies in there supposedly doing that, but it might not be real."
U.S. Army May Have To Extend Afghan Deployments
February 16, 2013 Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty
The top U.S. Army general says he may be forced to extend deployments of soldiers in Afghanistan next year because budget cuts will drastically limit training for brigades who may have to replace them.
Army Chief of Staff General Raymond Odierno said the military will be able to fund training and operations for combat units in Afghanistan now and for those deploying in the summer and fall.
But he said there will be delays in training for those deploying in 2014.
He said that if he couldn't make up the training delays he would have to send forces that aren't ready, or extend deployments of units already there.
Based on reporting by AP and AFP
White House: Obama giving ex-Afghanistan commander time to decide if he wants European command
The Associated Press By Darlene Superville February 15, 2013
The White House says President Barack Obama wants to give Marine Gen. John Allen time to consider his next assignment before deciding whether to proceed with his nomination to lead U.S. and NATO forces in Europe.
Allen, just back from a 19-month Afghanistan command, was linked to -- but then cleared of -- a sex scandal that ended David Petraeus' job as CIA director.
Obama spokesman Josh Earnest said Allen wants time with his family.
"We're happy to give him the opportunity to consider what he wants to do next," Earnest said.
He said Obama has a "ton of confidence in Gen. Allen."
Allen's nomination to the top European command was shelved during an investigation into emails Allen exchanged with a woman connected to the Petraeus affair. Allen was cleared.
US drawdown in Afghanistan a 'worry' for Pakistan, ambassador says
One of the concerns for Pakistan is 'how responsible' the US exit from Afghanistan will be, said Sherry Rehman, Pakistan's ambassador to the US, at a Feb. 5 breakfast meeting.
Christian Science Monitor By David Cook, Staff writer February 15, 2013
Pakistani ambassador Sherry Rehman has served as her nation's top envoy to the United States since November 2011. She was the guest at the Feb. 5 Monitor Breakfast.
Relations between the US and Pakistan:
"This relationship has come a long way from the days of 2011 and early 2012, when it was marked by chronic distrust and periods of crisis management and episodes that left many of us awake at night.... The relationship is now on a stable and, we hope, uphill trajectory."
US drone attacks on suspected Al Qaeda elements in Pakistan:
"We see them as a direct violation of our sovereignty, and we also see them as a violation of international law."
Conjecture that Pakistan's leaders tacitly approve of US drone strikes while publicly denouncing them:
"There is no question of any quiet complicity, no question of wink and nod. This is a parliamentary red line that all government institutions have internalized as policy."
Want your top political issues explained? Get customized DC Decoder updates.
Reaction to the planned US troop drawdown from Afghanistan in 2014:
"There are clear worries ... about how responsible this exit will be. And we are of course invested in ... ensuring that the region remains as stable and as peaceful as possible."
The symbolism of Pakistani schoolgirl Malala Yousafzai, shot by the Taliban for advocating female education:
"We are defeminizing poverty.... It is not going to happen overnight.... Women are in positions of leadership and responsibility in many places in Pakistan...."
The film "Zero Dark Thirty" about the raid in Abbottabad targeting Osama bin Laden:
"Oh, it is very zero and very dark. What can I say?"
U.S. Faces Fire as It Pulls Out of Afghanistan
New York Times By MATTHEW ROSENBERG February 15, 2013
STRONG POINT HAJI RAHMUDDIN II, Afghanistan - When the last American soldiers to occupy this squat, lonely outpost in southern Afghanistan pulled out this week, they left the same way earlier units had arrived: ready for a fight.
They were leaving this violent patch of land outside Kandahar, the south’s main city, just as Taliban fighters were filtering back in from winter havens in Pakistan. It was, as First Sgt. Jason Pitman, 35, bluntly put it, “no time to get stupid.”
The Americans knew they would be most vulnerable in their final hours after taking down their surveillance and early-warning systems. The Taliban knew it, too, and intelligence reports indicated that they had been working with sympathetic villagers to strike at the departing soldiers. Two days earlier, the militants made a test run against the outpost, taking the rare step of directly engaging it in a firefight, albeit a brief one, soon after the first radio antennas came down.
On the same day that President Obama announced that roughly half of the American troops still in in Afghanistan would withdraw this year, and that Afghan forces would begin taking the lead in the war, the smaller-scale departure from the Haji Rahmuddin II outpost was an uncelebrated milestone.
But it pointed at a harsh reality of the process: that some of the withdrawal will happen under fire in areas of the Taliban heartland where the idea of Afghan-led security remains an abstraction. With the start of the annual fighting season just weeks away, some of the hardest-won gains of the war are at risk of being lost.
In the years since the Obama administration’s additional tens of thousands of American soldiers and their Afghan allies pushed into the grape fields, pomegranate orchards and opium poppy fields of southern Afghanistan, some islands of relative calm have been cleared.
But even though this corner of Kandahar Province — the Zhare district — was also a focus of the troop increase, it is far from calm. And it is not unique: many areas in the south and east where troop pullouts are under way have had only tenuous security gains at best, despite years of hard-fought American-led advances.
The Taliban here have not given up their fight, on ground where Mullah Muhammad Omar and his followers first rose up against a local warlord, in the movement’s genesis. In one telling indication of the level of strife in Zhare, even many Afghans are hesitant to make the hourlong trip from Kandahar to the district’s mud-brick villages, many of which stand semiabandoned after three summers of intense fighting.
“My sons live in Kandahar City, and they do not like to come back here,” said Abdul Malik, an elder from Tieranon, a village in central Zhare. Once you are in the villages, he added, “anything can happen.”
The American withdrawal is picking up pace regardless, and American commanders have begun to cede even the most contested of ground to Afghan forces.
There are still places “that the Taliban can find sanctuary, and we still believe there is an informal network or support structure in place that they can rely on,” said Maj. Thomas W. Casey, the executive officer of the Third Battalion, 41st Infantry, which operates in the eastern and central half of Zhare.
So the Americans are out on patrol alongside Afghan units here almost every day, and running larger operations on a regular basis. Last week, they used a weapon that shoots a line of explosives and is intended to clear mined roads to knock down roughly 600 yards of trees that could provide cover for Taliban scouts and attackers.
On Thursday, they demolished a hill that the Taliban had used as a fighting position. Three huge explosions — 100 pounds of high explosives were used in each of the last two, which could be felt over a mile away — reduced the hill to dust and dirt. The Americans on the mission outnumbered Afghan soldiers nearly three to one.
There are some things the Americans have to do solo because the Afghans cannot do them, nor will they be able to anytime soon, commanders say. One example is using high-tech surveillance — blimps, drones, cameras mounted on towers at every base — to help spot militants before they attack, and to direct airstrikes against them. They have launched numerous such attacks in the past month alone.
The Afghans send out regular patrols on their own, and conduct a growing number of small, independent operations. Their fighting ability is getting close to where it needs to be, but the crucial back end of the army — the logistics and supply teams that get bullets, fuel, food and water to where they need to be — is woefully unready, American and even some Afghan officers say.
The Afghan brigade based here, for instance, nearly ran out of fuel this week. It was down to a few hours’ worth when a supply came through after some behind-the-scenes prodding from coalition officers up the chain of command.
But with fewer American troops here — the force level in Zhare and the neighboring district of Maiwand is down from a brigade of roughly 4,500 soldiers to two battalions totaling about 1,500 — Afghan forces have to fill the holes.
“There’s no white space in Zhare — white space being the area that no one owns or controls,” Major Casey said. If an area is not occupied by American or Afghan forces, “it’s occupied by the Taliban. It’s red space.”
Unless the Afghans can hold what the Americans give up, he said, “more space is going to turn red.”
That is now the case in the villages that surround Strong Point Haji Rahmuddin II. As recently as September, the outpost was home to a company of roughly 120 American soldiers, along with a few dozen Afghan troopers.
By January, its American force was down to a single understaffed platoon. Between watching from their four guard towers, running patrols, starting to break down the base and taking care of basic human necessities — eating, bathing and sleeping — the platoon was stretched thin.
They did manage to find a few more minutes in each day about two weeks ago — after the showers were trucked away and not replaced. Hot food went next, and chow time became whenever rations could be grabbed. The soldiers here still manage to joke about it. Then the radio antennas were taken down. The brief Taliban attack followed, after which the battalion dedicated a single balloon camera to keeping watch around the outpost’s perimeter day and night, Major Casey said.
The Afghan force at the base, now down to 16 soldiers, watched warily, telling the Americans that they had to stay. The morning of the Americans’ departure, the Afghan commander, Lt. Muhammad Mohsen, said in an interview that he believed they would come back. If not, he said grimly, the villagers would soon want them back.
“We’ll have the freedom to do what we want,” Lieutenant Mohsen said. Those villagers who desired peace would get it. Those who did not, “maybe we can destroy their homes.”
The Americans brought down their towering surveillance camera, one of the single biggest advantages for the defenders. At that point, security became “a huge concern,” Major Casey said. “We focused pretty much all our assets we had on watching that.”
They had to watch a few hours longer than planned. Lieutenant Mohsen had left only three soldiers at the base, not even enough to put one man in each of the five towers he now controlled. The Americans sat for two hours past their appointed departure time waiting for him and the rest of his men to return.
In the end, the Americans managed to vacate the outpost having faced just the one firefight — a relief after preparing for days for an attack.
But Major Casey and other commanders said they expected the Taliban to learn from what they had just seen.
The platoon that departed Haji Rahmuddin II will also be returning on a regular basis to work with the Afghan forces based there. The Americans would keep watching from the sky, as well.
“The last thing we want,” Major Casey said, is “the Taliban successfully overcoming a strong point after we’ve left. That’s almost as bad as them getting ready to attack us as we’re leaving.”
Bryan Denton contributed reporting.
Afghans skeptical of Obama troop withdrawal
DW 15/02/2013
US President Barack Obama plans to withdraw some 34,000 American troops from Afghanistan this year – a little more than half the current number. The Karzai government has welcomed the move as long overdue.
The office of Afghan President Hamid Karzai issued a statement saying it had long been hoping for such an announcement and that the US president's plans would certainly provide added impetus for peace and security in the country.
Zahir Azimi, the spokesman for the Afghan defense ministry, added that "by the end of 2013, the government would take over the security responsibilities for all of Afghanistan." Afghan security forces had the necessary capabilities and strength, he said.
Currently, Afghanistan's own security forces consist of 157,000 soldiers and 190,000 police officers. The total number of personnel is supposed to increase by another 5,000 to 352,000 by 2014. Afghanistan is quick to emphasize that it is already responsible for security in 80 percent of the country.
US support still necessary
Due to a lack of equipment, Afghan troops are still dependent on international forces as far as air support is concerned. The United States has repeatedly denied Afghan requests for equipment for its air force.
Tooryalai Wesa, the governor of Kandahar province, where the Taliban have been traditionally strong, thinks Washington has an obligation to help.
"The US has to depart Afghanistan within the framework of a responsible transition process and provide all assistance possible for strengthening the peace process," he told DW. "They have to help us equip and train our troops."
Afghan military experts, unlike the government, are skeptical about the chances for peace and security in the country. Former general, Atiqullah Barialai, sees domestic political reasons behind President Obama's withdrawal decision. "In Afghanistan, the war continues unabated and the number of attacks by the Taliban is still very high. Furthermore, there are no confidence-building measures for compromises and reconciliation," Barialai told DW. Political and military vacuum
After international troops leave, will Afghanistan once again slip back into civil war and become a pawn of foreign interest, like it did after the withdrawal of Soviet forces in 1989?
That is exactly what many Afghans fear, such as Mohammad Omar Sati, a member of the Kandahar province peace council. "Unfortunately, we are surrounded by local enemies and hostile neighbors, who are just waiting to lure us into a trap with intrigue."
The Taliban responded to Obama's announcement with the usual demand for an immediate troop withdrawal. Western news agencies quoted Taliban spokesman Zabihullah Mujahid as saying that the problems in the country could only be solved by Afghans themselves after a rapid withdrawal of international forces.
What happens after 2014?
Political observers think that the Taliban are not interested in a peaceful solution and are just waiting for foreign troops to leave to intensify their attacks. Military expert Baralai is one of the pessimists: "The Taliban are planning to expand their attacks and occupy additional territory. Afghan security forces will not be able to contain the insurgents," he said.
In Afghanistan, people are now anxiously awaiting the outcome of the current security negotiations with the US, which will determine the extent of training and equipment for Afghan forces and the size of the US anti-terror units to remain in Afghanistan after 2014.
2 Afghan security members die in explosion in northern province
SHIBRGHAN, Afghanistan, Feb. 16 (Xinhua) -- Two members of Afghan security forces were killed and four others were wounded Saturday when a bomb hit their mobile in the country's northern province of Jawzjan, the provincial police chief said.
"Two members of National Security Directorate (NDS) died and four others were wounded when their vehicle touched off a roadside planted bomb in Khwaja Buran, an area outside provincial capital at around 3:30 p.m. local time," Abdul Aziz Khirat told Xinhua, blaming Taliban insurgents for the attack.
He said the NDS or intelligence service unit was in a routine patrol with police forces when the blast took place in the province 390 km north of Afghan capital Kabul.
The Taliban has been waging an insurgency since its regime was toppled by a U.S-led invasion in late 2001.
Haqqani facilitator detained in eastern Afghanistan
KABUL, Feb. 16 (Xinhua) -- A weapons facilitator with the Haqqani militant group was detained in eastern Afghan province of Logar on Saturday, the coalition force said.
"An Afghan and coalition security force arrested a Haqqani facilitator in Pul-e Alam district, Logar province, today. The detained Haqqani facilitator is believed responsible for planning and preparing attacks targeting Afghan and coalition forces and facilitating the acquisition of improvised explosive devices and other weapons," the Nato-led International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) said in a press release.
As a Taliban-linked radical group mostly operating in eastern Afghan provinces and the capital Kabul, the Haqqani network has been responsible for many high-profile attacks against security forces.
In addition, the joint forces also captured a high-profile attack facilitator in eastern Khost province.
"The detained facilitator is believed to be associated with both Taliban and Haqqani insurgent networks throughout Khost district. He is accused of assisting in the transfer and delivery of heavy weapons, equipment and ammunition," it noted.
Prior to his arrest, he was suspected of coordinating a vehicle- borne improvised explosive device attack targeting Afghan and coalition forces in the province 150 km southeast of Kabul, said the release.
The Taliban, which has been waging an insurgency since its regime was toppled by a U.S-led invasion in late 2001, has yet to make comment.
Hekmatyar send out curse to democracy in Afghanistan
By Mirwais Adeel - 16 Feb 2013, 8:56 pm Khaama Press
Gulbuddin Hekmatyar Afghan warlord and founder of Hezb-e-Islami (Islamic Party of Afghanistan) said around 1000 people were killed during the Afghan civil war and denied to agree with the current Afghan institution, democracy and freedom of speech.
While speaking during an exclusive interiew with the 1TV Gulbuddin Hekmatyar said he sends out curse to the current democracy in Afghanistan.
Hekmatyar told 1TV media that he was not involved in all civil war during 1990′s in capital Kabul but the war was going on between several parties.
He said around 1000 ordinary people were killed during the Kabul civil war which mainly took place in south and east parts of the capital.
“The overall casualties during the Kabul civil war hardly reaches to 1000 people and majority of the civilians casualties took place in southern and eastern part of Kabul city which was under the control of Islamic Party of Afghanistan and was continuously targed by artillery, tanks and airstrikes of the government at that time.” Hekmatyar told 1TV.
However the Islamic Party of Afghanistan led by Gulbuddin Hekmatyar is believed to be the main reason behind bloody civil war in Kabul city during the 1990s.
According to independent human rights commission of Afghanistan around 60,000 people were killed during the civil war in capital Kabul which lasted for 4 years and 4 months.
But Gulbuddin Hekmatyar said his party did not have any major role in Kabul civil war. He said, “We had only four to five small fights with the coalition of that time and we were only responding to the government’s attack.”
He also give out a curse to the current democracy in Afghanistan and said, “If democracy, women’s rights, freedom of speech and constitutions is what that has been displayed by Americans in Kabul and Baghdad, and which have broadly been campaigned by media agencies then we do not agree and hate such a democracy. Being a liberal Afghan we deny such a democracy and will continue to do so.”
Mr Hekmatyar is currently in a tenuous alliance with the Taliban, although both sides remain suspicious of each other. In 2003, the US state department designated him as a terrorist, accusing him of taking part in and supporting attacks by al-Qaeda and the Taliban.
The Hezb-e-Islami was blamed for much of the terrible death and destruction of that period, which led many ordinary Afghans to welcome the emergence of the Taliban.
The civil war also led to Mr Hekmatyar’s fall from grace – he quickly became one of the most reviled men in the country.
For some time, Mr Hekmatyar himself enjoyed considerable support from Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, according to BBC. But eventually Islamabad turned against him, preferring to give full support to the Taliban instead.
So like the other mujahideen factions, Mr Hekmatyar and his men were forced to flee Kabul when the Taliban swept into power in 1996. He ended up being given refuge in Tehran, where he lived a quiet life, waiting for his fortunes to change.
The Iranians may have regarded him as a potentially useful Pashtun card to have up their sleeve, but he turned out to be too much of a wild card for them.
His vocal opposition both to the Americans and to the new regime of President Hamid Karzai was an embarrassment to the Iranian government, which threw its official weight behind Mr Karzai. In February 2002, the Iranian authorities expelled Mr Hekmatyar and closed down the offices of his Hezb-e-Islami in Tehran.
They accused him of abusing Iranian hospitality with his comments vowing to fight the Karzai administration.
Afghan Insurgent Is Killed on U.S.-Led Military Base
New York Times By ALISSA J. RUBIN and TAIMOOR SHAH February 15, 2013
KABUL - American Special Operations Forces stopped a tribal leader as he was driving with his brother and 6-year-old son in an area rife with Taliban in southern Afghanistan on Wednesday. A quick examination of his identity documents confirmed that he was a wanted man.
The troops took the man, Mirza M. Khan, and his brother to a nearby base for questioning. According to both the brother and a district official who heard the Special Forces’ account of the episode, the two men were let go — but Mr. Khan was fatally shot as he returned to his car.
Jamie Graybeal, a spokesman for the American-led coalition, e-mailed a statement to The New York Times on Friday saying that the episode was under investigation. “On 13 February, an engagement between coalition forces and a known Taliban member in Sangin District resulted in the death of the insurgent,” the statement said. “The circumstances surrounding the engagement are being investigated by the coalition. It is inappropriate to comment further on the specifics of this engagement until that investigation is complete.”
That Mr. Khan was almost certainly involved in illegal and violent activities is not in question, and the Special Forces may have worried that he was about to detonate a bomb in his car. But for Afghans, the details provided by the brother and the district official raise a series of disturbing questions: Why was someone who was on a list of men wanted for helping Taliban insurgents not held until he could be transferred to a detention center? Why was it necessary to shoot a man who was almost certainly unarmed, since no Afghan suspected of insurgent ties would be allowed on an American base with a weapon?
“Even if he was supporting the Taliban, did the Americans have the right to kill him?” said Wali Khan, a Parliament member from Helmand who said he had met with three of the dead man’s relatives on Friday and planned to bring the matter before Parliament and to the attention of President Hamid Karzai.
“If he was a suspect, then they should have arrested him and put him in jail or given him to the Afghan government,” he said. “Instead, they executed him in front of his son and brother. I do not see any differences between this execution and what we all condemn: the Taliban’s extrajudicial executions that happen day and night.”
The surviving brother, Massoom Khan, gave this account to his brother-in-law, Hajji Ghulam Rasool Khan, and other relatives. Mirza Khan had been ill and went to see a doctor, taking his brother and son with him. They were stopped near sunset on their way back to their village, near Poza, where the Special Operations Forces have a base. They were questioned for a couple of hours there. As they left and were walking back to their car, a volley of bullets hit Mizra Khan in the back, neck and head, and he crumpled to the ground, before his son, Zirak.
The American troops then pushed Massoom Khan back into the base — it is not clear in any of the accounts where the boy was during the initial questioning or after the shooting — but half an hour later let him go and asked if he needed help moving his brother’s corpse. He declined the offer.
Mohammed Sharif, the governor of Sangin District, said he had heard a similar account from the Special Forces as they informed him of Mirza Khan’s death, differing mainly in specifying that Mr. Khan had been furious as he left the base.
“The Special Forces said that while he was being interrogated, he got angry and said something in Pashto that from his gestures seemed hostile,” Mr. Sharif said. “Then he walked out of the room and walked toward his car.”
“The Special Forces thought he was going to cause a problem and so that’s why he was shot,” he said. “They said, ‘We had no intention of killing him, but then he seemed to be raging and suddenly left the room and walked quickly toward his car and his gesturing was strange, and we thought he was going to cause a problem.’ ”
The car had been left outside the base and may not have been searched, so it is possible that the American troops thought Mr. Khan may have been intending to grab a weapon or detonate an explosive device. Relatives insisted, however, that Mr. Khan, who was well known in the area, had no need to carry a weapon, especially when traveling on a main road. Mr. Sharif said that the Special Operations Forces told him that Mirza Khan had supported and sheltered a man who, while wearing a police uniform, shot and killed three Special Operations soldiers at the Poza base in August and then escaped.
Mr. Khan was on the American military’s list of people to be killed or captured, known as the Joint Prioritized Effects List, according to officials.
Several Helmand leaders said that Mr. Khan helped insurgents frequently, but he was also a local leader of the Alizai tribe and a well-off businessman who traded in auto parts and owned several taxis, including three that act as a local ambulance service, sometimes transporting wounded Taliban to medical treatment.
The Parliament member, Wali Khan, said: “He was a rich man, and the Taliban would make him provide them with food and money. I would do the same if I were him. You would do the same. It is a matter of survival.”
Only a few places in Afghanistan are as unstable and Taliban-dominated as northern Helmand Province. American troops largely ousted the Taliban from central Helmand, but were never able to completely penetrate the north, where residents have historically had little love either for the Afghan government or foreign forces. While Sangin is far less violent today than it was two years ago, according to statistics from the international military troops, the insurgency in rural areas remains robust.
Residents are particularly critical of the troops at the Poza base. “They set up checkpoints near the outpost, and they scare children and women because when they stop the cars they point their guns at them,” said an elder from the area who asked not to be named because he feared being singled out. “I have heard from many villagers that they slap young men and they curse people in English, and at night they raid houses and kill people. To me they look like a bunch of well-armed bandits who don’t steal from you but treat you like animals.”
For many in the area, the prolonged fighting has left them with no trust for either the Western and Afghan troops or the Taliban, but also little willingness to help the Westerners who are viewed as interlopers.
“They set up checkpoints, they raid houses and they ambush insurgents,” said Mr. Gul, Mirza Khan’s brother-in-law. “Most of the time civilians are caught in cross-fire. Taliban and Americans are enemy, but to tell you the truth, we, the civilians, are bearing the brunt of it at the end of the day.
“If we support the Americans, the Taliban kill us, and if we support the Taliban, then the Americans kill us. And if we do not support any side, then both of them kill us.”
Alissa J. Rubin reported from Kabul, and Taimoor Shah from Kandahar, Afghanistan. Habib Zahori contributed reporting from Kabul.
Thriving Afghan zoo’s plans to expand worry its champions
McClatchy Newspapers By Jay Price Friday, February 15, 2013
KABUL, Afghanistan - In 2001, as the Taliban government collapsed, the Kabul Zoo had been almost destroyed by years of war and neglect. Exhibits were bombed out, and many of the animals had been maimed, been eaten by hungry Afghans or died of hunger.
That’s when the North Carolina Zoo stepped in with more than $400,000 it had collected in donations. Other foreign groups pitched in, and the donations eventually reached nearly $2 million.
The result: Despite being no larger than a suburban U.S. high school campus, the zoo has become one of the most popular leisure attractions in Afghanistan – so popular, in fact, that ticket sales generate more money than it costs to operate the attraction.
Now Kabul’s mayor wants to make the zoo more than five times larger – with more animals, more space and more crowd-pleasing species from places such as Africa.
Those who helped revive the zoo say that might be a big mistake.
"Getting them to understand what they can do that will be sustainable, given their resources and the climate there, is difficult," said David Jones, the director of the state-owned North Carolina Zoo in Asheboro, which covers 150 times more land than its counterpart in Kabul.
Jones, who’s long been involved in helping zoos in the developing world, said the idea of a sprawling zoo with more species from more places raised a host of issues, including simply the cost of heating and cooling animals’ housing in Afghanistan’s climate, which is known for its big swings in daily and seasonal temperatures.
Jon Coe, one of the world’s best-known zoo designers, was hired in 2011 as part of a $120 million aid package to improve the city from the U.S. Agency for International Development. His design for the zoo emphasized native species, education, conservation, the health of the animals and sustainability over flash. The area for animals would grow only moderately. The emphasis would be on species native to Afghanistan. Land across the Kabul River that’s been earmarked for expansion would become a conservation-minded river park tied in with the zoo.
The idea was a zoo that Kabul could afford to run properly even if the foreign funding that now fuels the city’s budget dries up, Coe said in an email from his home in Australia.
His design, though, has failed to satisfy the mayor, Mohammed Younas Nawandish, a short, mustachioed, wildly popular buzzsaw of a man dubbed "The Builder of Kabul."
For one, Nawandish says, the animal enclosures must expand across the river, where Coe had foreseen a family-friendly park.
"The condition of the zoo is very good, but unfortunately we don’t have a lot of animals," Nawandish said in an interview. "We will change that. It will be an excellent park, and at the same time a zoo, and it will be very nice."
Nawandish, a civil engineer by training, is famed for 17-hour workdays and striding the streets of the city day and night, looking for things to improve. Backed with Western aid money, he’s paved miles of dirt roads, built dozens of parks and playgrounds, installed streetlights and planted thousands of trees. He has huge plans to construct entire new neighborhoods.
As for the zoo, he wants animals that will amaze.
"I want elephants,” he said.
Tales of what happened to the animals during the nation’s civil war and the period of Taliban control are part of the zoo’s lore: A handful of unpaid zookeepers dodged bullets to get supplies to the animals. Taliban soldiers slept in the zoo, eating the rabbits and deer, and shooting other animals for fun.
The aquarium was damaged in the fighting and shelling destroyed a parrot enclosure. Most famously, Marjan the Lion lost an eye, his hearing and his teeth to a grenade. He died in 2002, but he remains a symbol of the zoo.
As the zoo’s plight became known, the N.C. Zoo Society, the North Carolina Zoo’s private fundraising arm, hoped to get about $30,000. Instead, more than $430,000 poured in. The money helped rebuild exhibits, pay staff and buy animal feed. The North Carolina Zoo also helped with animal care, staff training and a business strategy.
The zoo today is clean, and the modest enclosures and animals appear to be in good condition. There’s a food stand, a Ferris wheel, security cameras, more than 100 species of animals and insects, and 40 employees. Officials claim that attendance was 600,000 last year.
The zoo now has an education center that 30,000 students visited last year, and it’s been allowed to join international zoo groups, including the World Association of Zoos and Aquariums, which will give it access to high-quality training for the staff.
The zoo is popular in part because it’s a safe, peaceful refuge, particularly for women and children, in a city that has few.
On a recent Friday, despite snow on the ground and near-freezing temperatures, hundreds turned out. Several of them liked the mayor’s plan.
Abdul Aziz, 45, a taxi driver, had eight members of his family in tow.
"You’re always coming into the zoo and seeing the same animals each time," he said. "This is my third visit this winter, but the animals are the same. We certainly want more animals. Expansion of the zoo gives us the opportunity to come every week, maybe, and get familiar with different kinds of animals."
The mayor says the bigger zoo will pay its way by attracting more people. Jones is skeptical, though, because the market size won’t change. It’s unlikely that many people would travel from outside Kabul to go to the zoo, he said.
There are plenty of Afghan animals that could form the heart of a terrific zoo along the lines Coe suggested, Jones said. Among them are one of the world’s most diverse groups of cats, including snow leopards and Asiatic lions. Other exciting species include the Markhor, a massive mountain goat with bizarre spiraling horns.
"They’ve got a lot that is really interesting, and well-designed exhibits for their own animals would satisfy a lot of people and be more sustainable," Jones said.
Aziz Gul Saqib, the Kabul Zoo’s director, says it will use Coe’s design as a guide, and hopes to consult with him more. It will need to work with international advisers and donors to carry out the expansion.
The mayor, meanwhile, is moving ahead. He’s hoping that the land acquisition can start soon. He’s already begun the search for elephants.
"I have asked the ambassador of India for help," he said.
McClatchy special correspondent Rezwan Natiq in Kabul contributed to this story.
Email: jayprice@mcclatchydc.com; Twitter: @jayatnando
Afghan warlord Gen. Dostum threatened for his war crimes
Khaama Press By Sadaf Shinwari 16 Feb 2013
The former leader of Hezb-e-Junbish Millie Islami — National Islamic Movement party of Afghanistan warned to disclose the war crimes of the party’s founder and former warlord Gen. Abdul Rashid Dostum if he does not prevent his interference in the party.
However a spokesman for the National Islamic Movement party of Afghanistan denied the allegations by Syed Noorullah Sadat and said Gen. Abdul Rashid Dostum does not misuse from his military position to interfere in party’s internal affairs.
Syed Noorullah Sadat accused Gen. Dostum for interfering in National Islamic Movement Party fo Afghanistan and warned that he will disclose the war crimes committed by him.
Faizullah Zaki spokesman for the National Islamic Movement party of Afghanistan following a press conference denied the allegations by Mr. Sadat.
Mr. Zaki said, “Mr. Sadat has himself denied the remarks which he said in an emotional way while his duty as the leader of the party was over. He was leading the party for the past 30 years and was a close person to Gen. Abdul Rashid Dostum.”
He said, “Such remarks are wondering and the people of Afghanistan will not accept that Mr. Sadat has given such a remark regarding Gen. Abdul Rashid Dostum. We deny his allegations.”
He also added that the National Islamic Movement Party of Afghanistan is keen to have a strong stance in the upcoming presidential election and will support a unique candidate and therefore changes were made in the party.
Azizullah Kargar has been appointed and is heading the National Islamic Movement Party of Afghanistan.
Afghanistan's Economy, a Victim of Politics
TOLOnews.com By Suleman Fatimie Thursday, 14 February 2013
If Afghanistan is to sustain and build on the achievements of the past 10 years, it is imperative that serious attention and resources are mobilised to get the country's economy on its feet, Suleman Fatimie writes.
Afghans face yet another deadline: 2014. The uncertainty continues. While the Afghan government's international partners want to stabilise and create an "Afghan good enough" environment, many wonder how this is possible with everyone running towards the exit doors.
Afghans are faced with a barrage of negative and depressing news about their future, with grim predictions for years to come. Signing strategic agreements cannot be considered a commitment to and a promise of stability beyond 2014. If Afghanistan is to sustain and build on the achievements of the past 10 years, it is imperative that serious attention and resources are mobilised to get the country's economy on its feet.
Real economic growth and development, even if modest, will create greater employment opportunities, better security, and most critically, better living standards for Afghan people - items that should be on the top of our agendas.
Afghanistan's economy at this moment is donor driven with over 90 percent of our GDP funded through bilateral and multilateral donors. And with the scaling down of international presence and 2014 deadline looming, unless we take concrete steps and bold decisions, Afghanistan's economy is headed for severe turbulence with the possibility of crash landing.
In 2005, Financial Times published a magazine titled 'Courage Rewarded – Afghanistan's President Hamid Karzai Leads the Reforms'. The publication focused on opportunities and challenges in Afghanistan but with a positive and encouraging message.
"It is true that investing in Afghanistan is not for the faint-hearted but the opportunities are almost limitless. Those who feel their nerve slipping need only look to the optimism of the country's government and its citizens," James Eedes wrote. He continued that "key ministers and a small team of technocrats – a wafer-thin layer of competent bureaucracy – are working to remove the many obstacles to private sector development."
The question that needs to be asked now is, what happened to the optimism and reforms initiated to create a pro-business environment? The answer is that some of the sound reforms have been stalled or reversed, administrative and non-tariff business barriers both at national and provincial levels have increased, and corruption has soared, making it almost impossible to get anything done without paying a bribe.
No wonder existing investors are reluctant to expand or re-invest and potential investors fail to consider Afghanistan for business opportunities. Afghanistan simply does not provide a business-friendly environment.
In 2006 Afghanistan was considered one of the leading reformers of its business environment and between 2004 and 2007 it steadily improved its ranking in the Doing Business Indicators. But since then, Afghanistan's ranking has deteriorated due to lack of a clear vision, lack of understanding of relevant bodies of the reforms and conflicted agendas.
In 10 years, we could not define what 'market economy' means in the context of Afghanistan's constitution and prevailing economic situation. While the concept of market economy has been the focus of continuous and elaborate discussions inside Afghanistan, the relevant government and non-government bodies fail to address or ignore the core reasons for why we have yet to establish the administrative and legal framework for a market economy to function in the context of Afghanistan.
We are still focusing on the symptoms instead of the causes. We still do not have a sound, practical and implementable national economic vision and policy. Several national documents claim to have these elements, but none could be implemented because the so-called national economic vision and strategies are not based on ground realities. Preference has been to deal with economic trends and challenges on ad hoc basis, which has led to laws, regulations and procedures complicating the system even further and creating layers and layers of bureaucracy, obstacles and red-tape.
The encouraging news is that there are still many Afghans interested or already doing business in Afghanistan. These are Afghans who have endured over 30 years of war and uncertainty. They have every reason to give up, but they are coming back and doing business, even if under very difficult circumstances. Why would they take this chance if they did not believe in the future? It is vital that we maintain this hope and generate even more optimism.
Afghans' entrepreneurial spirit and resilience should be nurtured and, through a collective Afghan-driven process, plans devised and executed to deal with the economic turbulence once the donor money starts to dry up.
The government has the mandate and responsibility to create a transparent business-friendly environment. If it cannot ensure certainty beyond 2014, then the government must at least ensure the private sector, which it claims is the engine of growth, is no longer choked by the current cumbersome business processes.
www.afghanistannewscenter.com
VOA News February 16, 2013
Afghanistan's President Hamid Karzai says Afghan security forces will be banned from asking NATO forces to carry out airstrikes on residential areas.
In an address to officers at a military academy in Kabul, Karzai said he will issue a decree on Sunday stating that under no circumstances can Afghan forces request airstrikes on homes or villages.
His announcement was in apparent reference to a NATO airstrike that killed 10 people, including women and children, in Kunar province on Wednesday. Afghan forces requested the airstrike during a joint Afghan-U.S. operation targeting Taliban fighters in the region.
At least three Taliban militants with links to al-Qaida died in the raid.
Civilian casualties have been a major source of friction between Afghanistan and the U.S.-led international coalition during the 11-year war in the country. Mr. Karzai regularly condemns the killing of civilians.
Afghan forces ready to secure country after 2014: president
KABUL, Feb. 16 (Xinhua) -- Afghan President Hamid Karzai reiterated Saturday that the Afghan security forces are entirely ready to ensure national security after NATO-led forces withdraw from the country by the end of 2014.
"Once the foreigners leave, Afghans will demonstrate to the world that they are able to secure the country and provide security for the nations," Karzai said in his speech delivered at an army officers's gathering at Afghan National Military Academy.
"Our national security forces are entirely ready to take security charge by the end of 2014," Karzai said. "Afghans do not need foreign forces for the defense of their country."
Transition of security responsibilities from NATO-led forces to Afghan army and police began in mid-2011 and lasts till 2014 when Afghanistan is due to take over its full security duties from U.S. and NATO-led forces.
Currently there are about 100,000-strong foreign forces, with nearly 66,000 of them Americans in the country.
Under the U.S. President Barack Obama's withdrawal plan 33,000 U.S. troops already pulled out of Afghanistan in September last year and another 34,000 will return home within one year.
The Afghan leader also called on Taliban and other insurgent groups to renounce violence and join the government-initiated peace and reconciliation process.
The Taliban, whose regime was ousted by a U.S.-led invasion in late 2001, has renewed armed insurgency since then, staging roadside and suicide bomb attacks, killing combatants as well as civilians.
However, the Taliban has repeatedly turned down government's offer for peace talks, saying there will be no dialogue with the government in the presence of foreign troops in the country.
According to Karzai, even if the NATO-led forces leave Afghanistan, international financial support for the war-ravaged country will stay.
During an international aid conference in Japan in July last year, the donor countries pledged more than 16 billion U.S. dollars in development aid for Afghanistan through 2015.
The U.S. and its NATO allies also promised almost the same amount to support Afghan army and police after pullout of their troops.
As Afghan army gets cash to buy its own supplies, some worry about corruption
McClatchy Newspapers By Jay Price Friday, February 15, 2013
KABUL, Afghanistan - The Afghan army is one of the least corrupt parts of a society where more than two-thirds of the citizens think it’s fine for bureaucrats to take bribes. Now that reputation is getting its biggest test: access to more money. Billions of dollars more.
For most of the war, equipment and supplies for the Afghans have been supplied primarily by the foreign militaries operating here. But as the United States and NATO fulfill a vow to withdraw the vast majority of their troops by the end of 2014, Afghan security officials will be expected to do their own purchasing, giving them more opportunities for the kind of bribery and embezzlement that perpetually has Afghanistan ranked among the worst two or three nations on Earth for corruption..
"It is a delicate moment, because if there is a high level of corruption in the military it means that institution will not work, because it will lose the confidence of the people," said Yama Torabi, the director of Integrity Watch Afghanistan, an Afghan group that monitors corruption. "It means, basically, the beginning of collapse of the army."
With the country consumed with anxiety about next year, which features a pivotal presidential election and the complete handover of security to Afghan forces, it’s crucial that the military’s reputation remains sturdy, he said.
"The army is what ensures we won’t slide into civil war,” he said, “but if we are not confident in the army holding together as an institution, but rather being corrupt and easily penetrated by patronage and other corrupting influences, it won’t hold together. It will disappear."
Observers inside and outside Afghanistan have long echoed those views. A study of the Afghan army last year by the RAND Corp., for example, said beating the insurgency required the Afghan public’s continued support and that would require confidence not only in its fighting ability but also in its relative lack of corruption. In short, whether people could trust it.
For most of the war, NATO and other coalition nations have bought the vast majority of vehicles, weapons, aircraft, communications equipment, clothing and individual equipment that the Afghan army and the national police use.
The foreign forces already have transferred the purchasing of food, clothing, individual equipment and service contracts to the Afghan security ministries, said Jamie Graybeal, a spokesman for the U.S. and NATO forces. They expect the transition to full Afghan control to be largely complete by the end of this year.
That’s raised the focus on what the likelihood of corruption will be. A new survey of corruption risk among the world’s militaries by the Berlin-based watchdog group Transparency International found that Afghanistan wasn’t among the two or three worst-ranked countries – relatively good news. But the risk still was rated "very high."
The most vulnerable area, said Mark Pyman, the director of Transparency International’s defense and security program, lies in military procurement. He estimated that the amount Afghan military-procurement officers will have authority over soon will go from hundred of millions of dollars to perhaps $4 billion a year.
That’s a huge increase for any organization to handle properly, particularly in a place where corruption is essentially part of the culture.
"The acid test here will be does the international community leave in place sufficient safeguards and mechanisms with Ministry of Defense’s procurement so that when it’s in charge, there are ways and means for the international community to assist them in dealing with this significant increase in spending?" Pyman said.
His group found positives for Afghanistan compared with other countries that face huge challenges with corruption. For example, in some countries, the military takes control of mines or oil fields and siphons off the proceeds.
That’s not happening in Afghanistan.
Also, he said, the military’s budget is published publicly in enough detail for corruption to be spotted. He said there seemed to be relatively good controls on the payroll system and no indications of corruption involving companies owned by the military.
The Defense Ministry has established an internal committee to fight corruption that seems to be working. For one thing, it’s determined that there should be a panel from outside the ministry to scrutinize contracts for supplies and equipment.
Transparency International places the risk for corruption within Afghanistan’s security services in the same league as those in India, Turkey and Pakistan, one level up from the worst of the 83 countries studied, which include Algeria, Angola, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Egypt, Syria and Yemen.
Torabi, the Integrity Watch Afghanistan director, who also is a member of a national panel that makes recommendations on measures to control corruption, agreed that there’s reason for at least mild optimism about how the military will handle the flood of cash.
But there’s also no doubt that corruption exists in the military, and that some will try to take advantage of the new opportunities.
He said he knew of two business owners who were considering placing bids for supplying the military, and who already had been asked for bribes. He described the bribes solicited as being up to $10 million.
"These are really big contracts, and the size of the bribe reflects that," he said.
Another area of vulnerability is hiring. It’s routine in Afghanistan to pay bribes to get a job.
A U.N. survey earlier this month found that even getting a basic government position here often involved corruption. More than half of schoolteachers and members of the national police reported having paid bribes to help secure their jobs.
Recommendations from Transparency International include that the government allow groups such as Torabi’s to participate in oversight.
"They need to make sure you have civil society in their monitoring," Torabi said. "You can have other government agencies in there supposedly doing that, but it might not be real."
U.S. Army May Have To Extend Afghan Deployments
February 16, 2013 Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty
The top U.S. Army general says he may be forced to extend deployments of soldiers in Afghanistan next year because budget cuts will drastically limit training for brigades who may have to replace them.
Army Chief of Staff General Raymond Odierno said the military will be able to fund training and operations for combat units in Afghanistan now and for those deploying in the summer and fall.
But he said there will be delays in training for those deploying in 2014.
He said that if he couldn't make up the training delays he would have to send forces that aren't ready, or extend deployments of units already there.
Based on reporting by AP and AFP
White House: Obama giving ex-Afghanistan commander time to decide if he wants European command
The Associated Press By Darlene Superville February 15, 2013
The White House says President Barack Obama wants to give Marine Gen. John Allen time to consider his next assignment before deciding whether to proceed with his nomination to lead U.S. and NATO forces in Europe.
Allen, just back from a 19-month Afghanistan command, was linked to -- but then cleared of -- a sex scandal that ended David Petraeus' job as CIA director.
Obama spokesman Josh Earnest said Allen wants time with his family.
"We're happy to give him the opportunity to consider what he wants to do next," Earnest said.
He said Obama has a "ton of confidence in Gen. Allen."
Allen's nomination to the top European command was shelved during an investigation into emails Allen exchanged with a woman connected to the Petraeus affair. Allen was cleared.
US drawdown in Afghanistan a 'worry' for Pakistan, ambassador says
One of the concerns for Pakistan is 'how responsible' the US exit from Afghanistan will be, said Sherry Rehman, Pakistan's ambassador to the US, at a Feb. 5 breakfast meeting.
Christian Science Monitor By David Cook, Staff writer February 15, 2013
Pakistani ambassador Sherry Rehman has served as her nation's top envoy to the United States since November 2011. She was the guest at the Feb. 5 Monitor Breakfast.
Relations between the US and Pakistan:
"This relationship has come a long way from the days of 2011 and early 2012, when it was marked by chronic distrust and periods of crisis management and episodes that left many of us awake at night.... The relationship is now on a stable and, we hope, uphill trajectory."
US drone attacks on suspected Al Qaeda elements in Pakistan:
"We see them as a direct violation of our sovereignty, and we also see them as a violation of international law."
Conjecture that Pakistan's leaders tacitly approve of US drone strikes while publicly denouncing them:
"There is no question of any quiet complicity, no question of wink and nod. This is a parliamentary red line that all government institutions have internalized as policy."
Want your top political issues explained? Get customized DC Decoder updates.
Reaction to the planned US troop drawdown from Afghanistan in 2014:
"There are clear worries ... about how responsible this exit will be. And we are of course invested in ... ensuring that the region remains as stable and as peaceful as possible."
The symbolism of Pakistani schoolgirl Malala Yousafzai, shot by the Taliban for advocating female education:
"We are defeminizing poverty.... It is not going to happen overnight.... Women are in positions of leadership and responsibility in many places in Pakistan...."
The film "Zero Dark Thirty" about the raid in Abbottabad targeting Osama bin Laden:
"Oh, it is very zero and very dark. What can I say?"
U.S. Faces Fire as It Pulls Out of Afghanistan
New York Times By MATTHEW ROSENBERG February 15, 2013
STRONG POINT HAJI RAHMUDDIN II, Afghanistan - When the last American soldiers to occupy this squat, lonely outpost in southern Afghanistan pulled out this week, they left the same way earlier units had arrived: ready for a fight.
They were leaving this violent patch of land outside Kandahar, the south’s main city, just as Taliban fighters were filtering back in from winter havens in Pakistan. It was, as First Sgt. Jason Pitman, 35, bluntly put it, “no time to get stupid.”
The Americans knew they would be most vulnerable in their final hours after taking down their surveillance and early-warning systems. The Taliban knew it, too, and intelligence reports indicated that they had been working with sympathetic villagers to strike at the departing soldiers. Two days earlier, the militants made a test run against the outpost, taking the rare step of directly engaging it in a firefight, albeit a brief one, soon after the first radio antennas came down.
On the same day that President Obama announced that roughly half of the American troops still in in Afghanistan would withdraw this year, and that Afghan forces would begin taking the lead in the war, the smaller-scale departure from the Haji Rahmuddin II outpost was an uncelebrated milestone.
But it pointed at a harsh reality of the process: that some of the withdrawal will happen under fire in areas of the Taliban heartland where the idea of Afghan-led security remains an abstraction. With the start of the annual fighting season just weeks away, some of the hardest-won gains of the war are at risk of being lost.
In the years since the Obama administration’s additional tens of thousands of American soldiers and their Afghan allies pushed into the grape fields, pomegranate orchards and opium poppy fields of southern Afghanistan, some islands of relative calm have been cleared.
But even though this corner of Kandahar Province — the Zhare district — was also a focus of the troop increase, it is far from calm. And it is not unique: many areas in the south and east where troop pullouts are under way have had only tenuous security gains at best, despite years of hard-fought American-led advances.
The Taliban here have not given up their fight, on ground where Mullah Muhammad Omar and his followers first rose up against a local warlord, in the movement’s genesis. In one telling indication of the level of strife in Zhare, even many Afghans are hesitant to make the hourlong trip from Kandahar to the district’s mud-brick villages, many of which stand semiabandoned after three summers of intense fighting.
“My sons live in Kandahar City, and they do not like to come back here,” said Abdul Malik, an elder from Tieranon, a village in central Zhare. Once you are in the villages, he added, “anything can happen.”
The American withdrawal is picking up pace regardless, and American commanders have begun to cede even the most contested of ground to Afghan forces.
There are still places “that the Taliban can find sanctuary, and we still believe there is an informal network or support structure in place that they can rely on,” said Maj. Thomas W. Casey, the executive officer of the Third Battalion, 41st Infantry, which operates in the eastern and central half of Zhare.
So the Americans are out on patrol alongside Afghan units here almost every day, and running larger operations on a regular basis. Last week, they used a weapon that shoots a line of explosives and is intended to clear mined roads to knock down roughly 600 yards of trees that could provide cover for Taliban scouts and attackers.
On Thursday, they demolished a hill that the Taliban had used as a fighting position. Three huge explosions — 100 pounds of high explosives were used in each of the last two, which could be felt over a mile away — reduced the hill to dust and dirt. The Americans on the mission outnumbered Afghan soldiers nearly three to one.
There are some things the Americans have to do solo because the Afghans cannot do them, nor will they be able to anytime soon, commanders say. One example is using high-tech surveillance — blimps, drones, cameras mounted on towers at every base — to help spot militants before they attack, and to direct airstrikes against them. They have launched numerous such attacks in the past month alone.
The Afghans send out regular patrols on their own, and conduct a growing number of small, independent operations. Their fighting ability is getting close to where it needs to be, but the crucial back end of the army — the logistics and supply teams that get bullets, fuel, food and water to where they need to be — is woefully unready, American and even some Afghan officers say.
The Afghan brigade based here, for instance, nearly ran out of fuel this week. It was down to a few hours’ worth when a supply came through after some behind-the-scenes prodding from coalition officers up the chain of command.
But with fewer American troops here — the force level in Zhare and the neighboring district of Maiwand is down from a brigade of roughly 4,500 soldiers to two battalions totaling about 1,500 — Afghan forces have to fill the holes.
“There’s no white space in Zhare — white space being the area that no one owns or controls,” Major Casey said. If an area is not occupied by American or Afghan forces, “it’s occupied by the Taliban. It’s red space.”
Unless the Afghans can hold what the Americans give up, he said, “more space is going to turn red.”
That is now the case in the villages that surround Strong Point Haji Rahmuddin II. As recently as September, the outpost was home to a company of roughly 120 American soldiers, along with a few dozen Afghan troopers.
By January, its American force was down to a single understaffed platoon. Between watching from their four guard towers, running patrols, starting to break down the base and taking care of basic human necessities — eating, bathing and sleeping — the platoon was stretched thin.
They did manage to find a few more minutes in each day about two weeks ago — after the showers were trucked away and not replaced. Hot food went next, and chow time became whenever rations could be grabbed. The soldiers here still manage to joke about it. Then the radio antennas were taken down. The brief Taliban attack followed, after which the battalion dedicated a single balloon camera to keeping watch around the outpost’s perimeter day and night, Major Casey said.
The Afghan force at the base, now down to 16 soldiers, watched warily, telling the Americans that they had to stay. The morning of the Americans’ departure, the Afghan commander, Lt. Muhammad Mohsen, said in an interview that he believed they would come back. If not, he said grimly, the villagers would soon want them back.
“We’ll have the freedom to do what we want,” Lieutenant Mohsen said. Those villagers who desired peace would get it. Those who did not, “maybe we can destroy their homes.”
The Americans brought down their towering surveillance camera, one of the single biggest advantages for the defenders. At that point, security became “a huge concern,” Major Casey said. “We focused pretty much all our assets we had on watching that.”
They had to watch a few hours longer than planned. Lieutenant Mohsen had left only three soldiers at the base, not even enough to put one man in each of the five towers he now controlled. The Americans sat for two hours past their appointed departure time waiting for him and the rest of his men to return.
In the end, the Americans managed to vacate the outpost having faced just the one firefight — a relief after preparing for days for an attack.
But Major Casey and other commanders said they expected the Taliban to learn from what they had just seen.
The platoon that departed Haji Rahmuddin II will also be returning on a regular basis to work with the Afghan forces based there. The Americans would keep watching from the sky, as well.
“The last thing we want,” Major Casey said, is “the Taliban successfully overcoming a strong point after we’ve left. That’s almost as bad as them getting ready to attack us as we’re leaving.”
Bryan Denton contributed reporting.
Afghans skeptical of Obama troop withdrawal
DW 15/02/2013
US President Barack Obama plans to withdraw some 34,000 American troops from Afghanistan this year – a little more than half the current number. The Karzai government has welcomed the move as long overdue.
The office of Afghan President Hamid Karzai issued a statement saying it had long been hoping for such an announcement and that the US president's plans would certainly provide added impetus for peace and security in the country.
Zahir Azimi, the spokesman for the Afghan defense ministry, added that "by the end of 2013, the government would take over the security responsibilities for all of Afghanistan." Afghan security forces had the necessary capabilities and strength, he said.
Currently, Afghanistan's own security forces consist of 157,000 soldiers and 190,000 police officers. The total number of personnel is supposed to increase by another 5,000 to 352,000 by 2014. Afghanistan is quick to emphasize that it is already responsible for security in 80 percent of the country.
US support still necessary
Due to a lack of equipment, Afghan troops are still dependent on international forces as far as air support is concerned. The United States has repeatedly denied Afghan requests for equipment for its air force.
Tooryalai Wesa, the governor of Kandahar province, where the Taliban have been traditionally strong, thinks Washington has an obligation to help.
"The US has to depart Afghanistan within the framework of a responsible transition process and provide all assistance possible for strengthening the peace process," he told DW. "They have to help us equip and train our troops."
Afghan military experts, unlike the government, are skeptical about the chances for peace and security in the country. Former general, Atiqullah Barialai, sees domestic political reasons behind President Obama's withdrawal decision. "In Afghanistan, the war continues unabated and the number of attacks by the Taliban is still very high. Furthermore, there are no confidence-building measures for compromises and reconciliation," Barialai told DW. Political and military vacuum
After international troops leave, will Afghanistan once again slip back into civil war and become a pawn of foreign interest, like it did after the withdrawal of Soviet forces in 1989?
That is exactly what many Afghans fear, such as Mohammad Omar Sati, a member of the Kandahar province peace council. "Unfortunately, we are surrounded by local enemies and hostile neighbors, who are just waiting to lure us into a trap with intrigue."
The Taliban responded to Obama's announcement with the usual demand for an immediate troop withdrawal. Western news agencies quoted Taliban spokesman Zabihullah Mujahid as saying that the problems in the country could only be solved by Afghans themselves after a rapid withdrawal of international forces.
What happens after 2014?
Political observers think that the Taliban are not interested in a peaceful solution and are just waiting for foreign troops to leave to intensify their attacks. Military expert Baralai is one of the pessimists: "The Taliban are planning to expand their attacks and occupy additional territory. Afghan security forces will not be able to contain the insurgents," he said.
In Afghanistan, people are now anxiously awaiting the outcome of the current security negotiations with the US, which will determine the extent of training and equipment for Afghan forces and the size of the US anti-terror units to remain in Afghanistan after 2014.
2 Afghan security members die in explosion in northern province
SHIBRGHAN, Afghanistan, Feb. 16 (Xinhua) -- Two members of Afghan security forces were killed and four others were wounded Saturday when a bomb hit their mobile in the country's northern province of Jawzjan, the provincial police chief said.
"Two members of National Security Directorate (NDS) died and four others were wounded when their vehicle touched off a roadside planted bomb in Khwaja Buran, an area outside provincial capital at around 3:30 p.m. local time," Abdul Aziz Khirat told Xinhua, blaming Taliban insurgents for the attack.
He said the NDS or intelligence service unit was in a routine patrol with police forces when the blast took place in the province 390 km north of Afghan capital Kabul.
The Taliban has been waging an insurgency since its regime was toppled by a U.S-led invasion in late 2001.
Haqqani facilitator detained in eastern Afghanistan
KABUL, Feb. 16 (Xinhua) -- A weapons facilitator with the Haqqani militant group was detained in eastern Afghan province of Logar on Saturday, the coalition force said.
"An Afghan and coalition security force arrested a Haqqani facilitator in Pul-e Alam district, Logar province, today. The detained Haqqani facilitator is believed responsible for planning and preparing attacks targeting Afghan and coalition forces and facilitating the acquisition of improvised explosive devices and other weapons," the Nato-led International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) said in a press release.
As a Taliban-linked radical group mostly operating in eastern Afghan provinces and the capital Kabul, the Haqqani network has been responsible for many high-profile attacks against security forces.
In addition, the joint forces also captured a high-profile attack facilitator in eastern Khost province.
"The detained facilitator is believed to be associated with both Taliban and Haqqani insurgent networks throughout Khost district. He is accused of assisting in the transfer and delivery of heavy weapons, equipment and ammunition," it noted.
Prior to his arrest, he was suspected of coordinating a vehicle- borne improvised explosive device attack targeting Afghan and coalition forces in the province 150 km southeast of Kabul, said the release.
The Taliban, which has been waging an insurgency since its regime was toppled by a U.S-led invasion in late 2001, has yet to make comment.
Hekmatyar send out curse to democracy in Afghanistan
By Mirwais Adeel - 16 Feb 2013, 8:56 pm Khaama Press
Gulbuddin Hekmatyar Afghan warlord and founder of Hezb-e-Islami (Islamic Party of Afghanistan) said around 1000 people were killed during the Afghan civil war and denied to agree with the current Afghan institution, democracy and freedom of speech.
While speaking during an exclusive interiew with the 1TV Gulbuddin Hekmatyar said he sends out curse to the current democracy in Afghanistan.
Hekmatyar told 1TV media that he was not involved in all civil war during 1990′s in capital Kabul but the war was going on between several parties.
He said around 1000 ordinary people were killed during the Kabul civil war which mainly took place in south and east parts of the capital.
“The overall casualties during the Kabul civil war hardly reaches to 1000 people and majority of the civilians casualties took place in southern and eastern part of Kabul city which was under the control of Islamic Party of Afghanistan and was continuously targed by artillery, tanks and airstrikes of the government at that time.” Hekmatyar told 1TV.
However the Islamic Party of Afghanistan led by Gulbuddin Hekmatyar is believed to be the main reason behind bloody civil war in Kabul city during the 1990s.
According to independent human rights commission of Afghanistan around 60,000 people were killed during the civil war in capital Kabul which lasted for 4 years and 4 months.
But Gulbuddin Hekmatyar said his party did not have any major role in Kabul civil war. He said, “We had only four to five small fights with the coalition of that time and we were only responding to the government’s attack.”
He also give out a curse to the current democracy in Afghanistan and said, “If democracy, women’s rights, freedom of speech and constitutions is what that has been displayed by Americans in Kabul and Baghdad, and which have broadly been campaigned by media agencies then we do not agree and hate such a democracy. Being a liberal Afghan we deny such a democracy and will continue to do so.”
Mr Hekmatyar is currently in a tenuous alliance with the Taliban, although both sides remain suspicious of each other. In 2003, the US state department designated him as a terrorist, accusing him of taking part in and supporting attacks by al-Qaeda and the Taliban.
The Hezb-e-Islami was blamed for much of the terrible death and destruction of that period, which led many ordinary Afghans to welcome the emergence of the Taliban.
The civil war also led to Mr Hekmatyar’s fall from grace – he quickly became one of the most reviled men in the country.
For some time, Mr Hekmatyar himself enjoyed considerable support from Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, according to BBC. But eventually Islamabad turned against him, preferring to give full support to the Taliban instead.
So like the other mujahideen factions, Mr Hekmatyar and his men were forced to flee Kabul when the Taliban swept into power in 1996. He ended up being given refuge in Tehran, where he lived a quiet life, waiting for his fortunes to change.
The Iranians may have regarded him as a potentially useful Pashtun card to have up their sleeve, but he turned out to be too much of a wild card for them.
His vocal opposition both to the Americans and to the new regime of President Hamid Karzai was an embarrassment to the Iranian government, which threw its official weight behind Mr Karzai. In February 2002, the Iranian authorities expelled Mr Hekmatyar and closed down the offices of his Hezb-e-Islami in Tehran.
They accused him of abusing Iranian hospitality with his comments vowing to fight the Karzai administration.
Afghan Insurgent Is Killed on U.S.-Led Military Base
New York Times By ALISSA J. RUBIN and TAIMOOR SHAH February 15, 2013
KABUL - American Special Operations Forces stopped a tribal leader as he was driving with his brother and 6-year-old son in an area rife with Taliban in southern Afghanistan on Wednesday. A quick examination of his identity documents confirmed that he was a wanted man.
The troops took the man, Mirza M. Khan, and his brother to a nearby base for questioning. According to both the brother and a district official who heard the Special Forces’ account of the episode, the two men were let go — but Mr. Khan was fatally shot as he returned to his car.
Jamie Graybeal, a spokesman for the American-led coalition, e-mailed a statement to The New York Times on Friday saying that the episode was under investigation. “On 13 February, an engagement between coalition forces and a known Taliban member in Sangin District resulted in the death of the insurgent,” the statement said. “The circumstances surrounding the engagement are being investigated by the coalition. It is inappropriate to comment further on the specifics of this engagement until that investigation is complete.”
That Mr. Khan was almost certainly involved in illegal and violent activities is not in question, and the Special Forces may have worried that he was about to detonate a bomb in his car. But for Afghans, the details provided by the brother and the district official raise a series of disturbing questions: Why was someone who was on a list of men wanted for helping Taliban insurgents not held until he could be transferred to a detention center? Why was it necessary to shoot a man who was almost certainly unarmed, since no Afghan suspected of insurgent ties would be allowed on an American base with a weapon?
“Even if he was supporting the Taliban, did the Americans have the right to kill him?” said Wali Khan, a Parliament member from Helmand who said he had met with three of the dead man’s relatives on Friday and planned to bring the matter before Parliament and to the attention of President Hamid Karzai.
“If he was a suspect, then they should have arrested him and put him in jail or given him to the Afghan government,” he said. “Instead, they executed him in front of his son and brother. I do not see any differences between this execution and what we all condemn: the Taliban’s extrajudicial executions that happen day and night.”
The surviving brother, Massoom Khan, gave this account to his brother-in-law, Hajji Ghulam Rasool Khan, and other relatives. Mirza Khan had been ill and went to see a doctor, taking his brother and son with him. They were stopped near sunset on their way back to their village, near Poza, where the Special Operations Forces have a base. They were questioned for a couple of hours there. As they left and were walking back to their car, a volley of bullets hit Mizra Khan in the back, neck and head, and he crumpled to the ground, before his son, Zirak.
The American troops then pushed Massoom Khan back into the base — it is not clear in any of the accounts where the boy was during the initial questioning or after the shooting — but half an hour later let him go and asked if he needed help moving his brother’s corpse. He declined the offer.
Mohammed Sharif, the governor of Sangin District, said he had heard a similar account from the Special Forces as they informed him of Mirza Khan’s death, differing mainly in specifying that Mr. Khan had been furious as he left the base.
“The Special Forces said that while he was being interrogated, he got angry and said something in Pashto that from his gestures seemed hostile,” Mr. Sharif said. “Then he walked out of the room and walked toward his car.”
“The Special Forces thought he was going to cause a problem and so that’s why he was shot,” he said. “They said, ‘We had no intention of killing him, but then he seemed to be raging and suddenly left the room and walked quickly toward his car and his gesturing was strange, and we thought he was going to cause a problem.’ ”
The car had been left outside the base and may not have been searched, so it is possible that the American troops thought Mr. Khan may have been intending to grab a weapon or detonate an explosive device. Relatives insisted, however, that Mr. Khan, who was well known in the area, had no need to carry a weapon, especially when traveling on a main road. Mr. Sharif said that the Special Operations Forces told him that Mirza Khan had supported and sheltered a man who, while wearing a police uniform, shot and killed three Special Operations soldiers at the Poza base in August and then escaped.
Mr. Khan was on the American military’s list of people to be killed or captured, known as the Joint Prioritized Effects List, according to officials.
Several Helmand leaders said that Mr. Khan helped insurgents frequently, but he was also a local leader of the Alizai tribe and a well-off businessman who traded in auto parts and owned several taxis, including three that act as a local ambulance service, sometimes transporting wounded Taliban to medical treatment.
The Parliament member, Wali Khan, said: “He was a rich man, and the Taliban would make him provide them with food and money. I would do the same if I were him. You would do the same. It is a matter of survival.”
Only a few places in Afghanistan are as unstable and Taliban-dominated as northern Helmand Province. American troops largely ousted the Taliban from central Helmand, but were never able to completely penetrate the north, where residents have historically had little love either for the Afghan government or foreign forces. While Sangin is far less violent today than it was two years ago, according to statistics from the international military troops, the insurgency in rural areas remains robust.
Residents are particularly critical of the troops at the Poza base. “They set up checkpoints near the outpost, and they scare children and women because when they stop the cars they point their guns at them,” said an elder from the area who asked not to be named because he feared being singled out. “I have heard from many villagers that they slap young men and they curse people in English, and at night they raid houses and kill people. To me they look like a bunch of well-armed bandits who don’t steal from you but treat you like animals.”
For many in the area, the prolonged fighting has left them with no trust for either the Western and Afghan troops or the Taliban, but also little willingness to help the Westerners who are viewed as interlopers.
“They set up checkpoints, they raid houses and they ambush insurgents,” said Mr. Gul, Mirza Khan’s brother-in-law. “Most of the time civilians are caught in cross-fire. Taliban and Americans are enemy, but to tell you the truth, we, the civilians, are bearing the brunt of it at the end of the day.
“If we support the Americans, the Taliban kill us, and if we support the Taliban, then the Americans kill us. And if we do not support any side, then both of them kill us.”
Alissa J. Rubin reported from Kabul, and Taimoor Shah from Kandahar, Afghanistan. Habib Zahori contributed reporting from Kabul.
Thriving Afghan zoo’s plans to expand worry its champions
McClatchy Newspapers By Jay Price Friday, February 15, 2013
KABUL, Afghanistan - In 2001, as the Taliban government collapsed, the Kabul Zoo had been almost destroyed by years of war and neglect. Exhibits were bombed out, and many of the animals had been maimed, been eaten by hungry Afghans or died of hunger.
That’s when the North Carolina Zoo stepped in with more than $400,000 it had collected in donations. Other foreign groups pitched in, and the donations eventually reached nearly $2 million.
The result: Despite being no larger than a suburban U.S. high school campus, the zoo has become one of the most popular leisure attractions in Afghanistan – so popular, in fact, that ticket sales generate more money than it costs to operate the attraction.
Now Kabul’s mayor wants to make the zoo more than five times larger – with more animals, more space and more crowd-pleasing species from places such as Africa.
Those who helped revive the zoo say that might be a big mistake.
"Getting them to understand what they can do that will be sustainable, given their resources and the climate there, is difficult," said David Jones, the director of the state-owned North Carolina Zoo in Asheboro, which covers 150 times more land than its counterpart in Kabul.
Jones, who’s long been involved in helping zoos in the developing world, said the idea of a sprawling zoo with more species from more places raised a host of issues, including simply the cost of heating and cooling animals’ housing in Afghanistan’s climate, which is known for its big swings in daily and seasonal temperatures.
Jon Coe, one of the world’s best-known zoo designers, was hired in 2011 as part of a $120 million aid package to improve the city from the U.S. Agency for International Development. His design for the zoo emphasized native species, education, conservation, the health of the animals and sustainability over flash. The area for animals would grow only moderately. The emphasis would be on species native to Afghanistan. Land across the Kabul River that’s been earmarked for expansion would become a conservation-minded river park tied in with the zoo.
The idea was a zoo that Kabul could afford to run properly even if the foreign funding that now fuels the city’s budget dries up, Coe said in an email from his home in Australia.
His design, though, has failed to satisfy the mayor, Mohammed Younas Nawandish, a short, mustachioed, wildly popular buzzsaw of a man dubbed "The Builder of Kabul."
For one, Nawandish says, the animal enclosures must expand across the river, where Coe had foreseen a family-friendly park.
"The condition of the zoo is very good, but unfortunately we don’t have a lot of animals," Nawandish said in an interview. "We will change that. It will be an excellent park, and at the same time a zoo, and it will be very nice."
Nawandish, a civil engineer by training, is famed for 17-hour workdays and striding the streets of the city day and night, looking for things to improve. Backed with Western aid money, he’s paved miles of dirt roads, built dozens of parks and playgrounds, installed streetlights and planted thousands of trees. He has huge plans to construct entire new neighborhoods.
As for the zoo, he wants animals that will amaze.
"I want elephants,” he said.
Tales of what happened to the animals during the nation’s civil war and the period of Taliban control are part of the zoo’s lore: A handful of unpaid zookeepers dodged bullets to get supplies to the animals. Taliban soldiers slept in the zoo, eating the rabbits and deer, and shooting other animals for fun.
The aquarium was damaged in the fighting and shelling destroyed a parrot enclosure. Most famously, Marjan the Lion lost an eye, his hearing and his teeth to a grenade. He died in 2002, but he remains a symbol of the zoo.
As the zoo’s plight became known, the N.C. Zoo Society, the North Carolina Zoo’s private fundraising arm, hoped to get about $30,000. Instead, more than $430,000 poured in. The money helped rebuild exhibits, pay staff and buy animal feed. The North Carolina Zoo also helped with animal care, staff training and a business strategy.
The zoo today is clean, and the modest enclosures and animals appear to be in good condition. There’s a food stand, a Ferris wheel, security cameras, more than 100 species of animals and insects, and 40 employees. Officials claim that attendance was 600,000 last year.
The zoo now has an education center that 30,000 students visited last year, and it’s been allowed to join international zoo groups, including the World Association of Zoos and Aquariums, which will give it access to high-quality training for the staff.
The zoo is popular in part because it’s a safe, peaceful refuge, particularly for women and children, in a city that has few.
On a recent Friday, despite snow on the ground and near-freezing temperatures, hundreds turned out. Several of them liked the mayor’s plan.
Abdul Aziz, 45, a taxi driver, had eight members of his family in tow.
"You’re always coming into the zoo and seeing the same animals each time," he said. "This is my third visit this winter, but the animals are the same. We certainly want more animals. Expansion of the zoo gives us the opportunity to come every week, maybe, and get familiar with different kinds of animals."
The mayor says the bigger zoo will pay its way by attracting more people. Jones is skeptical, though, because the market size won’t change. It’s unlikely that many people would travel from outside Kabul to go to the zoo, he said.
There are plenty of Afghan animals that could form the heart of a terrific zoo along the lines Coe suggested, Jones said. Among them are one of the world’s most diverse groups of cats, including snow leopards and Asiatic lions. Other exciting species include the Markhor, a massive mountain goat with bizarre spiraling horns.
"They’ve got a lot that is really interesting, and well-designed exhibits for their own animals would satisfy a lot of people and be more sustainable," Jones said.
Aziz Gul Saqib, the Kabul Zoo’s director, says it will use Coe’s design as a guide, and hopes to consult with him more. It will need to work with international advisers and donors to carry out the expansion.
The mayor, meanwhile, is moving ahead. He’s hoping that the land acquisition can start soon. He’s already begun the search for elephants.
"I have asked the ambassador of India for help," he said.
McClatchy special correspondent Rezwan Natiq in Kabul contributed to this story.
Email: jayprice@mcclatchydc.com; Twitter: @jayatnando
Afghan warlord Gen. Dostum threatened for his war crimes
Khaama Press By Sadaf Shinwari 16 Feb 2013
The former leader of Hezb-e-Junbish Millie Islami — National Islamic Movement party of Afghanistan warned to disclose the war crimes of the party’s founder and former warlord Gen. Abdul Rashid Dostum if he does not prevent his interference in the party.
However a spokesman for the National Islamic Movement party of Afghanistan denied the allegations by Syed Noorullah Sadat and said Gen. Abdul Rashid Dostum does not misuse from his military position to interfere in party’s internal affairs.
Syed Noorullah Sadat accused Gen. Dostum for interfering in National Islamic Movement Party fo Afghanistan and warned that he will disclose the war crimes committed by him.
Faizullah Zaki spokesman for the National Islamic Movement party of Afghanistan following a press conference denied the allegations by Mr. Sadat.
Mr. Zaki said, “Mr. Sadat has himself denied the remarks which he said in an emotional way while his duty as the leader of the party was over. He was leading the party for the past 30 years and was a close person to Gen. Abdul Rashid Dostum.”
He said, “Such remarks are wondering and the people of Afghanistan will not accept that Mr. Sadat has given such a remark regarding Gen. Abdul Rashid Dostum. We deny his allegations.”
He also added that the National Islamic Movement Party of Afghanistan is keen to have a strong stance in the upcoming presidential election and will support a unique candidate and therefore changes were made in the party.
Azizullah Kargar has been appointed and is heading the National Islamic Movement Party of Afghanistan.
Afghanistan's Economy, a Victim of Politics
TOLOnews.com By Suleman Fatimie Thursday, 14 February 2013
If Afghanistan is to sustain and build on the achievements of the past 10 years, it is imperative that serious attention and resources are mobilised to get the country's economy on its feet, Suleman Fatimie writes.
Afghans face yet another deadline: 2014. The uncertainty continues. While the Afghan government's international partners want to stabilise and create an "Afghan good enough" environment, many wonder how this is possible with everyone running towards the exit doors.
Afghans are faced with a barrage of negative and depressing news about their future, with grim predictions for years to come. Signing strategic agreements cannot be considered a commitment to and a promise of stability beyond 2014. If Afghanistan is to sustain and build on the achievements of the past 10 years, it is imperative that serious attention and resources are mobilised to get the country's economy on its feet.
Real economic growth and development, even if modest, will create greater employment opportunities, better security, and most critically, better living standards for Afghan people - items that should be on the top of our agendas.
Afghanistan's economy at this moment is donor driven with over 90 percent of our GDP funded through bilateral and multilateral donors. And with the scaling down of international presence and 2014 deadline looming, unless we take concrete steps and bold decisions, Afghanistan's economy is headed for severe turbulence with the possibility of crash landing.
In 2005, Financial Times published a magazine titled 'Courage Rewarded – Afghanistan's President Hamid Karzai Leads the Reforms'. The publication focused on opportunities and challenges in Afghanistan but with a positive and encouraging message.
"It is true that investing in Afghanistan is not for the faint-hearted but the opportunities are almost limitless. Those who feel their nerve slipping need only look to the optimism of the country's government and its citizens," James Eedes wrote. He continued that "key ministers and a small team of technocrats – a wafer-thin layer of competent bureaucracy – are working to remove the many obstacles to private sector development."
The question that needs to be asked now is, what happened to the optimism and reforms initiated to create a pro-business environment? The answer is that some of the sound reforms have been stalled or reversed, administrative and non-tariff business barriers both at national and provincial levels have increased, and corruption has soared, making it almost impossible to get anything done without paying a bribe.
No wonder existing investors are reluctant to expand or re-invest and potential investors fail to consider Afghanistan for business opportunities. Afghanistan simply does not provide a business-friendly environment.
In 2006 Afghanistan was considered one of the leading reformers of its business environment and between 2004 and 2007 it steadily improved its ranking in the Doing Business Indicators. But since then, Afghanistan's ranking has deteriorated due to lack of a clear vision, lack of understanding of relevant bodies of the reforms and conflicted agendas.
In 10 years, we could not define what 'market economy' means in the context of Afghanistan's constitution and prevailing economic situation. While the concept of market economy has been the focus of continuous and elaborate discussions inside Afghanistan, the relevant government and non-government bodies fail to address or ignore the core reasons for why we have yet to establish the administrative and legal framework for a market economy to function in the context of Afghanistan.
We are still focusing on the symptoms instead of the causes. We still do not have a sound, practical and implementable national economic vision and policy. Several national documents claim to have these elements, but none could be implemented because the so-called national economic vision and strategies are not based on ground realities. Preference has been to deal with economic trends and challenges on ad hoc basis, which has led to laws, regulations and procedures complicating the system even further and creating layers and layers of bureaucracy, obstacles and red-tape.
The encouraging news is that there are still many Afghans interested or already doing business in Afghanistan. These are Afghans who have endured over 30 years of war and uncertainty. They have every reason to give up, but they are coming back and doing business, even if under very difficult circumstances. Why would they take this chance if they did not believe in the future? It is vital that we maintain this hope and generate even more optimism.
Afghans' entrepreneurial spirit and resilience should be nurtured and, through a collective Afghan-driven process, plans devised and executed to deal with the economic turbulence once the donor money starts to dry up.
The government has the mandate and responsibility to create a transparent business-friendly environment. If it cannot ensure certainty beyond 2014, then the government must at least ensure the private sector, which it claims is the engine of growth, is no longer choked by the current cumbersome business processes.
www.afghanistannewscenter.com