[Afghan News] March 26, 2013

[یاسمینه]

Karzai says media misinterpreted comments on U.S. and Taliban
CNN By Tom Cohen and Jason Hanna March 26, 2013
U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry made a previously unannounced visit to Afghanistan on Monday to repair strained relations with President Hamid Karzai as the American-led international force continues to prepare to end its combat mission next year.

Kerry's stop came on the same day that U.S. forces turned over control of a prison that has caused tension between the two nations, with Americans retaining a say on the handling of certain Taliban inmates.

The talks on Monday followed controversial comments by Karzai in recent weeks that seemed to accuse U.S. forces of working with the Taliban to kill Afghan civilians, a charge denied by U.S. officials.

Karzai's reported remarks caused outrage in Washington with some in Congress questioning why the United States should continue the war effort.

At a joint news conference after meeting Kerry, Karzai said he had been misinterpreted when quoted as alleging collusion between the Americans and the Taliban.

But he made clear that violence against villagers must stop for there to be any chance for successful peace talks.

Karzai explained that he was talking about Taliban violence, especially how a bombing in Kabul that killed nine people didn't help achieve the Taliban goal of getting foreign troops to withdraw. He said media reports misinterpreted his comments to mean he was accusing the Taliban and United States of collusion.

"If they want the international community to leave Afghanistan, then the best way is for them to stop killing people," Karzai said of the Taliban. "That does not mean a collusion between the Untied States and Taliban. That's a conclusion the press came up with."

Karzai also said some U.S. special forces in Wardak province had tortured and killed Afghan civilians, but that had stopped when those forces were removed under a recent agreement after his government complained.

He made sure to emphasize his appreciation for U.S. support, twice declaring the thanks of the Afghan people for American assistance that he said would "enable Afghanistan to manage itself through 2014 and beyond."

For his part, Kerry emphasized the commitment of President Barack Obama to Afghanistan and its people would continue past the halt in combat operations by the NATO forces before the end of next year.

The United States and Afghanistan are negotiating an agreement that would allow some U.S. forces to remain in Afghanistan beyond the end of the NATO mission, but unresolved issues include how many and there specific role.

Kerry said Obama "was committed to not allow America's investment and the sacrifice here to be reversed," adding that "the United States will still be playing a role and will be here through the course of this future period."

Meanwhile, the former commander of the international military force in Afghanistan, U.S. Gen. John Allen, said Monday that the war there would continue after foreign troops conclude their combat mission by the end of 2014.

"On the first of January, there's still going to be fighting in 2015. There's still going to be fighting in Afghanistan," Allen told a conference at the Brookings Institution.

He added that Afghanistan would "join a long and distinguished list of countries that will be struggling in a post-conflict environment where it will have an insurgency in some parts of that country for an extended period of time."

Kerry landed in Kabul on Monday afternoon and met with Karzai at the presidential palace before the news conference that lasted almost an hour. The two were to talk further over dinner and perhaps again on Tuesday morning, Kerry said.

Earlier Monday, the United States handed over control of a U.S.-run prison near Bagram Air Base to Afghan authorities.

Karzai called the development a major boost for the transition, while Kerry emphasized several times that the agreement respected Afghanistan's sovereignty to operate the prison that holds Taliban figures.

The agreement includes provisions to give the United States a say on how some of the most notorious Taliban prisoners are handled. Karzai outlined a process in which U.S. officials provide intelligence to Afghan officials on specific prisoners, and further consultations follow if the Afghans want to set them free.

In a sign of the sensitivity of the issue, Karzai twice described the final step of the process as consultations, then changed his wording to "an exchange of views." He said that "I must use my words carefully."

"We will consider it," he said of a U.S. request to keep particular prisoners in custody, adding that Afghan law would call for such handling of anyone posing a legitimate threat.

The matter touches on a politically charged situation for Karzai, who is criticized by the Taliban and other foes for the continuing presence of the NATO forces in the country.

The handover deal was reached Saturday, but came a full year after the initial plan was announced by U.S and Afghan authorities.

An initial plan called for the prison and detainees to be handed over within six months, but in September, the United States "paused" the transfer of detainees, which include suspected Taliban militants and insurgents.

Other tensions between the countries involve continuing violence, such as a bomb blast in Kabul this month that killed nine people. Karzai said afterward that there are "ongoing daily talks between the Taliban, Americans and foreigners in Europe and in the Gulf states."

The comment effectively claimed the United States was trying to foment continued violence inside Afghanistan, and it was quickly denounced by NATO and U.S. officials.

Some experts say Karzai's comments were fueled by frustration over the detention facility not being handed over sooner, which he viewed as an attack on his country's sovereignty.

During the news conference, Kerry repeatedly referred to Afghanistan's sovereignty in the transition process as the NATO military force turns over leadership of combat operations to Afghanistan's military, which it has trained in recent years.

Under an agreement between the Afghan government and NATO, the bulk of U.S. and NATO combat forces are to be out of Afghanistan by the end of 2014. What remains to be decided is how many troops may remain to help train Afghan forces.

The trip was Kerry's first visit to Afghanistan as secretary of state, but the former senator's sixth during Obama's presidency.

He was in Iraq over the weekend to press that nation's leaders to take steps prohibiting Iranian planes from delivering arms to Syria's besieged government. Last week, Kerry joined Obama on a trip to Israel, the Palestinian territories and Jordan.

CNN's Nick Paton Walsh, Barbara Starr, Chelsea J. Carter and Ed Payne contributed to this report.


Karzai Has Nothing but Praise for U.S. Upon Bagram Prison Transfer
New York Times By ROD NORDLAND, MICHAEL R. GORDON and ALISSA J. RUBIN March 25, 2013
BAGRAM, Afghanistan - Within hours of the American military’s formally transferring all but a “small number” of the Afghan prisoners at the Bagram Prison to the Afghan government, President Hamid Karzai held a friendly news conference with Secretary of State John Kerry on Monday that stood in stark contrast to his recent acrimonious tone toward the United States.

The apparent rapprochement, which the Americans worked hard to achieve, was a product in part of policy turnarounds on detention and on the deployment of Special Operations forces in a crucial province.

In both cases, the Americans appeared to choose long-term influence in Afghanistan over holding firm on thorny issues. On detention, American officials had long feared that the Afghans might release dangerous Taliban prisoners. But the Obama administration has made a priority of reaching an agreement on an American military presence here after 2014 that will allow the United States to keep tabs on Iran and Pakistan and contain extremists in Pakistan’s ungoverned tribal areas.

None of the tension that marked Mr. Karzai’s recent meeting with Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel was on display Monday evening.

Two weeks ago, the news conference with Mr. Hagel was canceled, and he and Mr. Karzai had tense closed-door discussions about the Bagram prison hand-over and alleged abuses by special forces in Wardak Province.

This time, the news conference with Mr. Kerry ran for nearly an hour as he and Mr. Karzai lavished praise on each other.

Mr. Karzai expressed his thanks both to the American people and the American government. And he blamed the news media for misinterpreting his earlier inflammatory comments that the United States was supposedly colluding with the Taliban to keep Afghanistan weak. In making those remarks, Mr. Karzai asserted, he was speaking only to the Taliban and telling them that their bomb attacks were merely giving the Americans a reason to prolong their stay in Afghanistan.

“We talked about the ups and downs of our relationship,” Mr. Karzai said of his talks with Mr. Kerry. “I am very happy about this transfer of Bagram to Afghan control. It was very important for the people of Afghanistan.”

Mr. Kerry, who has known Mr. Karzai for years and met with him five times while he was a senator from Massachusetts, even persuading him to proceed with an Afghan election runoff in 2009, was equally effusive.

“We are on the same page,” Mr. Kerry said. “I don’t think there is any disagreement between us, and I am very, very comfortable with the president’s explanation.”

Mr. Kerry’s unannounced visit to Kabul was his first to the country as secretary of state. Mr. Kerry had initially wanted to also visit Pakistan, whose cooperation is vital in any effort at stabilizing Afghanistan, but he decided not to go now because of the elections there. But Mr. Kerry did meet Pakistan’s army chief, Gen. Ashfaq Parvez Kayani, for dinner in Amman, Jordan, on Sunday.

For Mr. Karzai and Mr. Kerry, it seemed doubtful the harmony would endure. Regaining full control of his country from the Americans looms large for Mr. Karzai, who has chafed at being called a puppet ruler by his opponents. The Obama administration is prepared for further clashes ahead.

“The process of winding down our current position and role in Afghanistan and stepping into more of a support role is not going to be a smooth process at all times,” said a senior State Department official traveling with Mr. Kerry. “Issues of sovereignty and security are always going to be difficult."

Bagram Prison was the most flagrant symbol of Mr. Karzai’s lack of control. Americans detained several thousand Afghans there, and Mr. Karzai had no power to release them. His effort to wrest the prison from the Americans began in earnest more than year ago, and nearly succeeded at least twice, most recently two weeks ago, a day before Mr. Hagel’s first visit.

Each time, American military commanders backed out because of worries that the Afghans might release Taliban prisoners, who would return to the battlefield and endanger American soldiers. This time, despite those concerns, the transfer went forward.

“It’s about a shift that’s going on in how the U.S. is looking at what’s important,” said one American official knowledgeable about detention issues. “We have to look at the larger picture: What’s the U.S. strategic interest here?”

The Bagram commander, Gen. Ghulam Farouk Barakzai, said Monday that the Americans had given the Afghans control of a total of 4,000 prisoners in the last year since the transfer began but that a small number still remained in American custody. He would not say how many were being held by the Americans, or for how long.

If recent history is any guide, any decisions the Afghans make on Taliban releases after taking control are not likely to reassure the American military.

Among those released in recent years by Afghan officials or Afghan courts were most of the 46 Taliban prisoners who had been returned from the prison camp in Guantánamo Bay, Cuba. One became the top insurgent commander in southern Afghanistan — Maulavi Abdul Qayum Zakir, whose real name is Abdullah Ghulam Rasoul. He was released from an Afghan prison in late 2008, just before the American troop surge was to start. And the suicide bomber who in December nearly killed Asadullah Khalid, the head of the Afghan intelligence service, had been freed by a presidential pardon, according to officials of that agency.

The Americans also agreed with Mr. Karzai’s demands that they withdraw Special Operations forces from a district of Wardak Province, which abuts Kabul, after accusations of abuse by the Special Operations troops even though the Americans believe that the accusations were inaccurate. The Special Operations forces are expected to leave in the next two to three weeks, military officials said.

The decision to hand over the Bagram Prison was said to have been eased in part by “private assurances” from Afghan officials not to release “enduring security threats,” as officials call the most dangerous prisoners. Those high-security inmates are believed to number no more than 50 among the nearly 4,000 prisoners at Bagram, which is connected to the American air base north of Kabul.

Since the transfer to the Afghans began last spring, the Afghans have released 1,376 prisoners, General Barakzai said. Those releases occurred when the Americans still had a veto and ran joint review boards with the Afghans to determine who could be released.

Even those earlier prison releases led to the return to the battlefield of some high-level Taliban figures, a senior Afghan military official said. Among those confirmed to have returned to the fight, the official said, were Maulavi Said Khail, who is now a Taliban commander in Wardak Province; Maulavi Shaheer, who turned formerly peaceful Badakhshan Province into a new war zone, where 17 Afghan soldiers were killed in a single battle this month and 10 more were taken hostage on Monday; and Maulavi Raouf, who has become one of several new commanders in Helmand Province, where the insurgents are trying to regain control as American surge forces have pulled out.

An American military official in Kabul insisted that the military had confidence that those insurgents whom the United States views as enduring security threats would not be released easily or quickly. “These people pose a threat to Afghan soldiers and Afghan civilians, too,” the official said. “We’re confident they will have appropriate measures in place to ensure dangerous detainees don’t pose a threat to Afghan and coalition forces.”

Critics of Mr. Karzai were alarmed recently when he appointed a prominent cleric in Kabul, Maulavi Enayatulah Balegh, to review the cases of 700 mullahs and religious officials in Afghan prisons, mostly because of suspected insurgent activity. Known for his anti-American sentiments, Mr. Balegh recommended the release of hundreds of Taliban clerics this month.

Rod Nordland reported from Bagram, and Michael R. Gordon and Alissa J. Rubin from Kabul, Afghanistan. Sharifullah Sahak and Sangar Rahimi contributed reporting from Kabul, and an Afghan employee of The New York Times from Kunar.


Suicide Bombers Strike in Eastern Afghanistan
VOA News March 26, 2013
Afghan officials say a group of suicide bombers has attacked a police base in the eastern city of Jalalabad, killing at least five officers.

Police say one of the attackers set off a car bomb, early Tuesday, at the entrance to the police headquarters. At least two others then blew themselves up inside the facility. Several other militants were killed in an hour-long gun battle.

The Taliban immediately claimed responsibility for the attack, which also left at least four police wounded.

Jaweed Jan, a resident of Jalalabad says he was among those hurt.

"I was driving my car and suddenly I heard an explosion. I got a wound in my hand," he said. "A few minutes after the explosion I saw some insurgents walk out of a car and attack police soldiers. Then the gunfire started."

The attack came as U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry held a second round of talks with Afghan President Hamid Karzai, Tuesday. Kerry is making a brief, unscheduled visit to Kabul, in part to repair strained relations with the Afghan government.

At a news conference late Monday, Kerry said Washington is "on the same page" with its Afghan allies when it comes to peace talks with the Taliban.

Earlier this month, President Karzai made headlines when he suggested that Washington and the Taliban were colluding against Afghanistan. Karzai insisted his comments were misinterpreted.

U.S. and Afghan leaders are discussing the U.S. role in the country as the international military operation winds down. Most foreign troops are to leave by the end of 2014.

Australia, an original member of the U.S.-led coalition, said Tuesday most of its 1,550 troops will come home by the end of the year, when a major international military base in Uruzgan province closes.

Australian Defense Minister Stephen Smith describes the move as "natural," saying it was made after consultations with Afghan authorities.

"If we were not confident that transition would occur in Uruzgan by the end of this year then this decision would not have been made. It is a necessary and logical and natural consequence of transition being effective in Uruzgan by the end of this year," he said.

Australia has lost 39 troops in the conflict.


Over 50 killed in Afghan violence in two days
KABUL, March 26 (Xinhua) -- More than 50 people, mostly militants, have been killed in attacks and bombings across Afghanistan since Monday morning, authorities said Tuesday.

At early Tuesday morning, five Afghan policemen and eight militants were killed when Taliban launched a coordinated attack on a police compound in Jalalabad city, the provincial capital of eastern Nangarhar province. "Eight suicide bombers stormed the Fast-Reaction Police Force complex in Jalalabad at around 4:45 a.m. local time Tuesday. Two militants detonated two explosive-laden cars at the gate, one bomber detonated his explosive vest and five who tried to enter the facility were killed by police," the provincial government said in a statement.

It said five other policemen were wounded in the attack in the city, 120 km east of Afghan capital Kabul.

Following the blasts and gunfight, the Taliban insurgent group claimed responsibility for the incident.

Zabihullah Mujahid, a Taliban purported spokesman, told local media via phone that the insurgents carried out the raid, killing scores of Afghan police and foreign trainers.

The bombing came at the second day of visit of Kabul by U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry.

On Monday evening, a total of 27 Taliban militants had been killed in a clash which broke out during a poppy-eradication camping in Garmser district in Helmand province 555 km south of Kabul, the provincial governor Mohammad Naim said Tuesday. "An Afghan army officer and a policeman were also killed in the fighting lasting for hours,"Naim told Xinhua, adding one cop was also wounded in the attack.

The Taliban, who ruled the country before they were ousted by a U.S.-led invasion in late 2001, renewed armed insurgency, staging ambush and suicide attacks, killing combatants as well as civilians.

In addition, up to 11 militants have been killed when army carried out a cleanup operation in Helmand's Marja district, said senior army official Gen. Seyyed Maluk.

In neighboring Nad Ali district, an army soldier was wounded when a Taliban suicide bomber set off his explosive-laden truck near army outpost Monday night.

Notorious for growing poppy and militancy, the Helmand province has been branded as Taliban stronghold in southern Afghan region.

The insurgent group has warned the civilians to stay away from official gatherings, military convoys and centers regarded as the legitimate targets by militants besides warning people against supporting government and foreign troops.

The latest bombings and attacks underscore the challenges that Afghan army and police faced as they struggle to provide security across the country before assuming the full operational lead in a couple of weeks and the departure of all U.S. and NATO forces by the end of next year.

The Taliban-led insurgency and conflicts claimed the lives of 2, 800 Afghan security forces and over 400 foreign soldiers besides leaving 2,750 civilians dead last year in the central Asian state.


Handing over Bagram prison to Kabul signals signing of U.S.-Afghan security pact
By Abdul Haleem
KABUL, March 26 (Xinhua) -- After months of bargaining in Kabul and Washington D.C., the U.S. military finally handed over the control of Bagram prison to Afghan administration on Monday, putting an end to a source of tension between the allies in the war on terror.

According to an Afghan observer, the transfer of the notorious Bagram prison, located next to the Bagram airbase, the main U.S. military base 50 km north of Kabul, could pave the way for the signing of the security pact with the U.S. that would allow continued, albeit limited, U.S. military presence in the country even beyond 2014.

"Transferring the control of Bagram prison to the government of Afghanistan was one of the preconditions for the inking the security agreement between Kabul and Washington,"political analyst Atiqullah Omarkhil, a retired general, told Xinhua.

Handing over the control of Bagram prison to Afghan government had been delayed several times over the past couple of years.

The sprawling detention center was scheduled to be handed over to Afghanistan during the visit of U.S. Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel early this month but the ceremony was cancelled for unknown reasons, prompting President Hamid Karzai to criticize Washington.

The frequent delay in handing over the Bagram prison where some 3,000 suspected Taliban and al-Qaida operatives are held has been the source of tension between Afghanistan and the United States.

President Karzai has announced that he will set free all innocent inmates held in the Bagram jail, a decision opposed by the U.S. military, saying that some of the detainees are dangerous and would rejoin Taliban if released.

"The Taliban is an ideological group and militants loyal to the outfit neither change their ideology nor join the establishment in Kabul, no matter if they were held in prison or provided with concessions," Omarkhil said.

Omarkhil said that Afghanistan, as a poor country, has no choice in the crafting of a security pact because it needs U.S. firm assistance not only in security matters but also in economic development.

Transferring Bagram jail to Afghan government coincided with the visit of U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry to Kabul where he would hold meeting with President Karzai to discuss the situation in Afghanistan and the details of the Bilateral Security Agreement (BSA) between Kabul and Washington.

President Karzai has underscored that Afghanistan regains the national sovereignty by taking over the control of Bagram detention center, noting that no foreigners have the right to have a prison facility in Afghan soil.

"Taking over the control of Bagram prison would serve as a trust-building gesture to the Taliban and show that President Karzai can set free the detainees, which is important for talks with the Taliban," Kabul University professor Musa Fariwar told Xinhua.

He added that handing over the Bagram prison to Afghan government had removed at least one obstacle to reaching the BSA.


Australia to withdraw most troops from Afghanistan by year-end
Reuters – Tue, Mar 26, 2013
CANBERRA (Reuters) - Australia will withdraw most troops from Afghanistan's south at the end of this year and shut down a major base for NATO-led forces, handing security to Afghan soldiers and police, Defense Minister Stephen Smith said on Tuesday.

Western and Afghan commanders, Smith said, had agreed that the major multinational coalition base at Tarin Kowt and its NATO airbase in Uruzgan province would close at the end of 2013.

Most foreign combat troops are due to leave Afghanistan by the end of 2014 under a planned security transition from foreign forces to Afghans.

"It is a necessary and logical and natural consequence of transition being effective," Smith said.

"The effect of that closure will be that Australia will no longer have a permanent presence in Uruzgan province, and the majority of Australian defense force personnel will return."

Australia has around 1,650 troops in Afghanistan, including special forces, based mainly in volatile Uruzgan, and was an original member of the U.S.-led coalition that helped oust the former Taliban government in late 2001.

It has lost 39 troops in the war, with 242 wounded.

The United States and NATO allies are racing against the clock to train a 350,000-strong force of Afghan soldiers to meet the 2014 deadline, although there is widespread skepticism that target can be met.

"A lot of people are worried about the military side and how are we going to get to 2014," Washington-based Australian counter-insurgency expert David Kilcullen told Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC) television.

"How are we going to hand over to the Afghans effectively and prevent the Taliban coming back?" he said on the ABC's "Four Corners" program late on Monday.

Australia had not yet decided whether special forces troops would remain in Afghanistan next year or after 2014, Smith said, with negotiations still underway with the Afghan government.

(Reporting by Rob Taylor; Editing by Paul Tait)


Former US Commander in Afghanistan John Allen Hopeful, Realistic About Country’s Future
ABC News By Dana Hughes Mar 25, 2013
Gen. John Allen, the former commander of international forces in Afghanistan, said Afghan security forces have proven themselves to be more capable than anyone expected, and will be ready to take over securing the country 2014.

“They turned out to be better than we thought. They turned out to be better than they thought,” said Allen.

Allen said he generally was hopeful as he sat down at the Brookings Institute today to give his thoughts on the state of Afghanistan and how it might fare after the U.S. draw-down that starts next year.

He credited the progress made by Afghan security forces to developmental strategies as much as building military capacity, citing the push for literacy within Afghan forces. Allen said the literacy program was championed by international forces commanders – Stanley McChrystal, David Petraeus and then himself – and that he expected Gen. Joseph Dunford to continue the program because of its success. Allen said more than half the Afghan troops now have the capacity to read and write at a first grade level.

“We intend ultimately to not just emphasize the continuation of that program at the basic or entry level,” he said, “but to continue to emphasize the continued learning of the Afghan soldiers and police throughout the period of time when they’re enlisted so that this becomes not just an initiative which is useful for military or police operations; it’s an initiative that has the potential to change society.”

Allen added that despite a turbulent 2012 dealing with the fallout of a video that purportedly showed troops urinating on the corpses of suspected Taliban fighters, the furor over the burning of Korans at a U.S. base in Afghanistan, and an increase in insider attacks, the U.S. was still able to accomplish its major goals for Afghanistan this year, completing the draw-down of 23,000 troops brought in during a surge in force levels and continuing to serve as support for the Afghan forces who are increasingly taking the lead in the fighting. He called the achievement “momentous,” noting that already in 2013, U.S. troop positions in Afghanistan mostly are serving advisory roles.

But for all the good news, Allen sounded the alarm on some of the issues that could upend progress. His biggest concern he said was not Afghanistan, but the role it’s neighbor Pakistan continues to play in securing peace and stability in the region. He described the relationship between Pakistan, Afghanistan and, by extension, the U.S. as “complicated.” He said Pakistan doesn’t always get enough credit for the counter-terrorism measures it has taken, but acknowledged that not enough is being done to secure the porous border between the two countries where militants are known to cross easily.

“The border area on both sides remains a principle obstacle and potential problems for a downturn of the campaign,” he said, alluding to “safe havens” that he said Pakistan needs to crack down on.

The general said it was unrealistic to expect the insurgency to completely end by Jan 1, 2015.

“The fact that the ISAF mission has ended and resolute support is under way as an advisory mission, there’s still going to be fighting,” said Allen. “And Afghanistan will join a long and distinguished list of countries that will be struggling in a post-conflict environment, where it will have an insurgency in some parts of that country for an extended period of time.”

Allen said the measure of success shouldn’t be whether there is still a presence of an insurgency, but whether the Afghanistan security forces and police have the capacity to continue to erode and ultimately defeat the insurgency’s power base. Allen believes that, with continued support from the U.S. and other international partners, Afghan security forces will be successful.

He said President Karzai’s statements criticizing the U.S. are unhelpful to the partnership, but he said the Afghanistan president was in a “complex” position. Calling Karzai’s job “the hardest in the world,” Allen said that the leader is constantly stuck between serving his domestic constituency and keeping the international community happy.

“He has to balance his rhetoric for the potential for peace,” said Allen. “Sometimes, that rhetoric is harsh. And we don’t have to agree with it. We don’t have to condone it. We don’t have to like it. And on those occasions where I’ve publicly been confronted — in testimony, primarily — with some of his rhetoric, I, in fact, reject it. And I reject comments which would put our troops at risk, that would put his troops at risk.”

Referencing the latest controversy over Karzai accusing the U.S. of colluding with the Taliban, Allen joked, “In fact, if the president truly does believe that the U.S. is colluding with the Taliban, I’m here to tell you: I would know, and we ain’t and we don’t intend to.”

The four-star general got personal as he reflected on the end of his 36-year military career, telling the crowd that serving as the commander of international forces in Afghanistan was the greatest honor of his life. He said he thinks every day about the 561 coalition troops who were killed and 5,500 who were wounded in action fighting under his command.

“While we all may have different views of the war and the struggle and the conflict, none of us should have anything other than the utmost respect for these young women and men who have, in some cases, given everything,” he said. “And we should never forget that.”


Have Americans Forgotten Afghanistan?
As the U.S. grapples with sequestration, the economy, and other policy battles, the war has fallen (even farther) from view.
The Atlantic By James Wright Mar 25 2013
On January 20, men of the First Battalion 38th Infantry Regiment gathered at a frigid base camp in the mountains of eastern Afghanistan. At Combat Outpost Sperwan Ghar in southern Kandahar, they held a memorial service for Army Sergeant David J. Chambers. A native of Hampton, Va., Chambers had been killed on January 16 by an improvised explosive device while on patrol. His commander said of him, "His subordinates trusted him, his peers learned from the example he set, and his superiors counted on him to get the job done." He had been wounded on a previous deployment to Afghanistan but he hadn't talked about this much because, as his mother said, "he never tried to worry us."

The day that the soldiers saluted their fallen comrade at Combat Outpost Sperwan Ghar, Sergeant Mark Schoonhoven died at Brooke Army Medical Center at Fort Sam Houston, Texas, from wounds suffered in Afghanistan. Schoonhoven was from Plainwell, Michigan. His mother and oldest daughter had sat by his hospital bed for nearly six weeks hoping he would recover from the coma. His wife had returned to Michigan to look after the five children at home. He never recovered from the injuries suffered when insurgents detonated explosives as his vehicle passed. At his funeral his wife and his mother received folded flags and each of his children put a rose on his coffin.

Other than local coverage, there was little attention paid to these deaths. Certainly there was little notice in Washington. In August 2012, Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta expressed his frustration over the absence of any discussion of the war in Afghanistan during the political campaigns. He explained at a Pentagon press briefing, "I thought it was important to remind the American people that there is a war going on."

This reminder takes on a great importance as Americans reflect on the 10-year anniversary of the beginning of the war in Iraq. As pundits and politicians debate the origins of that war, they will not dwell too long on the Afghanistan war that started a year and a half earlier -- and still continues.

Afghanistan did not become an issue during the fall presidential election campaigns, and the war seldom was a substantive issue in congressional races. Candidates scarcely discussed the war other than in passing references. In fact, they focused more on the putative next war in Iran. Ignoring the current war may have been politically or even morally derelict, but it was not of electoral consequence. Voters did not seem to consider war strategy as relevant to their election choices. Afghanistan did not figure in public opinion polls as a major issue and had not for some time.

Nonetheless, we could hope that after the election political leaders would finally focus on the war in Afghanistan. If it did not seem relevant to swing-state campaign strategy, it surely was an important issue in developing national military strategy. After all, there was a need to consider the objectives for the troops who remained there as well as the terms of the drawdown of these troops scheduled for the end of 2014.

Of course, fiscal cliffs, sequestered funds, the ongoing effects of the recession, the shocked reaction to the tragedy at Sandy Hook School, as well as the new political urgency to address immigration policy all took over the post-election debate and positioning. All of these were clearly important matters and there was genuine urgency associated with them. But Afghanistan also cried out for attention -- attention with the sense of priority that war has traditionally received in American politics.

Early in 2013 President Obama nominated Senator Chuck Hagel to replace the retiring Panetta as Secretary of Defense. This cabinet post was critical in the management of the war effort. The Senate confirmation hearings might have finally provided an opportunity for the sort of debate that Washington has had far too infrequently during America's wars in recent years.

Unfortunately, in the Senate Armed Services Committee hearings on January 31, Afghanistan was hardly mentioned. Gayle Tzemach Lemmon of the Council on Foreign Relations observed that those who watched the hearings on television "could be forgiven for forgetting that America is at war." She noted that "Apparently, so did their senators."

Most senators, especially the Hagel critics, as it turned out were focused beyond Afghanistan -- not beyond in terms of addressing the critical strategic questions regarding the mission of the post-Afghanistan military. In this case "beyond Afghanistan" meant the senators paid far more attention to a potential engagement with Iran than they did to the current war with the Taliban. And in the minds of many senators, equally troubling was the corollary question of how U.S. Iranian policy would support that of Israel. This in fact became the primary focus of the opposition to Senator Hagel. When Afghanistan did come up, it largely involved critical statements by Republicans, or slow-pitch questions by Democrats, and Senator Hagel's responses.

Perhaps the most pointed exchange in the hearing occurred not over future plans or concern about what we are asking our servicemen and women to do, but over views of recent history. Senator John McCain, who had been an aggressive advocate of the 2007 "surge" in Iraq, asked Hagel to answer "yes" or "no" to whether the surge had been successful. Hagel, who had been wounded and cited for bravery while serving as an enlisted man in Vietnam, would not.

When given the opportunity by Senator Bill Nelson to explain his position on the surge, it may not have received as much press coverage as the testy exchange with Senator McCain, but his reflections on this were revealing - and finally got to the basic question that should be asked whenever American troops are sent off to war.

"I had one fundamental question that I asked myself on every vote I took, every decision I made. Was the policy worthy of the men and women that we were sending into battle and surely to their deaths?...

I saw it from the bottom. I saw what happens. I saw the consequences and the suffering when we are at war."

The Senate hearing was not encouraging to those who hoped to have a real debate on future plans for the war in Afghanistan. Secretary Panetta's August inquiry seemed to still hang over the ongoing theatre. It is hard to produce evidence that most Americans or their representatives do indeed know there is a war going on. Obviously they do in a general, even an abstracted, way. And certainly they "care." But the war seldom intrudes into their world.

Wars do have costs. Human costs. It has become far too easy to ignore those when neither the wars nor those flesh-and-blood citizens who serve and sacrifice are acknowledged. Numbers on casualty reports do not bear human faces for most Americans.

The surge began in Iraq early in 2007. Between 2007 and 2011, 1,482 Americans died in Iraq, all but a few following the announcement of the new enhanced operation. Senator Hagel was correct. History will judge the final results of the surge. Andrew Bacevich recently observed of the surge, "avoiding defeat should not be confused with winning."

There still remain the unanswered questions of what the United States will do next in Afghanistan. Or in Iran. History will judge our record here as well. Our task, our political leadership's task, is not to preview that judgment but to frame the policies and goals that will be part of this record. What will be the rate of withdrawal of American troops from Afghanistan? What will be the objectives of troops in Afghanistan during this period? How many troops will remain, if any, after 2014? What goal do we have for the next 20 months--and for the period following that? What are the likely casualties in this period? Is this an acceptable cost?

Senator Hagel sought to remind his colleagues of the personal consequences of military policy. He had tried to do that In January 2007 as well, when he spoke in opposition to the Iraq surge: "This is a ping-pong game with American lives. These young men and women that we put in Anbar province, in Iraq, in Baghdad are not beans; they're real lives. And we better be damn sure we know what we're doing, all of us, before we put 22,000 more Americans into that grinder."

Surely six years later Americans are even more tired of hearing about the wars than they were during the Iraq surge debate. But as a military spouse once said, "I understand that the American public is war weary. I only wish they understood what war weary really meant." Well under 1 percent of Americans serve in the military today -- a smaller fraction has actually served in Iraq and Afghanistan. Most American families have not been absorbed with worry and have not had to deal with grieving for the loss or serious injury of a loved one. They have not had to wait for the ring of the doorbell at night.

War and death do go together -- and we have managed to put the current wars out of our lives sufficiently that grief from their sacrifices has seldom touched most of us. But it is there. Over 6,660 U.S. servicemen and women have died in these wars -- 145 have been women. Over 1,000 of these men and women were under 20 years of age; more than 3800 were 25 or younger (fatalities in Iraq were on average younger than those in Afghanistan.) The survivor's organization TAPS has estimated that the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have left 3,659 widows and widowers with 4,790 surviving children, 13,306 grieving parents and 19,559 grandparents. Since 2001, 18,311 Americans have been wounded in Afghanistan. And 32,223 were wounded in Iraq between 2003 and 2011. These only count the visible wounds.

Of course, these wars have impacted people beyond our borders, as well. There have been 619 casualties from the United Kingdom and 780 from other coalition countries -- most of these have died in Afghanistan. And the United Nations has reported that in the last six years 14,728 Afghan civilians have lost their lives as a result of the war (in the last year it is estimated that over 80 percent of these were due to anti-government forces.) A Reuters estimate places the Iraqi civilian deaths at between 103,000 and 113,000.

But numbers can tally only; they cannot introduce us to the experience of war.

Wars with undefined purposes are dangerous things. Wars fought by men and women who are unknown to most citizens are more than dangerous -- they strip war of the very human cost that is a necessary part of war. Americans need to assert ownership over the purposes of this war -- and affirm responsibility for their costs and for those who pay these costs. Last August, just three days after Secretary Panetta reminded the American people, in frustration, "there is a war going on," the 2,000th American victim of the Afghanistan war died in the Landstuhl U.S. Army/Department of Defense hospital in Germany. He had been in Afghanistan for a month when he was shot in the head while posted in Wardak Province. The 21-year old soldier from Grover, North Carolina had played drums and guitar in his church and had always wanted to be a soldier. He left a wife and three stepchildren.

A few days later the New York Times published a lengthy story by James Dao and Andrew Lehren analyzing the casualties in Afghanistan. The first thousand were killed over nine years, from 2001 to 2010. The second thousand died in just 27 months. The Times supplemented the Dao/Lehren story with four full pages of photos of the thousand deaths since early in 2010, a period overlapping with the "surge" in Afghanistan announced by President Obama in December 2009. These small snapshots record the faces of dreams that ended--and scanning through them gives a sense of human tragedy that numbers can never convey. Other news sources, such as Military Times, the Washington Post, PBS NewsHour, periodically present the photographs of the dead as well. CNN provides a comprehensive and interactive site. These are reminiscent of the striking Life Magazine June 27, 1969 issue that had ten pages of photos of the 242 Americans killed in one week in Vietnam. Today's presentations do not seem to have the political impact of the 1969 story.

In the months following the Panetta plea to remember the war, the human toll has continued. In this period Americans have conducted a national election and have confirmed a new secretary of defense without much mention of this loss of life. Accounts or photographs in hometown or base newspapers present the deceased with their families prior to deployment. Or they convey the grief of loved ones -- clutching folded flags, weeping over coffins, hugging together. The wife of a dead soldier from Montana urged all at his funeral to hug friends and families tightly. His daughters sang at the service. These news sources have local readership or viewers, and most Americans miss the moving and very human accounts of grief and loss.

A soldier from Coral Springs, Florida, killed on his fifth deployment, left behind a wife and three children. Before his final deployment he had arranged a 60th anniversary dinner for his grandparents. A family member said, "He really believed in celebrating marriage." A Marine sent off a Facebook greeting to his mother before he went out on patrol. He promised to call her in the morning -- and his morning never came.

A Windsor, Colorado soldier was on his third deployment when he and another soldier were killed by an Afghan ally. His mother said of her son, "There was just something about him that made him able to bring a smile to anyone's face." A Kentwood, Michigan Navy Seal was killed when his Blackhawk helicopter crashed during a mission. Ten others died as well in the crash. His grandfather told a reporter that the young man and his girlfriend were going to get married before Christmas. "They were as happy as two kids in a candy store," he reported.

Most of us don't have to stay on alert. "The Marines are at war and America's at the mall," said the mother of Clay Hunt, a Marine who had served in Iraq and Afghanistan and had watched his friends die. He was wounded, and after three years of agonizing over his experiences, he committed suicide.

CNN correspondent Jake Tapper's book The Outpost: An Untold Story of American Valor puts a searing human face on the war in Afghanistan. It tells the story of American soldiers in an unknown place fighting a battle with little tactical meaning. Tapper introduces readers to the soldiers there, young men worrying about their situations, thinking about their families, planning for their futures. In October 2009 they repulsed a heavy attack by Taliban forces. Of the 53 outnumbered soldiers, 8 were killed and 22 wounded. One of this band, Staff Sergeant Clinton Romesha, received the Medal of Honor from President Obama on February 11. Following brief applause, the nation went on about its business.

On February 13, President Obama announced in greater detail the plans for the drawing down of American troops in Afghanistan. With the Senate confirmation vote delayed, he did not have the opportunity to involve Senator Hagel in the discussion leading to the decision. United States senators on the Armed Services Committee did not avail themselves of the opportunity to discuss these options when they had it. None of his critics directly asked Hagel about his view on this.

On February 27 Chuck Hagel was sworn in as Secretary of Defense. He immediately faced the problem of sequestration of funds that would impact the Department in two days. But first he met with some of his new colleagues, both civilian and military. He visited the Pentagon 9/11 Memorial where he "reflected a bit on what had happened that day." The new Secretary asked Army Sgt. 1st Class John Wirth, of Gordon, Nebraska, a veteran of the Iraq and Afghan wars, to introduce him to the Pentagon gathering. Wirth said that Secretary Hagel "knows the very real cost of war."

That same day in Window Rock, Arizona, the flag of the Navajo Nation was at half staff. Marine Staff Sergeant Jonathan Davis had been killed in Helmand Province, the only American death in Afghanistan in February. A Marine since 1997, Davis had two previous deployments in Iraq and Afghanistan and had already been awarded a Purple Heart. He was married with a son and hundreds turned out in Flagstaff and along the highway home to honor him when his body was returned to the Navajo Nation. The Tribal Chairman announced that he was the 14th Navajo to die in Iraq or Afghanistan. On March 2 he was buried at Kayenta. That same day Marines and Coalition troops who served with him held a memorial at Forward Operating Base Shir Ghazay in Afghanistan.

A week after assuming his new responsibilities, Secretary Hagel traveled to Afghanistan. He visited with the troops there and responded to President Karzai's allegation that the United States was working with the Taliban. During the Hagel visit, the Taliban detonated an explosive at the defense ministry in Kabul. On March 11 two American soldiers were killed by an individual wearing an Afghan army uniform, and five others died in a helicopter crash.

There is still a war going on.


26 inmates freed during first day of Bagram prison transfer
By GHANIZADA - 25 Mar 2013, 8:49 pm Khaama Press
The full responsibility of Bagram prison was handed over to the Afghan government on Monday after US troops handed over around 4,000 prisoners to Afghan security forces during the Afghan year 1391.

According to reports around 100 prisoners are currently kept by US troops and are due to be handed over to Afghan security forces by next week.

Around 26 prisoners were freed from the Bagram prison during the first day of prison transition to Afghan governmnet.

Afghan officials said around 949 prisoners were in the custody of US troops despite an agreement on the transfer of prisoners was signed by the two nations.

The transition of Baram prison to Afghan government was completed during a ceremony held in Bagram on Monday which was attended by Afghan defense minister Bismillah Mohammadi, Gen. Joseph Dunford NATO commander and a number of other high level Afghan and American officials.

Chief of the security transition committee Ashraf Ghani Ahmadzai said, “One of the national ambitions of the Afghan people was completed by the transition of Bagram prison today.”

Mr. Ahmadzai further added that the transfer of Bagram prison to Afghan government reflects the respect of United States towards the Afghan constitution and law and this will to further improve bilateral ties between the two nations.

In the meantime NATO commander Gen. Joseph Dunford said United States remains committed to assist Afghanistan.

Afghan defense minister Bismillah Mohammadi said Afghan defense ministry is prepared to take security of the prison and assured that the ministry had taken necessary steps for the security of Bagram prison.


Pakistan Selects Caretaker Prime Minister
AFP Monday, 25 March 2013
Pakistan Sunday finally selected a caretaker prime minister, a retired judge, to head up an interim administration to guide the country through its historic election period.

Mir Hazar Khan Khoso (84) was selected by the election commission after a parliamentary committee and rival parties failed to agree on a candidate. He comes from the troubled southwestern province of Baluchistan.

"We have picked Mir Hazar Khan Khoso after frankly and openly discussing all the four names forwarded to us," chief election commissioner Fakhruddin Ibrahim told reporters in Islamabad.

The outgoing government had proposed Khoso and a former central bank governor, while the main opposition Pakistan Muslim League-N, frontrunner to win the May 11 polls, put forward the name of another retired judge and a politician.

Khoso was selected a week after parliament dissolved and four days after President Asif Ali Zardari set the date of the general election.

The vote is set to mark the first time that an elected civilian government hands over to another in a country that has seen three military coups and four military rulers since partition from India in 1947.

The announcement was made just minutes before former military ruler Pervez Musharraf landed back in Pakistan after more than four years in exile, defying Taliban death threats in a bid to contest the May election.

Militant attacks and record levels of violence directed against the Shiite Muslim minority have raised fears about security for the polls in the nuclear-armed country of 180 million.

Meanwhile, a report under FT Syndication Service by Farhan Bokhari in Karachi and James Crabtree in Mumbai adds: Former military ruler General Pervez Musharraf has returned to Pakistan amid mounting concerns over threats to his safety, ending five years of exile in London and Dubai.

Mr Musharraf landed in the coastal city of Karachi on Sunday afternoon, the first step in an attempted political comeback involving campaigning in parliamentary elections due on May 11, despite receiving death threats from Taliban militants.

"The General has landed on Pakistani soil. He has returned to save the country," an official from Mr Musharraf's political party, the All Pakistan Muslim League, told the Financial Times.

In a video message last Saturday a Taliban spokesman said a "death squad" would be dispatched to target the former ruler, threatening a repeat of the assassination of former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto in 2007, shortly after her own return from exile.

The tense situation in the country was underlined by news of a car bomb that detonated next to an army post in the northwest of the country last Saturday evening, killing at least 17 soldiers.

Pakistan is preparing for a period of intense political infighting in advance of May's elections, although one that could result in the first democratic handover since the nation won independence in 1947.

Mr Musharraf's return also comes at a time of widespread discontent with Pakistan's political leadership, against a backdrop of Taliban violence, power cuts and high inflation.

Supporters gathered to welcome the former leader in Karachi, and pointed to a sharp decline in Pakistan's fortunes in the five years since his departure and ultimate replacement by current president Asif Ali Zardari.

"If you compare the two [Musharraf and Zardari], its almost like day and night" said Zareen Khan, a taxi driver. "Under Musharraf, there were opportunities for work, while Zardari has failed to provide anything to the people of Pakistan".

But despite a limited feeling of nostalgia for the relative economic prosperity enjoyed during Mr Musharraf's administration, analysts said there were few indications that his return would reshape the country's politics.

"Like previous military rulers, Musharraf held influence as long as he was in uniform and in charge of Pakistan. He has no political significance now," said Hasan Askari Rizvi, a political commentator. "I can't understand why he is returning given that he faces a personal risk."

"People who remember Musharraf are mainly looking at how the economy performed under his rule," said one Western diplomat, speaking on condition of anonymity.

Mr Musharraf's legacy as the man most directly responsible for leading Pakistan into the US-led global war on terror, following the terror attacks of September 11, remains deeply controversial in his home country.

Critics also suggest his time as military ruler was characterised by human rights violations, involving crackdowns on opposition figures, allegations of torture, and frequent battles with country's judiciary.

Last Saturday, Human Rights Watch, the US-based global watchdog, urged Pakistan's government to hold Mr Musharraf accountable upon his return.

"Musharraf should not be allowed to elude the serious legal proceedings against him," the group said in a statement.

"Only by ensuring that Musharraf faces the well-documented outstanding charges?.?.?.?can Pakistan put an end to the military's impunity for abuses."


US faces $6bn bill to ship equipment home from Afghanistan
Huge numbers of weapons and vehicles and tense relations with nearby countries make task more daunting than Iraq pullout
Guardian.co.uk By Emma Graham-Harrison Monday 25 March 2013
Bagram airbase - Fighting wars is expensive, but so is winding them down. As the US prepares to ship most of its weapons, vehicles and other equipment home after more than a decade in Afghanistan, the bill for the move will be a staggering $6bn, officers in charge of the complex process say.

Rusting Soviet tanks and guns still dot the Afghan landscape, serving as bleak memorials to violence of the 1980s, and perhaps a spur to Nato forces to ensure there are no similar reminders from the last decade of conflict.

The US military has pledged it will level any bases not handed over to Afghan forces and fly out, drive out or scrap the weapons, equipment and tens of thousands of Humvees and expensive MRAPs – mine-resistant ambush-protected vehicles – it has shipped in since 2001.

To do this, it must sort through 100,000 shipping containers and strip down nearly 30,000 vehicles scattered in hundreds of bases across Afghanistan's mountains and deserts, all by a 2014 deadline, while making sure nearly 70,000 US soldiers still in Afghanistan are not left short of equipment they need to fight.

"Our workload will at least double by the beginning of the fall," said Brigadier General Steve Shapiro, deputy commander of the unit overseeing the removal, sale or destruction of around $26bn worth of equipment, known to the military as a "retrograde".

"We're hearing about $6bn in transportation costs," he said, as civilians and US soldiers sorted and labelled new arrivals in one of three 60,000 sq ft warehouses on Bagram airbase which currently holds around $200m worth of neatly stacked equipment.

Bagram, the first US base for their war in Afghanistan, is one of two hubs for an effort that employs nearly 10,000 soldiers and civilians and is proving far more challenging than the US departure from Iraq, which Shapiro also helped co-ordinate.

In Iraq, US equipment was trucked across the border to Kuwait where it was packed, cleaned, recorded and shipped on. But Afghanistan has no coastline, no stable, US-friendly neighbours and only a weak, vulnerable road network, making the job more expensive and complicated.

Some 28,000 vehicles and 20,000 shipping containers need to be sorted and prepared in Afghanistan, then shipped out of the country by the end of next year, Shapiro said, leaving little room for error. The rest of the containers – and their contents – will be given to the Afghan army, sold commercially or destroyed.

"Its more complex than Iraq," said Colonel Mark Paget, commander of the 401st Army Field Support Brigade, which is managing the "retrograde" in Bagram. "You don't have the space to make big mistakes. I can't have a pile of equipment here building up. You need a steady, even flow through the system."

His team prepares up to 60 MRAPs a day in a painstaking, labour-intensive process, first poring over the vehicle for ammunition lost under seats or behind cables, using sophisticated cameras to look into hidden crevices. Lost assault rifle and machine gun rounds, even grenades and mines have been dug out from the interiors of the vehicles.

A second unit strips off netting designed to stop rocket propelled grenades, gun towers, radio equipment and other features, for separate shipping. MRAPs are washed at least twice, more if they are going straight back to the US, and then, mostly, loaded on to planes, although some are taken out by road. They are so large that only four can fit in the C-17 military transport planes used to fly them on to bases in Kuwait, where they are loaded once more on to ships.

The US can take some things out on Pakistani roads, the route many supplies came in by. But although the first ship packed with surplus US equipment has already set sail from Karachi port, tensions between the two countries have shut the border more than once, and the US will not send any high-tech or sensitive equipment by that route.

Roads through northern Afghanistan, once used by retreating Soviet troops, are another option, but also used only for less sensitive shipments such as generators, tools and odds and ends known as "military impedimentia". Planners have to weigh up the cost, the state of roads and bilateral relations, and the speed with which trucks, planes or other transport can be marshalled.

"What we don't want is peaks and valleys, which is why there is all this emphasis on it now, asking ourselves do we really need this piece of equipment," Paget said, looking down over muddy yards crammed with nearly 800 vehicles waiting to be shipped out of the country. "What you want and what you need are different things."

The government in Washington is concerned about costs. A recent report from the Government Accountability Office highlighted examples of potentially surplus equipment such as "96 scoop type loaders" that it said could cost between $1.8m and $14.7m to ship home.

The huge bill for the move has added to the pressure to work out what exactly is sitting on bases around the country, whether it is worth moving out, and if not how to destroy it; after a decade of war there are containers full of long-forgotten orders.

Paget recently opened a shipping container and found hundreds of easels inside, ordered at the peak of Obama's surge for commanders in small outposts, keen to map out their offensives against the Taliban on whiteboards balanced on the wooden stands. "Excess easels, there were easels everywhere," he said, shaking his head. "I will stand by that I have seen a container full of easels."


Iron Horse Gaining Traction In Afghanistan
By Abubakar Siddique March 25, 2013 Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty
More than 200 years after the arrival of steam locomotives changed the world of transport forever, the "iron horse" has finally made it to Afghanistan.

Afghanistan is in the early stages of constructing a cross-country rail network intended to spur economic development and boost trade.

The idea is to turn Afghanistan into a land bridge linking the energy-rich Middle East and Central Asia with the booming economies of China and South Asia, according to Deputy Public Works Minister Ahmad Shah Wahid.

"If we were linked with our neighbors through railway networks it would be a great development for our future prosperity,” he says. “It would improve trade and improve the lives of ordinary people."

The first step in this process came in 2001 with the completion of a 75-kilometer railway line connecting the northern city of Mazar-e Sharif to Uzbekistan's rail network. The line was constructed with the help of $160 million from the Asian Development Bank (ADB). Uzbekistan's state railway company is conducting a feasibility study on extending the link to the Tajik-Afghan border as part of a northern railway corridor for international cargo.

The second step entails connecting Turkmenistan and Tajikistan via a new 400-kilometer track crossing northern Afghanistan, again with funding from the ADB. Construction is set to begin in July, according to an agreement signed among the three states this month, and Turkmen workers will build the Afghan section of the rail line.

‘Revolutionary Development’

Shah Wahid sees great potential in establishing trade outlets for oil and minerals extracted in northern Afghanistan.

"This is really a revolutionary development in Afghanistan and the region's transit networks,” he says. “It will also connect Central Asian countries with one another. Even in the short term, this could bring a positive effect to households and will give our traders access to the region."

Aside from the two northern projects, future lines connecting western Afghanistan to Iran and southern Afghanistan to Pakistan are also being planned. And talk is already turning toward the possibility of someday joining the Commonwealth of Independent States' rail-oversight body, and of building a link that could connect Afghanistan to Azerbaijan, Turkey, and Georgia.

The goal to link Afghan territory by rail is not a new one, and has eluded planners for decades.

Afghan historian Habibullah Rafi notes that many 19th and 20th century Afghan rulers resisted efforts to connect to regional rail networks because they feared it would help the advancing British and Russian empires absorb Afghan territory.

It took until 1925 for the country to build its first railway line -- a 7-kilometer track linking the center of Kabul and the Darul Aman Palace on the capital's southern outskirts. That effort, part of the reformist King Amanullah Khan's modernization drive, was undone just four years later during a revolt against Amanullah.

President Muhammad Daud Khan, who led the country from 1973 to 1978, laid new plans to connect the country by rail. But his efforts, too, failed to materialize, according to Habibullah Rafi.

"During the reign of President Daud Khan [in the 1970s] there was a plan to connect Kabul to the western city of Herat through the central regions of Hazarajat,” he says. “But his government was overthrown before it could implement the project."

That left King Amanullah's rusting locomotive and carriages, which still stand outside a Kabul museum, as the only testaments to Afghanistan’s previous efforts to enter the railway era.


Parliament Prioritises Election Law, Underspent Budgets
TOLOnews.com By Jawed Stanikzai Monday, 25 March 2013
Afghanistan's lawmakers on Monday said the priority for parliament in the next weeks will be the dismissal of those ministers whose development budgets were underspent in 2011 and the approval of the election law.

A number of MPs said that any further delay on the election law approval is a serious concern that threatens next year's presidential poll, which should not be delayed.

"Any kind of delay of the date of the presidential election is against Afghanistan's Constitution," MP Assadullah Saadati said in parliament.

Many lawmakers say that a transparent and fair election in 2014 can help improve Afghanistan's situation, and so insist on the need for the election law soon.

"Eighteen million voting cards have been distributed so far, but most of them are fake," MP Ghulam Hussain Nasiri said. "In addition, 11 million people have qualified to vote [since the last election]."

The distribution of new electronic voting cards was insisted on by the lawmakers last year as a necessary step to ensure the fairness of the poll. But President Hamid Karzai dismissed the demand as too costly and time-consuming.

Meanwhile, the 11 ministers who did not spend more than 50 percent of their development budgets in 2011 will be summoned and some will be dismissed.

The four ministers who were not in charge at the time of the poorly-managed spending - higher education, defence, interior, and urban development - will still be summoned for questioning, but may not necessarily be dismissed.

Parliamentary Secretary Eng. Ikram said that they will process the questioning and dismissal of the ministers in three steps.

"The impeachment of the ministers starts next Monday ," Eng Ikram said.

www.afghanistannewscenter.com