Tacstrat: What the vote counts for

Tacstrat Analysis

29 November 2012: despite aggressive lobbying by the US and Israel, 138 member states voted for uplift of Palestine’s status, 41 (including Australia) abstained while only 9 voted against. France, Spain and Belgium voted in favor, while the US, Israel were only able to convert Canada, Czech Republic, Panama, Palau, Nauru, Micronesia and the Marshall Islands to their cause. Even after the highest world forum has made its decision to acknowledge Palestinians’ right to self determination the United States remains loyal to her ally. The United States has threatened to withhold funds to the Gaza strip; Netanyahu condemned President Abbas for spreading hatred and war crime rumors. He criticized Abbas for blowing the matter out of proportion; for his hypocrisy in preferring the General Assembly over a trip for ‘peace talks’ with the Likud government in Jerusalem. So how successful has dialogue between the two been?

In 1949 “Palestine” had been wiped off the map. 78% of the country had become Israel, the other 22% divided between Jordan and Egypt. The very existence of a Palestinian people was vehemently denied by the Israeli establishment. This denial had been turned into an article of faith, an inseparable part of the Zionist ideology that had brought the Jews to the Promised Land. Much later, Golda Meir famously declared that “there is no such thing as a Palestinian people”. Respected charlatans wrote popular books “proving” that the Arabs in Palestine were pretenders who had only recently arrived. The Israeli leadership was convinced that the “Palestinian problem” had disappeared, once and forever.

Read more…

Divorcing the Taliban

By Nida Afaque
ZoneAsia-Pk

The long and short of the war in Afghanistan was to eliminate terrorists and reinstall social equality for the locals so that women can have a greater say, children can acquire education and the young Afghans can find a stable source of income. The decade long war has ripped Afghanistan limb from limb; thousands of people have died, millions have incurred lifelong crippling injuries, social security is non-existent and perpetual state of chaos has taken over the nation.

The politics of withdrawal of coalition forces has seen ups and downs. The Chicago summit underscored the sincerity of the coalition forces in exiting Afghanistan. Months prior and after the summit, NATO forces have been integrating the Afghan security forces in their daily routines. NATO agreed to carry out night raids via Afghan counterparts, stop aerial attacks on Afghan residential buildings and even basic literacy camps have been set up to educate the afghan troops. A dip in Taliban attacks was also recorded.

The past few months have witnessed resurgence in violence from the Taliban. Suicide attacks, gunfire and bombs have occurred near the bases of Coalition forces and the Afghan security forces. Western embassies have not been spared the terror either. The latest attack was at a hotel in a scenic locality of Kabul on the pretext of un-Islamic activities like alcohol consumption. Soon afterwards, a cross-border attack was launched on Pakistani check-post resulting in deaths of 8 soldiers and 17 Pakistani security armed forces personnel were
beheaded after being taken hostage.

These graphic attacks have sent strong messages to coalition forces, afghan forces and even neighboring Pakistan. Taliban have been quite stubborn in working for a peace process but they did cede to form a diplomatic office in Qatar. While coalition forces have repeatedly stressed on their determination to leave the battlefield, some like the French have promised to leave even before the set date.

Unfortunately some serious blunders have been committed by them too which has turned positive reinforcements sour and send the reconciliation process many steps behind. The burning of the Holy Quran was a major incident that brought disapproval from all over the world. Shortly afterwards, a US marine allegedly suffering from PTSD killed 17 afghan civilians. But perhaps the greatest irksome moment for the Taliban are the reports from western media that their power has been weakened.

Indeed, actions speak louder than words and these graphic images are not soon to be erased from the minds of the locals. The targets of these attacks were mainly soldiers and civilians in close proximity to these soldiers, physically and/or figuratively. It is important to realize that these attacks occurred at the same time negotiations were taking place with the coalition forces. Thereby, indicating that the 10 year war has hardened the hearts of the Taliban against foreign invaders. This could also mean that the Taliban would reassert themselves and carry out the same tribal code of ethics they followed back in their term.

Another distressing point is the attitude of the Taliban regarding aid workers and volunteers. Many foreign social workers have been kidnapped for heavy ransom which some believe funds their extremist attacks. A senior British aid worker, Khalil Dale, was even killed when the ransom was not paid. For human right activists this would signal the continuation of violations against women, children and minorities.

The Taliban also symbolize a big question mark for Pakistan’s security. The porous Pak-Afghan border will continue to remain a source of skirmishes and refuge for the militants. Some intelligence reports have claimed alliances between ISI and the afghan Taliban. Assuming that it is the truth, Pakistan’s strategy to gain the Taliban’s vote has failed. TTP, which have been marked as a terrorist group by Pakistan, has been maintaining sanctuaries in Afghanistan probably with the help of the Afghan Taliban. The latter has been terrorizing locals near the border. The TTP already idolizes the Taliban for fighting foreign forces. With a history of terrorist attacks all over Pakistan, if the afghan Taliban decide to use the TTP for their purposes, Pakistan is looking at a serious threat. The Afghan Taliban could use this to harm Pakistani forces. The Afghan Taliban have also started warming up to Indian presence, a blow to their relations with Pakistan.

After these hiccups, Pakistan has to rethink its strategy for dealing with the Taliban. It has suffered immensely from being labeled as “part of the problem”. Domestic concerns are too pressing for Pakistan to be indulging in foreign battles. It’s time to end this insecurity by completely wiping out the presence of terrorists in Pakistan. Non-interventionists would recommend a strategy of negotiation. But the peace deal with the Taliban in Swat has proved how unreliable such accords can be.

The strategy of differentiating between the “good” terrorist and the “bad” terrorist can no longer continue. Discriminatory ethnic and religious movements be those of the Sipah-e-Sahaba or the Lashkar-e-Taiba will all have to end. For such a mass scale operation, foreign powers will be willing to help Pakistan achieve their common goal of regional and global peace. Furthermore, a new holistic strategy to be applicable after the operation has to be formulated, one that encompasses the presence and activities of these groups.

Such an aggressive strategy of uprooting the terrorist elements will also prove dangerous for the country’s politicians, armed forces and other law enforcement personell as always innocent civilians. It will invariably clamp down the nations’ freedom of speech and right to privacy but then nothing comes for free. Sadly, Pakistan has reached a point where a return to normalcy will cost them dearly but a radical operation like this can give it the chance to reestablish the writ of the state and get rid of the boulder blocking its economic and social prosperity.

Afghanistan bans foreign security firms

By Waheedullah Massoud (AFP)

KABUL – Afghanistan has formally banned eight foreign private security firms, including the controversial company formerly called Blackwater, a spokesman for President Hamid Karzai said on Sunday.

There are 52 private security contractors in Afghanistan, who must cease operations by January 2011

The Afghan government announced in August that it was giving security firms working in Afghanistan four months to cease operations, potentially hitting hard efforts by NATO-led troops fighting a nine-year insurgency in the country.

There are fears the measure could create huge problems for the military and other international entities that depend on the estimated 40,000 employees of private security contractors.

“The Afghan interior ministry today reported the dissolution of eight private security companies to the national security council of Afghanistan,” Waheed Omer told reporters.

Omer said some of the companies had been fully dissolved and their weapons had been collected, while for others the process was still under way.

Xe — the former Blackwater — and White Eagle Security Services, which provides security for Afghan government officials and NGOs in particular, are among the first companies banned.

The security firms provide a wide range of services including protecting supply convoys for NATO, guarding foreigners’ compounds, embassies and other installations, as well as training Afghan security forces.

The dissolution will not immediately affect companies’ activities that deal with the training of national security forces or those guards who operate inside buildings to provide protection, Omer said.

“The focus is on those security companies which are protecting the highways, protecting transport caravans — those areas other than the training of Afghan security forces or protecting the internal premises of international organisations or embassies, or others,” Omer said.

Omer said the eight companies included both Afghan and international firms, and two of them were small outfits employing only about 100 guards.

The August presidential decree ordered the 52 private security contractors operating in the country, both Afghan and international, to cease operations by January 1, 2011.

Karzai had accused the security companies of running an “economic mafia” based around “corruption contracts” favoured by the international community.

He has said the firms duplicate the work of the Afghan security forces and divert much-needed resources, while Afghans criticise the private guards as overbearing and abusive, particularly on the country’s roads.

Omer said security had improved along some highways since the banning of private guards operating as escorts for supply convoys in those areas.

Critics, though, say the tight deadline will not allow enough time to negotiate an alternative to private contractors in a country were security is a priority and police are generally not trusted.

Private security firms in Afghanistan are employed by US and NATO forces, the Pentagon, the UN mission, aid and non-governmental organisations, embassies and Western media.

They employ about 26,000 registered personnel, though experts say the real number could be as high as 40,000.

The contractors themselves have been reluctant to comment publicly but some have said privately they believe many of their clients would leave the country if they could not source their own security.

Xe, formerly Blackwater, gained notoriety in Iraq after guards protecting a convoy opened fire in a busy Baghdad square in September 2007, killing as many as 17 civilians.

Last month two former Blackwater security guards went on trial in the United States, accused of the murder of two Afghan citizens in a 2009 shooting.

The NATO Money to Ensure Taliban Security

The Moral Equivalents of American Founding Fathers Are Now Terrorists!

By Sohail Parwaz

The English Prime Minister David Cameron, who before kicking off for India on a business tour few days ago, very rudely and snobbishly, keeping all the diplomatic norms aside, warned Pakistan to behave and to stop exporting terror to India. The interesting part is that the British Prime Minister insisted that he had neither caused offence to Pakistan nor accused the Islamabad government of promoting terrorism. Amid deep anger in Pakistan, the Prime Minister said that he would always talk straight forwardly to Britain’s friends. Although the former British foreign secretary Mr. Milliband quite aptly snubbed him by saying that, ‘there was a big difference between straight-talking and being a loudmouth’.

This is not the first time that Pakistan has been accused of sponsoring terrorism. In the past most popular western lyric ‘Do More’ has been repeatedly orchestrated off and on. However the irony is that every time the Coalition while demanding from Pakistan to “do more” would forget about the pains they were taking at their ends to save the skin of their troops in Afghanistan. It’s impossible that Cameron’s predecessors had not told him about the efforts they were making before handing over the 10 Downing Street to him.

It is quite open a secret now that for months, British and the US diplomats and intelligence officers had been approaching those Taliban commanders whom they considered “soft and approachable”. Although the advances made by them were gauche and gawky and often sabotaged by mutual suspicion and above all a mistrust. Particularly the US and the Karzai government’s suspicions that always spoiled the British attempts to persuade Taliban fighters and other groups to abandon the insurgency yet at the end of the day the ‘conglomerate’ agreed on a coordinated international initiative in the shape of a discreet trust fund, the brain child of the British government officials, of course the same British government who claims now that Pakistan is exporting terrorism. Interestingly, the move reflects a growing realisation in London, Washington and elsewhere in the NATO countries that the conflict cannot be “won” in any military sense and that some kind of accommodation with the Taliban insurgency is inescapable.

The WikiLeaks made almost 90,000 cables and messages public but the publicity was given to those only which carried contents against Pakistan, however astonishingly the ‘Leaks’ are mysteriously quiet over the ‘under table dealings’ between the members of the Coalition forces and the Taliban to ensure the safety and a secure exit of the former’s troops. No one can disagree with the hard fact that 2010 is proving to be the most costly year of the entire war for the US-led occupation. The death toll has already reached 399, compared with the last year’s toll of 521. The number of deaths, however, is only one aspect of the mounting crisis being faced by the 100,000 American and 30,000 NATO and other allied troops in Afghanistan. The other alarming issue is the number of soldiers being wounded which has increased exponentially.

About a couple of years back an American Security Archive had published a pile of declassified documents alleging Pakistan to be the Taliban’s godfather. The papers were related to a period of seven years leading up to 9/11. That means it’s a 1994 onwards era? Barbara Elias was the lady who labored to arrange the jigsaw pieces of these ‘puzzling’ documents and gave them the title, ‘Pakistan – The Taliban’s godfather?’ Probably Barbra over looked (or intentionally skipped) the Document 21 which was the voice of the heart. It was the expunged extract of the U.S. Embassy Islamabad’s cable, through which the Assistant Secretary Robin Raphael was informed on March 10, 1997 and which reads, “The Embassy recommends a policy of “limited engagement to try to “moderate and modernize” the Taliban.” Full engagement would be against American interests as it would associate Washington with a “movement we find repugnant,” however a failure to engage the Taliban at all would further isolate Afghanistan”. Why has she also decided not to mention that at the invitation of Ronald Reagan a few Taliban leaders were invited to the White House, where Reagan in a welcome address, declared them to be the Moral Equivalents of the American Founding Fathers.

This premise made it clear and self explanatory that the recent visits of the American Secretary of the States to Pakistan and Afghanistan were in fact reflecting the volume of pressures being faced by the US and Allies in Afghanistan and also that the US government is desperately seeking an easy, safe, respectable and some phenomenal way out of Afghanistan. The above background would facilitate one to understand when it is explained that recently a number of incidents have been reported where the military operations are annexed and supported by the political maneuvers as well and that maneuvering includes the efforts to buy some influential Taliban leaders and bribing the drug mafia, warlords, ex Mujahedeen and some of the tribal elders of that area. Since making the direct efforts to achieve this all is not considered safe hence some indirect means have been chosen where the millions of dollars contracts are being sanctioned to a number of overt and covert transport and logistic support companies in Afghanistan who are fully aware that the fifteen to twenty percent of the contract amount is not meant for them rather it would be expanded as bribe to Taliban for the safe passage of logistic plying through the roads in fact. The one existing example is of a shady UK based NGO by the name of ‘Foreign & Commonwealth Office’ (FCO) which is apparently involved in stabilizing Helmand province while actually it is working to tone down the Taliban’s wrath in the area.

It’s next to impossible to trace anyone in Afghanistan who believes that the US and UK are not funding the Taliban. The lot is none other than the highly educated Afghan professionals, those employed by ISAF, USAID, international media organisations and even those who are advising US diplomats, seem the most convinced. They openly say that the aid organisations are nothing more than intelligence-collecting agencies, going into the risky regions where the ISAF troops cannot easily reach to obtain facts on the ground. They strongly believe that even a modest midwife-training project in Afghanistan is a spying outfit.

According to Anna Tomforde, who wrote an article titled, ‘Paying off the Taliban – Incentive or Bribe?’ published January this year, ‘The Peace and Reintegration Trust Fund established at the London conference on Afghanistan is being hailed as an ‘economic alternative’ by its creators and condemned as ‘paying off the Taliban’ by its critics. There can be little doubt, however, that the idea of the fund, aimed at inciting ‘moderate’ elements of the Taliban to lay down their arms, is as much part of a new strategy on Afghanistan as proof of the realization that the conflict cannot be solved by military means alone’. It leaves no doubt in any mind when Pakistan’s role is placed vis-à-vis the US and ISAF forces that Pakistan is fighting the GWOT selflessly and without making the compromises .No one can deny the sacrifices mentioned by the Pakistan army’s Chief General Kayani, while talking to media about few month back. He informed media that roughly well over two thousand Pakistani army officers and soldiers had been killed in the fighting by that date which included one three-star General, two two-star generals and five brigadiers as the martyrs.

Almost 168 years back, the British over threw Amir Dost Mohammad Khan and installed Shah Shuja as a “puppet king” who was killed by the Afghans within months and the British were made to lick the dust in a way that in January 1842, out of 16,500 soldiers and 12,000 dependents only a solitary survivor, of mixed British-Indian garrison, was allowed by the Afghan warriors to reach back to Jalalabad Fort, on a stumbling pony. Undoubtedly the US and NATO forces are bribing and paying Taliban to avoid the unsafe and solitary return and definitely they are preferring the lives over money?

Pakistan No Obedient Ally

WikiLeaks data shows how volatile nation is forced to act against own self interests

By ERIC MARGOLIS, QMI Agency

WASHINGTON – Release of 92,000 U.S. military field reports from Afghanistan by WikiLeaks has revealed the war’s ugly underbelly and embarrassed the hell out of Washington and its NATO allies, including Canada.

They have fired back, claiming release of these old reports from 2004-2009, endangers “our boys.”

Nonsense. The only thing the truth endangers are the politicians who have hung their hats on the Afghan War and some paid informers.

The facts are shocking: Wide-scale killing of civilians by U.S. and NATO forces; torture of prisoners handed over to the Communist-dominated Afghan secret police; death squads; endemic corruption and theft; double-dealing and demoralization of western occupation forces facing ever fiercer Taliban resistance.

I’ve been reporting on the lies and propaganda about the Afghan war since 2001.

The most interesting part of Wikigate was Pakistan’s supposedly duplicitous behaviour in aiding the U.S.-led war while maintaining secret links with the Taliban and its allies.

The U.S. government and media have been blasting Pakistan while downplaying the atrocities – and, charges WikiLeaks, “war crimes” – committed by western forces.

Here’s the bottom line on Pakistan’s “duplicity.”

After 9/11, the U.S. threatened to “bomb Pakistan back to the Stone Age” unless it turned against the Taliban, a religious, anti-Communist movement, and opened Pakistan to U.S. military forces and intelligence operations.

This was told to me by a former head of ISI, Pakistan’s intelligence service whose directors I have known since 1985.

Former Pakistani president Pervez Musharraf says his nation was forced to reluctantly give in to intense U.S. pressure and abandon the Taliban, which served as Pakistan’s proxy army in Afghanistan battling the still active Afghan Communist Party – Tajik Northern Alliance, also backed by Russia and Iran. Intensifying efforts by India to extend its influence into Afghanistan deeply worry Pakistan.

Pakistan was forced by the U.S. to act against its own vital strategic interests. Southern Afghanistan has long been Pakistan’s sphere of influence.

This column revealed that in 2007, Pakistan and India concluded that the U.S. and its dragooned allies would be defeated and driven from Afghanistan. Both old foes began implementing a proxy war to control strategic Afghanistan.

Pakistan was compelled to follow a dual-track policy: Accepting semi-occupation by the U.S. and $1 billion annually from Washington and paying lip service to the U.S.-led war, while keeping open links to Taliban and tribal militants.

This was basic common sense. No one should have been surprised – particularly not Washington which has a long record of abandoning faithful allies.

Washington and U.S. media are heaping blame for the growing fiasco in Afghanistan on Gen. Hamid Gul, former director general of the ISI intelligence agency.

Gul led the anti-Soviet struggle in Afghanistan in the 1980s and was one of America’s most formidable allies.

I knew Gul well. He is not anti-American. He is pro-Pakistan, a Pakistani patriot at a time when so many Pakistani politicians and generals have been bought like bags of Basmati rice.

Many of the false charges against Gul came from the Communist-led Afghan secret police.

What Washington really wants is a totally obedient, obsequious Pakistan, not a real ally.

But the interests of the two nations must at times diverge

Trying to make Pakistan into a satellite state will result in that vastly important, nuclear-armed nation one day exploding with anti-American hatred, as was the case in Iran in 1979.

The U.S.-led war in Afghanistan is putting the two nations on a collision course.

Here in Washington, the U.S. Congress just ignored the WikiLeaks scandal and voted for yet more billions to fuel the Afghanistan War.

Politicians are petrified to oppose this nine-year war, lest they be accused of being anti-patriotic, the kiss of death in hyper-patriotic America – where flag-wavers root for foreign wars so long as their kids don’t have to serve and they don’t have to pay taxes to finance them.

eric.margolis@sunmedia.ca

Dutch troops leave southern Afghanistan

By the CNN Wire Staff

Kabul, Afghanistan – More details about the Dutch withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan emerged on Monday.

The Netherlands became the first NATO ally to pull combat troops out of Afghanistan on Sunday as it handed over its mission in southern Afghanistan’s Uruzgan province to U.S. and Australian forces.

At the end of this year the Netherlands will have only 60 military personnel in Afghanistan, none in combat, Dutch Ministry of Defense spokeswoman Marloes Visser told CNN on Monday.

At the peak of their commitment, the Dutch had nearly 2,000 troops in Afghanistan. The bulk of that number, 1,500 personnel, were in Uruzgan, with 400 and 100 in Kandahar and Kabul, respectively.

Some staff units remain in Afghanistan, according to the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force, but the Air Task Force in Kandahar will pull out in December, emptying the country of Dutch troops. The remaining 60 personnel will work in the international headquarters in Kabul and Kandahar, Visser said.

The International Security Assistance Force-led multinational effort took over the Uruzgan mission Sunday. Combined Team-Uruzgan Commander, Colonel Jim Creighton, led a ceremony attended by acting governor for Uruzgan, Khodai Rahim Kahn, as well as ISAF and Afghan National Army personnel, according to an Australian Defence media release.

“The expansion of roads and bridges, the effectiveness of the Afghan National Security Forces, and enhanced security are examples of the improvements made by the hard work and efforts of Dutch and Australian personnel working with the Uruzgan leaders and people,” Creighton, who is from the United States, said.

More U.S. troops will have to enter the area to fill the void, he said.

“I am looking forward to building on the exceptional work that the Dutch and Australians have undertaken so far in Uruzgan.” Creighton said. Combined Team-Uruzgan includes around 1,800 US, Australian, Singaporean, Slovakian, New Zealand, and French personnel.

A 700-person task force will redeploy Dutch forces in Uruzgan Province back home, Visser said.

“The past four years brought the population of Uruzgan great improvements,” the Defense Ministry said in a statement Sunday. “Regrettably, the Netherlands is saddened by its 24 war casualties and 140 wounded.”

The Dutch government already had extended its mission by two years. NATO requested another extension as the United States and its allies beefed up forces at the end of 2009, but opposition to the proposal brought down Dutch Prime Minister Jan Peter Balkenende’s ruling coalition in February.

U.S. and NATO forces invaded Afghanistan in 2001 in retaliation for the al Qaeda attacks on New York and Washington that September. Allied and local forces quickly toppled the Taliban, the Islamic militia that ruled most of Afghanistan and allowed al Qaeda to operate within its territory.

But top Taliban and al Qaeda leaders escaped the invasion, and Taliban fighters regrouped along the rugged border between Afghanistan and Pakistan. The group is now battling both coalition forces in Afghanistan and Pakistan’s government.

Soldiers from the Afghan National Security Forces and Australian Special Forces killed Mullah Dawood, a Taliban insurgent leader in central Uruzgan, on July 14, according to an Australian Defence media release published Monday.

US military build-up in Kandahar will bolster Taliban, warns security monitor

Nato’s counterinsurgency tactic shows no signs of success, says Afghanistan NGO Security Office

Jon Boone in Kabul
guardian.co.uk

An Afghan security official inspects the scene of a suicide bomb attack in Kabul. Photograph: S. Sabawoon/EPA

The US military build-up in Kandahar is likely to further strengthen the hold of the Taliban over the vital southern Afghanistan city, a highly respected security organisation said today in a bleak report warning of record Taliban violence and rising civilian deaths across the country.

The report by the Afghanistan NGO Security Office, which monitors trends in violence on behalf of aid organisations, said Nato’s counter-insurgency strategy was not showing any signs of succeeding amid rising violence, the unchecked establishment of local militias and a huge increase in attacks on private development workers across the country.

It revealed that June marked a record for Taliban attacks – up 51% on the previous year to 1,319 operations.

At the same time the number of civilians killed by both sides of the conflict rose by 23%, despite the efforts of Nato forces to avoid killing innocent bystanders. The organisation also said attacks on private development organisations working on projects designed to win the support of ordinary Afghans had shot up, with more than 30 workers killed in the first three months of the year.

“We do not support the [counter-insurgency] perspective that this constitutes ‘things getting worse before they get better’, but rather see it as being consistent with the five-year trend of things just getting worse,” the report said.

The report was published days before the world’s foreign ministers gather in Kabul to discuss the international community’s future role in Afghanistan.

today a suicide bomber managed to evade Kabul’s new “ring of steel” – a series of police checkpoints designed to protect the city – and killed three civilians in a busy market. Local police said the bomber was on foot and it was not clear what his intended target was.

Nato said it had intercepted a letter from Taliban leader Mullah Omar which ordered fighters to kill any Afghans working for foreign forces. A huge number of local nationals are employed as interpreters and logistics workers.

In southern Afghanistan, insurgents staged a jailbreak by smuggling a bomb inside a prison, allowing 11 inmates to escape in the province of Farah.

In Kandahar a roadside bomb exploded near the city’s hospital, killing two police officers and a civilian. Nato also said that one of its soldiers from an unidentified country was killed by a roadside bomb.

With such bombings a near-daily occurrence in the south, the Anso report also reflected the grave doubts held by most Afghan experts that Nato’s concentration of force in southern Afghanistan can possibly work.

It said the effort to dislodge the Taliban from Marjah, a former Taliban stronghold in Helmand, had failed to deliver security to local people, allow refugees to return to their homes or given credibility to the local government.

It was sceptical that the next stage of the operation, in and around Kandahar, would be any better. It said the operation was “very unlikely to be the ‘breaking point’ of the Taliban”.

“It seems more likely to go the way of Operation Moshtarak, in Helmand, with lots of public ballyhoo around the actions of the IMF while the Afghan ‘partners’ discreetly pursue their own, often countervailing, agendas.”

It added that the military buildup in Kandahar, which will see fighting take place in districts surrounding the city in the autumn, “will cause a significant rise in support for the armed opposition in Kandahar and, with that, make eventual Taliban ascendency feasible”.

It also raised concerns about the increasing use of local people to defend their own villages – a strategy that David Petraeus, the US commander of Nato forces in the country, is strongly in favour of expanding.

There were already cases of the so-called “militias” causing the same problems as the 1963 South Vietnamese Self Defence Corps, including partnering with insurgents to steal from the local population, the report said.

On Saturday Mark Sedwill, Nato’s ambassador in Kabul, said the increase in violence this year had always been expected and it was a sign that the coalition was “taking the fight to the Taliban”.

Kandahar and “Counter-Insurgency-in-a-Box”

Amb. Marc Ginsberg
Former US Amb. to Morocco

This 4th of July weekend, war weary Americans are being force-fed more foreboding Afghan geography, just as they were force-fed Iraqi geography. “Marja,” “Helmund,” and now “Kandahar.”
These names of the Taliban’s birthplace and heartland mean little to most Americans, but everything to the thousands of U.S. soldiers deployed in southern Afghanistan, and their families back in the U.S. who know that the pending battle for Kandahar is shaping up to be the pivotal engagement in the war against….against….whom exactly? The Taliban? Al Qaeda? The Taliban that matter?

Many empires have fought over the centuries to control Kandahar — a city of 450,000 and Afghanistan’s second largest — due to its strategic location. It has also once served as the capital of the Afghan empire, and more recently, as the capital of the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan until the Taliban were routed from it after 9/11. But when America turned its back yet again on Afghanistan to invade Iraq, a good part of it was recaptured by the Taliban; and a small part was recaptured by Hamid Karzai’s corrupt warlord half brother, Ahmed Wali Karzai.

So why should Americans and their fellow NATO soldiers die for Kandahar? I frankly don’t know…since the dots just don’t seem, at least on paper or via media reports, to connect.

The cornerstone of General Petreaus’ military strategy comes down to this…to weaken the Taliban into a more defensive, negotiating posture, Americans will have to fight door-to-door in Kandahar to rid 4 of its 10 parishes of entrenched Taliban and in so doing win the hearts and minds of its inhabitants and turn them away from the Taliban — classic counter-insurgency surge doctrine…but not classic counter counter-terrorism doctrine. Then turn the city over to Hamid Karzai (who will inevitably turn it over to his corrupt half brother) to administer.

Gen. Petreaus testified this week before Congress that capturing Kandahar is pivotal to NATO’s strategy in Afghanistan. Sen. Carl Levin, the Chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee echoed that by stating that America’s support for the war in Afghanistan “…will depend on this Fall (i.e., NATO offensive) in Kandahar.”

I am not a general, and have no pretentions of becoming an arm-chair general. But the decision to pin a Petreaus — directed revised counter-insurgency strategy on the conquest of Kandahar — let alone the real-life cost of American lives and treasure – waves a red flag right in my face.

One need not wear a uniform to read a map….the Taliban’s real sanctuary lies not in Kandahar, but across the border in Pakistan, in the city of Quetta. How can NATO sufficiently weaken the Taliban if it can evaporate across the border once we invade Kandahar? And, we have been telegraphing to them for months of our intentions to invade.

General Petreaus is a visionary military strategist and a remarkably accomplished leader. I greatly admire him. In an increasingly grim situation in Afghanistan deferring to his military judgment is understandable. But even he is not superhuman and even he cannot change what lurks in the dark vestiges of Hamid Karzai’s heart.

Is it fair, therefore, to him and to our brave men and women to pin so much hope on a goal that even he has difficulty reducing to a believable elevator speech.

The Kandahar offensive is way behind schedule because the ingredients Petreaus needs to replicate his brilliantly executed Iraqi “take and hold” surge strategy are MIA , and it seems unlikely the ingredients will miraculously arrive by the Fall – like a cavalry relief column – to sustain any U.S.-led Kandahar battleground gains.

And what are some of those missing ingredients?

1. An adequately trained, capable Afghan army and police force to take over from NATO. This week, an Inspector General’s Report issued by the Pentagon exhorted the Defense Department for greatly exaggerating the real capability of Afghan troops and U.S. training results.
2. A leadership in Kabul that the inhabitants of Kandahar respect. As a test in Marja, NATO parachuted in a “government-in-a-box” to win the hearts and minds of its inhabitants. Today, as Gen. McChrystal stated, Marja is a “bleeding ulcer; ” and U.S. troops are under regular attack; the Taliban are slaughtering anyone who dares cooperate with NATO and by all accounts, there is nothing that resembles a sustainable Afghan government military or civilian presence.
3. A trustworthy cadre of local officials working transparently and tirelessly with NATO to protect supply lines instead of the corruption prone organized crime-like war lords on whom NATO is banking (and opening its bank) to protect supply lines. It is common knowledge that while Kandahar is mostly in Afghan government hands – the hands that it is in are dirty. Ahmed Karzai by ALL accounts, runs a city hall that makes Tammany Hall look like a nursery school. His small tribe — the Popalzai — are the source of his mafia-style militia.
4. A sustainable presence of allied NATO troops who will remain with us in and around Kandahar to help shoulder the American burden. Instead, Petreaus confronts the likelihood of a withdrawal of Dutch, Canadian and British troops just as the Fall offensive is about to commence, and responsibility will fall into the hands of 23 unregistered security companies who answer to their quartermaster, whoever that may be. Question: what do our allies know that we don’t know?
5. An ability to stop the Taliban’s assassination spree of local officials, foreign aid workers and tribal elders before there is no one left inside Kandahar who can help sustain the hard-fought NATO gains. Not a day goes by when reports seep out of Kandahar of how successful the Taliban’s own counter-U.S. insurgency campaign has been. In recent weeks, there has been report after report of beheadings, death threats, bombings and the like by the Taliban that is slowly ridding the city of anyone who can aid the surge from within. And there is growing local opposition to a military invasion among anti-Taliban elements inside and around Kandahar.
6. Most importantly, a way to choke off the Taliban’s access to its Pakistani sanctuaries. These sanctuaries inside Pakistan are like the oil spill: the source of a seemingly endless Taliban torrent that may undermine the best counter-insurgency strategy. Without a change of heart inside Pakistan against those sanctuaries, General Petreaus is about to wage a battle with two hands tied behind his back. That is no way to dispatch our best general to the battlefield.

If Gen. Petreaus is to convert a battlefield surge into a sustainable victory against the Taliban, it is increasingly unlikely that, under present conditions, Kandahar will yield even a modest return on investment.

The potentially insurmountable challenges NATO forces face before the gates of Kandahar are breached are shaping up to be a clarion call for compelling a major rethink whether Kandahar — as General Petreaus most important Afghan experiment for applying “counter-insurgency in-a-box” is the right target. Mr. President, General Petreaus, it is not too late if it means saving even one American life.

Afghan Aid on Hold as Corruption Is Probed

By PETER SPIEGEL in Washington and MATTHEW ROSENBERG in Kabul

The chairwoman of the House subcommittee responsible for foreign aid said she was stripping from pending legislation $3.9 billion in funding for Afghanistan following revelations that billions of dollars, including large amounts of U.S. aid funds, were flowing out of the country through Kabul’s main airport.

American soldiers near Kandahar carry a wounded comrade to a helicopter for evacuation on Monday. Combat operations have begun to escalate.

Rep. Nita Lowey (D., N.Y.) called the revelations “outrageous,” and Capitol Hill aides said she had the backing of Rep. David Obey (D., Wis.), the chairman of the full House Appropriations Committee.

“I do not intend to appropriate one more dime for assistance to Afghanistan until I have confidence that U.S. taxpayer money is not being abused to line the pockets of corrupt Afghan government officials, drug lords, and terrorists,” Ms. Lowey said.

At least $3.18 billion in cash has been flown out of Afghanistan since 2007 after being legally declared to customs officers, according to documents reported Monday in The Wall Street Journal.

U.S. State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley said Monday that the Afghan government has gradually improved its ability to monitor the flow of money in and out of the country, and that officials planned to explain to Ms. Lowey’s committee the improvements made by both Kabul and the U.S. to better account for aid money.

U.S. officials say they believe at least some of the cash is siphoned from Western aid projects and U.S., European and North Atlantic Treaty Organization contracts to provide security, supplies and reconstruction work for coalition forces in Afghanistan. NATO spent $14 billion in Afghanistan last year.

Profits reaped from the opium trade are also a part of the money flow, as is cash earned by the Taliban from drugs and extortion, officials say. Almost all the money is sent to Dubai, where wealthy Afghans have long parked their lawfully and unlawfully earned money.

Mr. Crowley said while some of the money leaving through the Kabul airport was likely from Afghanistan’s illicit drug trade, the State Department believed most was the product of Afghanistan’s growing economy and the need to move funds to a country with a better-functioning banking system, such as Dubai.

“I don’t think we have any evidence at this point that the money flowing out of Afghanistan is U.S. money,” Mr. Crowley said. “We think for the most part it’s the result of legitimate commerce.”

He added: “No one’s saying there’s not work to do, no one’s saying there isn’t some flow of illicit money leaving Afghanistan, but we think Afghanistan has made significant progress over the last several months.”

In Kabul, the Afghan government said its top anticorruption watchdog will launch an investigation into the allegations. The Journal’s article was discussed at an Afghan cabinet meeting Monday, and Afghanistan’s High Office of Oversight and Anti-Corruption plans to open an inquiry into who is carrying the money, where it comes from and why it is being shipped out of the country, said Waheed Omar, a spokesman for President Hamid Karzai.

A U.S. official familiar with the money flows said it was good the Afghan government was finally discussing the matter publicly, but that there was little reason to believe the investigation would yield major revelations, because those believed to be sending out money include relatives of Mr. Karzai, senior officials in his administration and large Afghan companies with ties to the presidential palace.

Ms. Lowey’s move, however, has the potential to be more problematic for the Obama administration, which is already facing significant questions about its Afghan strategy-particularly on issues of Afghan government corruption-from Democrats on Capitol Hill.

The House subcommittee is scheduled to debate the funding bill, which includes appropriations for the entire State Department and U.S. diplomatic operations, on Wednesday. Matt Dennis, a spokesman for Ms. Lowey, said the bill introduced for debate will now contain only humanitarian aid, which totals less than $100 million.

Ms. Lowey also said she would hold oversight hearings into the revelations after next week’s July 4 recess.

Of the approximately $4 billion the administration requested in Afghan aid, the vast majority, or about $3.3 billion, was in economic aid. The rest of the money that will be stripped from the bill was largely funding for drug interdiction and military exchange programs, Mr. Dennis said.

The Senate subcommittee responsible for foreign aid has yet to schedule a date for its deliberations, and the money could be put back in when the Senate and House bills are reconciled.

But the removal marks the latest in a series of moves on Capitol Hill, including increasingly vocal criticism of the war effort, that have begun to signal weakening political support for the conflict.

Afghan and U.S. officials say the sums legally leaving through Kabul’s airport could amount to about $3.65 billion a year, more than a quarter of Afghanistan’s $13.5 billion gross domestic product.

The money is being shipped through private money-transfer networks known as “hawalas,” which have been used for centuries across the Muslim world as a fast, cheap and legitimate way to transfer funds.

The murkiness of the money’s origins prompted U.S. officials to begin investigating the cash flow. A special U.S.-trained Afghan anticorruption unit under the Interior Ministry has also been investigating.

Separately, the Afghan parliament Monday confirmed Gen. Bismullah Khan, the former army chief of staff, as the country’s new interior minister overseeing law enforcement and police. The previous minister, Hanif Atmar, was fired this month by President Karzai amid disagreements over the country’s security policies.Four other ministers were approved, but two of Mr. Karzai’s nominees were rejected. They include the transport minister-designate, Daud Ali Najafi, who oversaw Afghanistan’s election commission during last year’s flawed presidential election.

Altogether, seven ministerial posts remain vacant. They have been open since parliament rejected most of President Karzai’s Cabinet picks in the wake of last year’s election.

Also still open is the top job at the country’s intelligence agency. Its previous occupant, Amrullah Saleh, was fired at the same time as Mr. Atmar.

-Maria Abi-Habib in Kabul
contributed to this article.

Write to Peter Spiegel at peter.spiegel@wsj.com and Matthew Rosenberg atmatthew.rosenberg@wsj.com

India likely to get role in Afghan military affairs

Sikander Shaheen

ISLAMABAD – The ongoing row between the NATO forces and allied European countries regarding provisions of training for Afghan National Army is paving way for Indian ‘legalised’ presence in Afghanistan.

According to the information received from top representatives of the UN Afghanistan, a special delegation on behalf of NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen landed in Kabul last week to discuss the situation with Afghan Government in the wake of reluctance of NATO’s European allies to cooperate any further in Afghanistan. Sources say that Indian diplomats were equally involved in these deliberations and the contractors of ‘private security sector,’ presumably the notorious Blackwater, were also present who are likely to be assigned a major role in Afghanistan’s military affairs in collusion with India. The award of lucrative $120 million to Blackwater in Afghanistan by the US Department of State is seen a pertinent move in this regard. The dwindling chances of training of Afghan forces by the European states are to blur further thus giving India all the needed justifications to ‘serve’ in Afghanistan.

The key European countries including the UK and Netherlands have refused to send further troops in Afghanistan. British Premier David Cameron announced earlier this month that the UK did not intend to amass any more British soldiers in Afghanistan while the political atmosphere in Netherlands ‘overcharged’ when the country’s coalition government collapsed last February following the reluctance of Dutch Parliament to give extension to Dutch troops in Afghanistan. Around 2500 Dutch soldiers are serving there, who are likely to pull out by the end of this year.

The only European country that committed to dispatch a ‘peanut’ amount of 80 trainers to Afghanistan in February this year was France. Still, it is not clear if the French trainers have landed in Afghanistan.

The target of International Security Assistance Force to train 134,000 and 171,600 troops of Afghan National Army by October 2010 and 2011 respectively seems to be a far-fetched notion. Likewise, training 80,000 Afghan policemen this year and those of over 100,000 in 2011, as decided in London Conference on Afghanistan, also sounds nothing more than a far cry.

Pertinent quarters say that at least 5000 to 7000 trainers are needed to train the Afghan National Army and Police but complete non-cooperation shown by Western European allies is adding to frustration for American camp.

With the pressure building on Pakistan to launch military offensive in North Waziristan, India is digging its ground to come out of its covert embryo and ‘ legally’ present itself in Afghanistan.

Afghan Taliban deny being supported by Pakistan

By BILL ROGGIO

The Taliban’s executive council has denied a recent report that stated the Pakistani military and government provides direct support to the Afghan group.

In a statement released on it website, the Voice of Jihad, the Afghan Taliban described a study released by the London School of Economics as “a merely baseless propaganda launched to promote British and American interests” and “a dictated drama of the political rulers of the West.”

The Taliban claimed that it is fighting the US and Afghan governments with the support of the people in Afghanistan and that it has no need for Pakistani support.

“The current Jihad and resistance against the invaders are being led by the leadership of the Islamic Emirate based inside Afghanistan – obviously with the help and support of the Afghan Mujahid people,” the statement read. “The enemy itself admits, the Islamic Emirate has control over 70% of the Afghan soil. The Islamic Emirate does not need to have such councils outside the country in order to continue the current popular resistance.”

The Afghan Taliban have long attempted to portray their movement as a localized, nationalist insurgency seeking only to restore the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan, led by Mullah Mohammed Omar, and they did so again in yesterday’s statement denying links to Pakistan. “The present resistance is completely an home-grown Afghan Islamic resistance against the aggression of the invaders,” the statement read.

The Taliban said that it wasn’t “rational” for the Pakistani government to back them as Pakistan has declared its support of the US and that “manifestations and impact of their support would have categorically become visible.” The Afghan Taliban offered no criticism of Pakistan or the Pakistani military, however, while repeatedly lashing out at the US, Britain, and NATO.

The London School of Economics report, titled “The Sun in the Sky: The Relationship between Pakistan’s ISI and Afghan Insurgents,” was released last weekend and created a stir as it accused the Pakistani military, Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) directorate, and even the Pakistani government itself of providing support across the spectrum for the Taliban.

“Interviews strongly suggest that support to the Afghan insurgency is official ISI policy,” the paper stated.”It appears to be carried out by both serving and former officers, who have considerable operational autonomy.”

The London School of Economics report even claimed that top political leaders, including Asif Ali Zardari, have met with detained Afghan Taliban leaders and promised to free them as soon as was politically expedient.

Direct Pakistani support for the Taliban has been an open secret for years. The Pakistani government, through the ISI, helped found the Taliban and helped it gain power during the 1990s. Pakistan was one of only three countries to recognize the Taliban as a legitimate government.

After the US ousted Mullah Omar from power in 2001 and 2002, the Taliban and al Qaeda regrouped in the Pakistani province of Baluchistan as well as in northwestern Pakistan. The Afghan Taliban teamed up with Pakistani Taliban factions and maintain safe havens and training camps in Pakistan to this day. The Quetta Shura, the Afghan Taliban’s executive council, is named after the Pakistani city where it is based. The ISI, through the Haqqani Network, is known to have directed suicide operations against the Indian Embassy and other targets in Kabul. Several Pakistani military officers have been detained inside Afghanistan in connection with terrorist attacks on Afghan soil, while numerous Afghan Taliban commanders have admitted to receiving support from the Pakistani military over the past several years.

Full text of the denial of Pakistani support by the Quetta Shura

A Study Team of the London School of Economics has claimed in a report that the intelligence agency of Pakistan has been supporting the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan militarily and logistically. It has claimed that Pakistani intelligence officials practically participate in meetings of the alleged Quetta Council and impose their discretions on members of the Leadership Council.

While considering this report of the London School of Economic as a merely baseless propaganda launched to promote British and American interests, the Islamic Emirate, meanwhile, declares its stand as follows:

1. The military power of the Evil Coalition including American, British and NATO forces have failed to prevent the victorious operations of the Mujahideen of the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan. Now they want to utilize their academic and research institutes in the work of the occupation of Afghanistan and for oppression of the Afghan Muslim people. The baseless report of the London School of Economics is a case in point. The Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan believes, the said report by the so-called research institute is a dictated drama of the political rulers of the West. It is not an investigative report based on facts and reasons, ethically carried out by academic research institute.

2. The current Jihad and resistance against the invaders are being led by the leadership of the Islamic Emirate based inside Afghanistan – obviously with the help and support of the Afghan Mujahid people. The enemy itself admits, the Islamic Emirate has control over 70% of the Afghan soil. The Islamic Emirate does not need to have such councils outside the country in order to continue the current popular resistance.

3. The Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan has always emphasized that the present resistance is completely an home-grown Afghan Islamic resistance against the aggression of the invaders. It is not possible to lead such resistance simply by foreign support instead of the native support of the Afghan masses. Had a foreign support rather than indigenous support , ever played a role in such cases, then the surrogate administration of Karzai has military, espionage, economic and political support of 49 countries, why it has failed to prevent the growing national resistance of the Afghan Mujahid nation despite the support of the foreign invaders that the Administration enjoys?

4. Rulers of the government of Pakistan claim that they are the frontline pioneers of the American ignited war. They have not spared to do whatever was in their capacity to do. Hence, it is not rationale to say that they are supporting the jihad and resistance against the Americans in Afghanistan. Had Pakistan supported the Mujahideen, then manifestations and impact of their support would have categorically become visible.

5. The Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan openly invites all academic and research institutes, military and intelligence entities of the world including the London School of Economics to come to Afghanistan and behold the ranks of the Islamic Emirate with their own eyes that whether the Afghan gallant people or any foreigner make up the Mujahideen and leaders of the Jihad. Then again, they should check the ranks of the Karzai stooge administration to see whether their leaders are the gallant Afghans or the open enemies of our country and the invaders. After that, they should put, their academic and investigative report conducted on the basis of the ground realities, at the disposal of the public of the world. Had they done so, these academic institutes would have abided by their recognized norms and principles; would have saved their caliber and reputations, and produced useful academic report. At least, it would not have been a fabricated drama, ironically ordered by the arrogant powers.

6. To end, the Islamic Emirate calls on all independent countries of the world, particularly, the neighboring countries to extend their support to the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan to put an end to the occupation of the arrogants so that our oppressed and suffering countrymen can get rid of the occupation of the tyrants and form an independent system.

Leadership Council

Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan.

Uzbekistan blocking NATO supplies for Afghan war: Tajikistan

Dushanbe (AFP)

The Central Asian country of Uzbekistan is blocking hundreds of train carriages of supplies for NATO operations in Afghanistan, a railway official in neighbouring Tajikistan said Tuesday.

“Without any reason, Uzbekistan is delaying on its territory hundreds of trucks with cargoes intended for the anti-terrorist coalition in Afghanistan,” said Usmon Kalandarov, deputy head of Tajik state railways.

Shahzad acted alone; no Taliban signature on his bomb attempt: says UN envoy Hussain Haroon

APP

NEW YORK: Pakistan’s U.N. Ambassador Abdullah Hussain Haroon has called Faisal Shahzad, the suspect in the Times Square bomb attempt, a “misguided soul” who had acted alone, and he disagreed with Obama administration officials’ claim that the accused was trained by the Pakistani Taliban.In an interview on CBS television on Monday, he said that General David Petraeus, the U.S. commander in Afghanistan, “had it right that this was the act of a lone man.” Petraeus stated (prior to the administration’s claims Sunday) that Shahzad, the 30-year -old US citizen of Pakistani descent, operated as a “lone wolf” who did not work with other terrorists.

But senior White House officials said Sunday that the Pakistani Taliban backed the failed Times Square bombing. On CBS’ “Face the Nation,” U.S. Presidential adviser John Brennan accused Shahzad of working with a Pakistani Taliban group closely allied with al Qaeda.

Although Ambassador Haroon said that the Obama administration may have other evidence, he said, “All I am saying is that the evidence I have points in one direction: It does not have its signature of the Taliban.”

Indio-Semite Nexus & Saudi Arabia

EVEN AMERICA IS WARRY OF INDO-SEMITE NEXUS

Zaheerul Hassan

India and Saudi Arabia has signed extradition treaty and number of other pacts to enhance cooperation in various sectors, like economy, energy and defence in recent visit of Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh to India. According to the Hindu media, leaders of both the countries also emphasized for long-term strategic relations between two states. It is also a known fact that Saudi Arabian king in one to one meeting with Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh has shown concern over the regional and global adverse security environment and urged him to resolve bilateral issues with Pakistan. India never liked Saudi interference on occupied Kashmir issue and always tried to tone down the conflicts in negotiations with Saudi leadership. Indo-Israel growing ties are also alarming for the Arabs and other non-Arab Muslim leadership.

Arab world including Saudi’s leadership must be well aware of the facts that India has provided bases to Israel to strike Iran and Syria. India is seeking cooperation from Israel in aerospace industries and at the same time to meet her local crude oil energy requirements approached Saudi Arabia. It is also notable here that she also recently went into arms deal with Israel purchasing over $ 200 million arms and naval crafts with a view to strengthen armed forces as one feature of her per-planned hegemonic design. Saudi rulers should be mindful to the increasing influence of Israel in central Asian region. As per Israel’s greater design, Madina (Muslim Holy City) falls in the jurisdiction of future Israeli state.

Singling out Muslims

By Abbas Raza

Recently a six-member entourage consisting of both senators and MNAs from FATA was on a 15-day official visit to the United States arranged by the State Department, as a part of an exchange programme intended to show the skeptical Pakistanis that America is their real ally. During their visit, the lawmakers were asked to submit to a secondary screening before boarding a flight to New Orleans at Ronald Reagan National Airport. The parliamentarians reacted strongly as they had been assured by the US embassy at Islamabad that they would not be subjected to a body scan. They preferred to return to Pakistan.

The body scan under the US Anti-Terrorism Act sends a very worrying signal about how unfairly the terrorism laws are applied to the Muslims. The western societies, being the campaigners of liberal values and open societies, believe that everyone has the right to be treated equally and fairly, with dignity and respect. But, the Homeland Security has jeopardised the trust and confidence the western culture has built over the centuries.