Showing posts with label drug violence. Show all posts
Showing posts with label drug violence. Show all posts

Jan 7, 2011

Soldier Suffering from PTSD Threatened with Redeployment



Soldier Suffering from PTSD Threatened with Redeployment
January 6, 2010

(FORT CAMPBELL, KY.Less than two months after surrendering himself at Fort Campbell from AWOL status, Army Spc. Jeff Hanks awaits imminent redeployment to Afghanistan without having received treatment for war wounds.

Hanks, who has served in both Iraq and Afghanistan, returned to the U.S. on leave this past September suffering from symptoms of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder and likely Traumatic Brain Injury. He sought treatment on two military bases before refusing to redeploy and going Absent Without Official Leave in order to get civilian medical attention.

Hanks has demanded that the Army respect his right to heal. With the help of the Operation Recovery campaign [http://www.ivaw.org/operation-recovery], he turned himself in to Fort Campbell on Veterans Day, ready to face the consequences but demanding treatment. Since then, he has been juggled between a series of military counselors who have provided no diagnoses, and proposals for long-term treatment have been denied by his commanders.

This week, Jeff Hanks’ commanders informed him he was scheduled to redeploy to Afghanistan on January 9. The Army's mandatory pre-deployment mental health screenings denied Hank's PTSD, contradicting positive diagnoses by three separate civilian therapists he received while AWOL. Results of an MRI test yesterday will not be available until after he is in Afghanistan. Like many soldiers have reported lately, the Army behavioral health specialist who screened Hanks suggested he seek treatment while deployed in Afghanistan.

“Four different mental health providers have diagnosed Jeff with PTSD, have advised treatment, and he has been denied treatment every single time. I am very worried about him,” says Johanna Buwalda, a licensed clinical counselor who counsels war veterans and has worked directly with Hanks since October. “Our soldiers deserve the right to heal.”

Hanks’ lawyer reports that Jeff’s situation remains tenuous but all signs point to orders to redeploy. For now, it is unclear how Jeff will react if officially ordered to redeploy, but he continues to stress his demands for adequate treatment before redeployment.

******
Operation Recovery is a national effort led by Iraq and Afghanistan veterans to stop the deployment of traumatized troops and the abuse of troops’ right to heal. For more information, go to: http://www.ivaw.org/operation-recovery.

Oct 27, 2010

Funding Pakistan's Jihad Against the West

Funding Pakistan’s Jihad

By Ali K Chishti

Karachi. While it may be true that over the years the militants have developed a vast and effective network for raising funds by taking as much as a rupee from a poor man to millions from the rich, donations are pouring in for jihad from every segment of society

All the commitment and fanaticism notwithstanding, terrorist operations cannot be run without funds. Funds for jihad are required for procuring weapons, financing training camps, providing logistical support, compensating the families of jihadis, paying instructors and also the wide networks of agents and running recruitment offices.

During the Afghan war, western governments were a major source of funding and weapons for the groups engaged in taking on the Soviet occupation army in Afghanistan. Much of these funds came from covert accounts of the states funding the Afghans. Islamic countries also poured in billions of dollars into the coffers of the jihadi groups. While the role of Saudi Arabia has been limited to the provision of funds to the Islamist and jihadi organisations, the Kingdom, to this day, is the biggest source of official and private funding to Islamist and jihadist organisations in Pakistan, and it is to their credit that certain Deobandi and Ahle-Hadith extremist organisations became so powerful with the growth in their size.

One also has to see the Saudi financial support to Deobandi organisations in the context of the rivalry between Saudi Arabia and Iran post the Iranian revolution where both these countries had supported militant sectarian organisations to organise attacks and counter-attacks on each other’s sects and fought a proxy war inside Pakistan.

So open was Saudi support to Sipah-e-Sahaba (now the Lashkar-e-Jhangvi and Jundullah) that the Saudi government, in 2000, gave out Rs 17 million to fund hardcore militant madrassas in Jhang alone. Another Saudi charity, called the International Islamic Relief Organisation (IIRO), is an affiliate of the Saudi welfare organisation, Rabita Alam-e-Islami, which in turn helped to set up the Rabita Trust in Pakistan that was banned after 9/11 because of a strong bin Laden connection. The most interesting aspect of the Trust was that its chairman was none other than General Pervez Musharraf, the chief of army staff. To save embarrassment to a close ally, a state department official said, “We do not think the prominent people who have their names on it were aware of the infiltration.”

In fact, so murky is the source of funds coming from Saudi Arabia that the leader of Harkat-ul-Mujahideen, Maulana Fazlur Rahman Khalil said, “The US had instructed, through Rabita Alam-e-Islami that we should initiate jihad in the Chinese province of Xinjiang, to which I replied that we have grown up now. We do not do jihad at your bidding.”

Lashkar-e-Tayyaba’s (LeT’s) parent organisation, the Dawat wal Irshad, initially also attracted the sympathy of certain Arab donors interested in purifying Islam in the subcontinent, which is considered to have been tainted by the influence of Hinduism. In fact, one such Saudi donor, Abu Abdul Aziz, who invested millions of dollars on LeT, LeJ and various jihadi organisations, even donated Rs 10 million to make a mosque at Markaz-e-Dawa’s headquarters.

And while it may be true that over the years the militants have developed a vast and effective network for raising funds by taking as much as a rupee from a poor man to millions from the rich, donations are pouring in for jihad from every segment of society. And while many jihadi organisations collect sacrificial hides to raise funds, many have started raising their capital from publishing magazines to even the property business, and now, as a jihadi told me sheepishly, “the national disaster business”. In a report published by the Aga Khan Development Network in 1998, approximately 50 percent of Pakistanis gave an estimated amount of Rs 770 billion in money, goods and time, of which 90 percent of the surveyed donors cited religious faith as the motivation for giving.

If all this foreign and local funding were not enough, the Pakistani government gives out an estimated Rs 20-35 billion in grants to madrassas and jihadi movements indirectly from government resources like zakat or iqra funds. Another funding source after the crackdown on Saudi sources and tighter monetary controls is the Afghan Transit Trade, which is a cash cow for jihadis and certain rogue establishment actors who exploit the trade for procuring weapons and narcotics smuggling, earning millions of dollars to be funnelled into proxy wars from Afghanistan to Pakistan. There was a reason why the Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) offered $ 10 million to replace American aid. The hundi trade is another source that is ‘welcomed’ by the State Bank of Pakistan, as it has, over the years, been buying billions of dollars to shore up its balance of payment positions. The hundi trade helps launder money for jihadis but in the land of the pure, jihad is used as a weapon to further our so-called strategic plans.

Even after 9/11, much of what is happening inside the tribal belt is a bit of a charade. In fact, what earlier used to be taking place openly has now been pushed behind the curtain, otherwise it is business as usual. Every time the Americans start getting impatient, the Pakistanis make a show of launching an operation in the tribal belt. There are arrests of Afghan and Arab jihadis or the killings of certain individuals until everything returns to normal. One big reason why our own Pakistani government will never really close the funding source and cut the roots of jihadis is because doing so would have a direct impact on the various jihads it is involved with to suit certain foreign policy goals. Moreover, by shutting down these rackets, the Pakistani state will lose an important leverage over deciding affairs inside Afghanistan. Often, the Pakistani state has used smuggling as a carrot for the various Afghan warlords and agents, and in return has managed to get them to do Pakistan’s bidding inside Afghanistan. This currency of power will be lost if Pakistan were to curb the illegal rackets. But, in the process of taking action on this trade, what will happen is that the Pakistani state will try to regain total and complete control over this trade, something it was gradually losing out on with the increasing privatisation of jihad.

===========
The writer is a political analyst. He can be reached at akchishti@hotmail.com

Aug 20, 2010

OIF-OEF Class Action PTSD Lawsuit Extension


JUDGE EXTENDS DEADLINE TO JOIN CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT BY THREE MONTHS FOR OEF/OIF VETS WITH PTSD WHO WERE SHORTCHANGED ON BENEFITSVeterans’ advocates win extension through November 10, 2010 for Sabo v. United States
NVLSP calls on friends and families of OEF/OIF vets to encourage class members to “opt-in”

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE August 16, 2010

WASHINGTON— Veterans discharged from military service due to post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) between December 17, 2002 and October 14, 2008 and shortchanged on their military benefits have three additional months to join a class action lawsuit, thanks to a critical deadline extension.

Last Thursday, Judge George W. Miller of the U.S. Court of Federal Claims signed an order giving eligible veterans – almost all of whom served in Iraq or Afghanistan -- until November 10, 2010 to join (or “opt-in to”) Sabo v. United States, a class action lawsuit brought in December 2008 by the National Veterans Legal Services Program (NVLSP) and pro-bono counsel Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP.

As a result of an agreement reached with the military services, veterans who join the lawsuit are guaranteed a disability rating upgrade and expedited records review, which can potentially lead to additional financial benefits and improved healthcare for veterans and their families.

Approximately, 42 percent, or 1,835 veterans, signed and sent in “Opt-in Forms” before the original July 24, 2010 deadline, making them class members in the lawsuit. At least 2,623 other veterans are eligible to join the lawsuit and become class members.

Class notices were mailed to 4,400 Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom veterans in January 2010. However, many notices were returned as undeliverable by the post office.

Using government sources and public records research, NVLSP staff attorneys called more than 600 eligible veterans as the July 24 deadline approached. They found that many veterans did not understand the legal notice they received in the mail, or never received it.

“More than a third of the eligible veterans are severely disabled, with VA disability ratings for PTSD of 70 to 100 percent,” said Bart Stichman, co-executive director of the NVLSP. “It’s not easy for them to understand the legal notice and what are the advantages of joining the lawsuit, even though they stand to potentially gain significant lifetime financial and healthcare benefits for themselves and their families.”

Stichman says NVLSP plans to continue calling eligible veterans over the next three months, but is also asking families and friends of eligible veterans to get involved and talk with the veterans.

“Anyone who knows an Iraq or Afghanistan veteran discharged between December 17, 2002and October 14, 2008 because of PTSD should ask if he or she has received a legal notice and opted into this lawsuit,” said Stichman. “These veterans and their families were treated unjustly and denied the benefits to which they were entitled. This is about getting them the lifetime military benefits that they have earned and deserve. More information is available at www.ptsdlawsuit.com.”

Eligible veterans who join the lawsuit are entitled to review of their PTSD disability rating by the military on a priority basis, a guaranteed correction of military records to show a higher military disability rating for PTSD for the six-month period following the date of release from military service, as well as a determination of whether the new rating should be permanently increased, decreased, or remain the same after the six-month period.

The correction of military records will not change the disability ratings that the veteran may have from the VA and no eligible veteran who opts into the lawsuit will risk losing any other military or VA benefits that he or she is already receiving. Nearly all class members who have already gone through the prioritized review with the military have received higher disability ratings and better benefits.

As a result of an increase in their military rating for PTSD, class members may receive back pay of disability benefits, reimbursement for healthcare expenses the military should have covered, as well as a higher amount of future benefits to which they and their families are entitled—potentially millions of dollars in benefits over time.

One hundred volunteer lawyers stand ready to offer free counseling to all class members. The lawyers for the veterans from NVLSP and Morgan, Lewis and Bockius LLP are donating their services for free. The lawyers involved say their payment is knowing an injustice is being righted for those who have served our country.

The disability ratings which are the subject of the lawsuit are critically important to ensuring veterans receive the benefits which they have earned and deserve. For years, the law has required the military to assign a disability rating of at least 50 percent to all veterans discharged for PTSD. A permanent disability rating of 30 percent or more entitles a veteran to monthly disability benefits for the rest of the veteran’s life, to free lifetime health care for the veteran and his or her spouse, and to free health care for their minor children.

All of the veterans who qualify as class members for this lawsuit were illegally discharged from the military with military disability ratings for PTSD of less than 50 percent. After they were discharged, many of them obtained a higher disability rating for PTSD from the VA, but the lawsuit is aimed at getting these veterans a higher military disability rating and with enhanced military disability benefits that accompany a higher military disability rating.

WHO CAN BE A CLASS MEMBER IN THIS CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT?All individuals who:
(a) served on active duty in the U.S. Army, Navy, Marine Corps, or Air Force,
(b) were found by a Physical Evaluation Board to be unfit for continued service due, at least in part, to the individual’s PTSD,
(c) were assigned a disability rating for PTSD of less than 50 percent, and, as a result,
(d) were released, separated, retired, or discharged from active duty after December 17, 2002, and prior to October 14, 2008 (regardless of whether such release, separation, retirement, or discharge resulted in the individual’s placement on the Temporary Disability Retirement List).

VETERANS WITH QUESTIONS ABOUT THE LAWSUIT

Veterans who have not received the legal notice, but who believe they may qualify as a class member, should go to www.ptsdlawsuit.com or call 877-345-8387 for more information.
======================
ABOUT NVLSP
The National Veterans Legal Services Program (NVLSP) is an independent, nonprofit veteran service organization that has served active duty military personnel and veterans since 1980. NVLSP strives to ensure that our nation honors its commitment to its 25 million veterans and active duty personnel by providing them the federal benefits they have earned through their service to our country. NVSLP offers training for attorneys and other advocates, connects veterans and active duty personnel with pro bono legal help, publishes the nation’s definitive guide on veterans’ benefits, and represents and litigates for veterans and their families before the VA, military discharge review agencies, and federal courts. For more information go to www.nvlsp.org.



ABOUT MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP

Morgan Lewis provides comprehensive transactional, litigation, labor and employment, and intellectual property legal services to clients of all sizes—from global Fortune 100 companies to just-conceived startups—across all major industries. Its international team of attorneys, patent agents, employee benefits advisors, regulatory scientists, and other specialists—nearly 3,000 professionals total—serves clients from 23 offices in the United States, Europe, and Asia. For more information about Morgan Lewis or its practices, please visit: www.morganlewis.com.



###

Apr 23, 2010

Quantico Conference: Afghanistan-the Way Ahead


Building Up Afghan Capacity Seen as Key Challenge
By REUTERS
April 22, 2010

QUANTICO, Virginia (Reuters) - When U.S. forces went in to clear the Taliban stronghold of Marjah in February, the hope was that local Afghan government could step in fast, but that has proved tough and underscores a countrywide challenge.
At a conference at the Marine Corps University in Quantico, Virginia, U.S. and Afghan officials listed dozens of obstacles in building up "Afghan capacity" and boosting credibility of a government seen by many as inefficient and corrupt.
The Afghan government's past inability to deliver services and provide basic security in areas where the Taliban has been pushed out is seen as an important threat to the Obama administration's counterinsurgency strategy. ''

In many districts, more than half of government jobs were still vacant as officials faced constant security threats and more educated candidates chose safer, more lucrative private sector work, said Jilani Popal, head of the Afghan agency seeking to boost government effectiveness.

"There is an urgent need for an improvement of the human resource situation in the provinces," Popal, director of the Independent Directorate of Local Government in Afghanistan, told Marines and officials at Wednesday's symposium.

In an extreme example, he said, only five out of 75 positions were filled in one district late last year, six provinces still did not have buildings for governors and others had no power.

In addition, Taliban have targeted local officials -- as they did on Tuesday when a deputy mayor in Kandahar was killed after gunmen burst into a mosque while he was praying.

"We have a lot of difficult days ahead of us, especially in terms of the issues of governance," said Brigadier General John Nicholson, head of the Pakistan-Afghanistan Coordination Cell at the Pentagon.

Another problem weighing on confidence in local government was the performance of the police force which U.S. and other allies are trying to boost in order to secure areas where the Taliban are being cleared out.
Nicholson said of an estimated 102,000 police in the country's force, only about 30 percent were trained.

"We have a fielded force out there carrying guns that are completely untrained -- the majority of them," he said. "We are just getting out of the starting gates. We are years behind."

AFGHAN ARMY

Retired Colonel Jeff Haynes, who was deployed to Afghanistan in 2008 and is now doing research and analysis there, said the Afghan Army also needed to step up and be given a stronger leadership role.

He said there was often cronyism and it was hard to punish or reward people in that environment, adding that corrupt officers should be removed.

"These guys are smart, they are clever people, they can do more and they are playing us. We need to stand up to that," Haynes said.
The State Department's top civilian representative in southern Afghanistan, Frank Ruggiero, said the United States was working hard to create a "connection" between the people of Afghanistan and their government.

In the former Taliban stronghold of Marjah, the U.S. government prepared what it dubbed a "government in a box" to extend the reach of central government to the southern town.

However, that has been tough going, and Ruggiero said freedom of movement was difficult to establish in Marjah. The route into the area was still "relatively insecure" and government capacity was slowly being built up.

Asked what lessons had been learned from Marjah before an expected major push in neighbouring Kandahar province this summer, he said there was a need to better prioritize which officials were needed fast and to ensure they were trained in time.
"If you are going to clear the area, you need to work out what the services are you need to provide soon thereafter clearing, so that those people are trained, hired and ready to go," Ruggiero said.

The blame for poor governance could also be shared among allies and donors who had not focussed enough on this during the eight-year war, several speakers at the conference said.

Grant Kippen, who chaired the electoral complaints commission for the flawed election in Afghanistan last year, said there had been a giant lack of voter education from the officials taking part to those who voted.
"I think a huge effort needs to go into educating public servants at all levels," he said.

Mar 16, 2010

Army gives up Bayonets - M16's next??


Army training: Bayonets out, ‘ab blasters’ in
Five-mile runs also nixed in first changes to regimen in 30 years

The Associated Press
updated 12:00 p.m. ET, Tues., March. 16, 2010

FORT JACKSON, S.C. - At 5 a.m. on the Army's largest training base, soldiers grunt through the kinds of stretches, body twists and bent-leg raises that might be seen in an "ab blaster" class at a suburban gym.

Adapting to battlefield experience in Afghanistan and Iraq, the Army is revamping its basic training regimen for the first time in three decades by nixing five-mile runs and bayonet drills in favor of zigzag sprints and honing core muscles.

Trainers hope the switch will better prepare soldiers physically for the pace of combat, with its sudden dashes and rolling gun battles.

They also want to toughen recruits who are often more familiar with Facebook than fistfights.

The exercises are part of the first major overhaul in Army basic fitness training since men and women began training together in 1980, said Frank Palhoska, head of the Army's Fitness School at Fort Jackson, which has worked several years on overhauling the service's fitness regime.

'Training warriors'

The new plan is being expanded this month at the Army's four other basic training installations — Fort Leonard Wood, Mo., Fort Sill, Okla., Fort Benning, Ga., and Fort Knox, Ky.

"We don't run five miles in combat, but you run across the street every day," Palhoska said, adding, "I'm not training long-distance runners. I'm training warriors" who must shuttle back and forth across a back alley.

Drill sergeants with combat experience in the current wars are credited with urging the Army to change training, in particular to build up core muscle strength to walk patrols with heavy packs and body armor or to haul a buddy out of a burning vehicle.

One of those experienced drill sergeants is 1st Sgt. Michael Todd, a veteran of seven deployments to Iraq and Afghanistan.

On a recent training day Todd was spinning recruits around to give them the feel of rolling out of a tumbled Humvee. Then he tossed on the ground pugil sticks made of plastic pipe and foam, forcing trainees to crawl for their weapons before they pounded away on each other.

"They have to understand hand-to-hand combat, to use something other than their weapon, a piece of wood, a knife, anything they can pick up," Todd said.

The new training also uses "more calisthenics to build core body power, strength and agility," Palhoska said in an office bedecked with 60-year-old black and white photos of World War II-era mass exercise drills.

'A more obese, sedentary generation'

Over the 10 weeks of basic, a strict schedule of exercises is done on a varied sequence of days so muscles rest, recover and strengthen.

Another aim is to toughen recruits from a more obese and sedentary generation, trainers said. Many recruits didn't have physical education in elementary, middle or high school and therefore tend to lack bone and muscle strength.

When they ditch diets replete with soda and fast food for healthier meals and physical training, they drop excess weight and build stronger muscles and denser bones, Palhoska said.

Lt. Gen. Mark Hertling of the Army's Training and Doctrine Command, the three-star general in charge of revamping all aspects initial training, said his overall goal is to drop outmoded drills and focus on what soldiers need today and in the future.

Bayonet drills had continued for decades, even though soldiers no longer carry the blades on their automatic rifles. Hertling ordered the drills dropped.

"We have to make the training relevant to the conditions on the modern battlefield," Hertling said during a visit to Fort Jackson in January.

The general said the current generation has computer skills and a knowledge base vital to a modern fighting force. He foresees soldiers using specially equipped cell phones to retrieve information on the battlefield to help repair a truck or carry out an emergency lifesaving medical technique.

But they need to learn how to fight.
"Most of these soldiers have never been in a fistfight or any kind of a physical confrontation. They are stunned when they get smacked in the face," said Capt. Scott Sewell, overseeing almost 190 trainees in their third week of training. "We are trying to get them to act, to think like warriors."

For hours, Sewell and his drill sergeants urge on helmeted trainees as they whale away at each other with pugil sticks, landing head and body blows until one falls flat on the ground. As a victor slams away at his flattened foe, a drill sergeant whistles the fight to a halt.

"This is the funnest day I've had since I've been here!" said 21-year-old Pvt. Brendon Rhyne, of Rutherford County, N.C., after being beaten to the ground. "It makes you physically tough. Builds you up on the insides mentally, too."

The Marine Corps is also applying war lessons to its physical training, adopting a new combat fitness test that replicates the rigor of combat.

The test, which is required once a year, has Marines running sprints, lifting 30-pound ammunition cans over their heads for a couple of minutes and completing a 300-yard obstacle course that includes carrying a mock wounded Marine and throwing a mock grenade.

Capt. Kenny Fleming, a 10-year-Army veteran looking after a group of Fort Jackson trainees, said men and women learn exercises that prepare them to do something on the battlefield such as throw a grenade, or lunge and pick a buddy off the ground.

Experience in Iraq has shown that women need the same skills because they come under fire, too, even if they are formally barred from combat roles. Fleming said those who had some sort of sports in high school can easily pick up on the training, while those who didn't have to be brought along.

One hefty soldier in a recent company he trained dropped 45 pounds and learned to blast out 100 push-ups and 70 sit-ups, he said.

"We just have to take the soldier who's used to sitting on the couch playing video games and get them out there to do it," Fleming said.

Jan 21, 2010

Taliban trying to woo, not kill, the locals


Taliban Overhaul Their Image In Bid To Win Allies
By Alissa J. Rubin
New York Times
January 21, 2010

KABUL, Afghanistan — The Taliban have embarked on a sophisticated information war, using modern media tools as well as some old-fashioned ones, to soften their image and win favor with local Afghans as they try to counter the Americans’ new campaign to win Afghan hearts and minds.

The Taliban’s spiritual leader, Mullah Muhammad Omar, issued a lengthy directive late last spring outlining a new code of conduct for the Taliban. The dictates include bans on suicide bombings against civilians, burning down schools, or cutting off ears, lips and tongues.

The code, which has been spottily enforced, does not necessarily mean a gentler insurgency. Although the Taliban warned some civilians away before the assault on the heart of Kabul on Monday, they were still responsible for three-quarters of civilian casualties last year, according to the United Nations.

Now, as the Taliban deepen their presence in more of Afghanistan, they are in greater need of popular support and are recasting themselves increasingly as a local liberation movement, independent of Al Qaeda, capitalizing on the mounting frustration of Afghans with their own government and the presence of foreign troops. The effect has been to make them a more potent insurgency, some NATO officials said.
Afghan villagers and some NATO officials added that the code had begun to change the way some midlevel Taliban commanders and their followers behaved on the ground. A couple of the most brutal commanders have even been removed by Mullah Omar.

The Taliban’s public relations operation is also increasingly efficient at putting out its message and often works faster than NATO’s. “The Afghan adaptation to counterinsurgency makes them much more dangerous,” said a senior NATO intelligence official here. “Their overarching goals probably haven’t changed much since 2001, but when we arrived with a new counterinsurgency strategy, they responded with one of their own.”

The American strategy includes limiting airstrikes that killed Afghan civilians and concentrating troops closer to population centers so that Afghans will feel protected from the Taliban.

American and Afghan analysts see the Taliban’s effort as part of a broad initiative that employs every tool they can muster, including the Internet technology they once denounced as un-Islamic. Now they use word of mouth, messages to cellphones and Internet videos to get their message out.

The Taliban can shape the narrative about attacks sometimes before NATO public affairs even puts out a statement. Unlike the NATO press machine, the Taliban are willing to give details, and while some are patently exaggerated or wrong, others have just enough elements of truth that they cannot be entirely ignored.

The new public relations campaign combined with relatively less cruel behavior may have stemmed some of the anger at the insurgency, which tribal leaders in the south said had begun to rally people against the Taliban.

But the most important factor in their growing reach is the ineffectiveness of the central government and Afghans’ resentment of foreign troops. Military intelligence analysts now estimate that there are 25,000 to 30,000 committed Taliban fighters and perhaps as many as 500,000 others who would fight either for pay or if they felt attacked by the Western coalition.


Admiral Smith and others say that according to a recent Defense Intelligence Agency survey, the Taliban’s new strategy has failed to win over Afghans and that even though the insurgency may be carrying out fewer mutilations and beheadings, it still relies on intimidation through night letters, threatening conversations and even assassinations.

Interviews with tribal elders in areas where the Taliban are active suggest a complex picture. Several interviewed in rural Kandahar Province praised the Taliban’s new, less threatening approach, but said that did not translate into enthusiasm for the Taliban movement. At the same time, there is not much liking for either the Afghan government or NATO troops.

“There is a tremendous change in the Taliban’s behavior,” said Haji-Khan Muhammad Khan, a tribal elder from Shawalikot, a rural district of Kandahar Province. “They don’t behead people or detain those they suspect of spying without an investigation. But sometimes they still make mistakes, people still fear them, but now generally they behave well with people. They had to change because the leadership of the Taliban did not want to lose the support of the grass roots.”

The latest refrain of Taliban commanders, their Internet magazine and from surrogates is that the insurgency represents Afghanistan’s Pashtuns, who are portrayed as persecuted by the Afghan government. “Pashtuns are suffering everywhere; if you go and check the prisons, you won’t find any prisoners except Pashtuns; when you hear about bombings, it is Pashtuns’ homes that have been bombed,” said a Taliban commander from Kandahar Province who goes by the name Sangar Yar.

At the moment, the dueling propaganda wars seem to have reached a stalemate.

“People have no choices; they are in a dilemma,” said Abdul Rahman, a tribal elder and businessman in Kandahar. “In places where the Taliban are active, the people are compelled to support them, they are afraid of the Taliban. And, in those places where government has a presence, the people are supporting the government,” he said.

Taimoor Shah contributed reporting from Kandahar.

Jan 19, 2010

Sending in the Marines


Sending In The Marines

New York Post
January 19, 2010

The massive Haitian earthquake has prompted a huge humanitarian response. Now Haitians can only pray that the world -- America, in particular -- makes sure the aid reaches those who need it.

As usual, leave it to the Marines.

Sure, Venezuela's crackpot strongman, Hugo Chavez, accuses the thousands of US troops sent to help victims of actually "occupying" Haiti.

America is dispatching "Marines armed as if they were going to war," fumed El Loco. "There is not a shortage of guns there, my God."
Actually, there is a shortage of guns -- in the right hands, at least.

Haitian President René Préval made that clear: "We have 2,000 police in Port-au-Prince, and 3,000 bandits escaped from prison [in the quake]. This gives you an idea of how bad the situation is."

Reports of looting and roadblocks manned by murderous gangs abound.

Obviously, order is vital for aid to reach those who need it, yet Haiti's police are in no position to handle the crisis alone; Uncle Sam can - and must - help.

US troops already control Port-au-Prince's main airport, while fresh arrivals yesterday put the total American military presence at around 10,000 -- most on ships anchored outside the capital. It remains to be seen whether that's enough. But, again, their help in restoring order and safeguarding the distribution of aid are top priorities.

To be sure, the last thing America needs is another lengthy entanglement -- and, indeed, morphing US relief efforts into an attempt at nation-building would be a mistake.

But today, some jobs can only be done by the swift application of force -- or, at least, the threat of it.

Anyway, the moral duties are clear: US forces can't stand by while Haitians die in the streets for lack of aid.

It's up to the US to step in, restore a semblance of order and save lives.

Jan 18, 2010

Karzai To Attempt a Reconciliation Plan


Karzai Closing In On Taliban Reconciliation PlanBy Rod Nordland and Alissa J. Rubin
New York Times
January 18, 2010

KABUL, Afghanistan — The Afghan government will soon unveil a major new plan offering jobs, security, education and other social benefits to Taliban followers who defect, according to the spokesman for President Hamid Karzai.

The plan, in the final stages of preparation, will go beyond the government’s previous offers to the Taliban, Waheed Omer, the spokesman, said at a news conference on Sunday. “The mistakes we have committed before have been considered in developing this new plan,” he said. “We have not done enough.”

The reconciliation and reintegration plan is aimed at luring large numbers of the Taliban’s followers, estimated by NATO officials at 25,000 to 30,000 active fighters, to change sides, and has qualified support from American officials. Afghan officials are hoping to finance the plan through pledges from the international community to be made at a London conference on Afghanistan planned for Jan. 28.

Even if such a plan wins international support, serious questions remain about Afghanistan’s ability to carry it out, especially without a functioning national government, a prospect that remained distant on Sunday.

Parliament turned down more than half of Mr. Karzai’s second list of nominees for cabinet ministers on Saturday. On Sunday, Mr. Omer said it was unlikely that Mr. Karzai would be able to complete his cabinet before the London conference, leaving important ministries leaderless.

Richard C. Holbrooke, the American special envoy to Afghanistan and Pakistan, said that he had discussed the plan with Mr. Karzai and that it was better than previous efforts, adding, “Can’t be worse.”

Mr. Karzai has previously promised amnesty to Taliban fighters willing to lay down their weapons and has offered repeatedly to talk directly with the Taliban leader Mullah Omar, but with little effect.

A relatively small number of Taliban have defected; some 170 came over to the government in late 2009, according to the United Nations.

Chief among the new measures, Mr. Omer said, were strong security guarantees to defecting Taliban that they would be protected from arrest or retaliation. He did not detail what those measures would be, but many defecting Taliban in the past have asked to be integrated into local police forces.

Mr. Omer also indirectly confirmed that the Afghan government might ask that Mullah Omar be removed from the United Nations terrorist blacklist, which freezes the bank accounts of those listed and bans them from international travel.

A private Afghan TV channel, Tolo TV, quoted Mr. Omer as saying that Mullah Omar’s name would “probably” be considered for removal from the blacklist. But on Sunday, Mr. Omer said that it was premature to talk about such details and that the blacklist would not be discussed in London.

American officials have been skeptical about engaging with Taliban leaders who may have close associations with Al Qaeda, and Mr. Holbrooke directly ruled out removing Mullah Omar’s name from the blacklist. “I can’t imagine what would justify such an action,” he said at a media gathering on Sunday.

Although the full details of the government’s plan are not yet clear, some experts have put the cost of carrying it out at $1 billion, mainly for jobs and education programs aimed at reintegrating former guerrillas.

A top adviser to Mr. Karzai, Mohammed Masoom Stanekzai, who helped draft the plan, suggested that number was on target. “If we can spend billions of dollars on military operations and security,” he said in a telephone interview on Sunday, “I think it is worth spending a billion dollars to build peace.”

He cautioned that any plan would have to take into account joblessness among Afghans who had not joined the Taliban, so they would not feel that insurgents were unfairly rewarded while their own loyalty was not.

Mr. Stanekzai did not rule out the possibility of talking with Mr. Omar. “What we need is a top-down and bottom-up approach,” he said.

The presence of some Taliban leaders on the United Nations blacklist was a negative “psychological force” preventing reconciliation talks, he said.

“The people in Afghanistan are tired of fighting and war, and there is a new political will in the region and also in the international community to reconcile with those who are not linked with Al Qaeda,” he said. He said that Mr. Karzai would announce details of the plan in “a couple more days.”

Mr. Holbrooke said he was encouraged by what he called “unambiguous national support for reintegration” of the Taliban’s followers.

“This is not going to end by killing everyone who fights with the Taliban,” Mr. Holbrooke said. What was lacking previously, he said, was “a vehicle for them to come in from the cold.” Without that, he said, “you give people no choice but to kill or be killed.”

“Stanekzai has a good plan, ISAF command has a good plan,” Mr. Holbrooke said, referring to the American-led NATO force in Afghanistan, the International Security Assistance Force.

The NATO force’s top spokesman, Rear Adm. Gregory J. Smith of the United States Navy, did not lay out the details of a separate plan, but said Saturday, “We are working closely with the government of Afghanistan as they develop their program.”

Admiral Smith said the program appeared to be “one of the means to resolve the ongoing insurgency.” He said coalition troops would not be involved in reconciliation efforts such as talks with Taliban leaders, “although we would support the government of Afghanistan’s efforts in this area.”

Mr. Omer’s remarks suggested that the government had a softer line than the Americans on talking to Taliban leaders. “We are ready to negotiate with anyone,” he said. “Whoever comes over is welcome.”

A spokesman for the Taliban in southern Afghanistan, Qari Yousuf Ahmadi, ruled out any possibility of negotiations with Mr. Karzai’s government. “We are united and we will remain united against them,” Mr. Ahmadi said in a telephone interview. “There is no differentiation between Taliban moderates and extremists. We are fighting under one name, Taliban, under one leadership.”

Jan 12, 2010

U.S. General Says Taliban Defeated In 'Heartland'


Marines clear most of key Afghan province

By Jim Michaels, USA Today, Jan 12, 2010

CAMP PENDLETON, Calif. — U.S. forces have driven the Taliban from most towns and villages in the strategic Helmand province of Afghanistan, leaving incoming troops with the mission of holding key areas and rebuilding the economy, Marine commanders say.

"They've taken on the Taliban, the insurgency, right in the heartland and they've defeated them," said Marine Maj. Gen. Richard Mills in an interview with USA TODAY.

Commanders warn that Taliban forces remain dangerous and they could mount a resurgence. Six coalition soldiers were killed in attacks around the country Monday. Still, the developments in Helmand could have broad implications for the war because of the province's importance to the Taliban.

Much of the Taliban's leadership and support comes from the mostly Pashtun province and nearby Kandahar. Helmand, the country's largest province, also produces most of the country's poppy crop, which has helped fund the insurgency.Recent attention has been focused on President Obama's orders to send about 30,000 reinforcements to Afghanistan this year. But an influx of Marines to Helmand province last year has produced dramatic results, raising hopes that the gains can be consolidated and spread elsewhere, Mills said.

"I see us moving away from the clear phase and moving into the hold and build" phase, Mills said.

Commanders say violence could increase if militants shift tactics to more large-scale attacks, such as car and truck bombs. "It's the dramatic strike that I worry about," Mills said.

The commander in Afghanistan, Army Gen. Stanley McChrystal, has also expressed confidence in recent developments. "We've been at this for about seven months now and I believe we've made progress," McChrystal told ABC's World News.The 9,000 U.S. Marines arriving this year will nearly double the number of coalition troops in Helmand province. Mills will take command of the larger force this spring when he moves his headquarters there from this Southern California base.

Marines now control most of the major towns and villages in Helmand and are pushing the Taliban into remote areas where it will be hard for them to thrive or influence the population.

"We're not taking a break during the winter season," said Marine Brig. Gen. Joseph Osterman, who will lead ground combat troops in the incoming command.

Marines plan to launch an offensive to seize Marjah, the Taliban's remaining stronghold in Helmand.

Sep 26, 2009

Re-Supply Problems in Afghanistan

Military Supply Line Threatened By Taliban

By Associated Press
September 26, 2009

POL-I-KUMRI, Afghanistan — Growing Taliban influence in northern Afghanistan is threatening a new military supply line painstakingly negotiated by the U.S., as rising violence takes hold on the one-time Silk Road route.

The north has deteriorated over just a few months, showing how quickly Taliban influence is spreading in a once peaceful area. Local officials say the Taliban are establishing a shadow government along the dilapidated road that ultimately could prevent vital supplies carried in hundreds of trucks every week from reaching the military. It also raises the danger that the supplies could end up in militant hands as fodder for suicide attacks.

People in Baghlan and Kunduz provinces complain that international forces, the government in Kabul and aid have passed them by in favor of more troublesome regions. Militants are taking advantage of that resentment, and control by either Afghan or international forces is slipping.

"For the past two to three years, it's deteriorated day by day," said Ahmad Jawid, 43, a car dealer who sat in the shade with a half-dozen friends watching the highway in Baghlan's provincial capital, Pol-i-Kumri. "The people are demoralized."

A young man in the group had an easy smile but spoke bitterly on Wednesday when asked about the Taliban.

"I'm engaged and I can't go to the village of my fiancee," said 23-year-old Farshad, who like many Afghans goes by only one name. The village fell to the Taliban before the wedding could be planned. "I'm going to wait for the situation to get worse or get better. Otherwise I'll have to become a Talib."

Just to the north, Kunduz province is home to the first leg of the highway. The full northern route, which starts in Europe and snakes through Central Asia to Afghanistan, was cobbled together by the U.S. earlier this year after Taliban violence repeatedly disrupted the two main Pakistani routes.

Local officials and analysts say the militants want to show they can control the north and take over the supplies. Taliban militants hijacked two fuel trucks on the highway on Sept. 4, and German forces in Kunduz called in an airstrike by U.S. fighter pilots, saying they feared the trucks could be used in suicide bombings. Thirty civilians and 69 armed Taliban died in the strike, according to a probe by an Afghan presidential commission.

"The mere fact that the trucks were hijacked, the mere fact that we had this level of challenge to the government's control and sovereignty to me shows we need an effort here," U.S. Gen. Stanley McChrystal said in a recent news conference.

Kunduz was among the last Taliban strongholds during the 2001 U.S. invasion that drove the Islamic government from power, and — until this year — had been relatively peaceful, despite a largely Pashtun population sympathetic to the militants. That began to change after the Taliban solidified control in the south as U.S. supply lines from Pakistan came under increasing attack.

Sep 19, 2009

Yet ANOTHER Contractor Scandal...


Pakistan Police Raid U.S. ContractorAssociated Press
Sept 19, 2009

ISLAMABAD -- Pakistani police raided a local security firm that helps protect the U.S. Embassy on Saturday, seizing dozens of allegedly unlicensed weapons at a time when unusually intense media scrutiny of America's use of private contractors has deepened anti-U.S. sentiment here.

Pakistani police raided a local security firm that has a contract with the U.S. Embassy, seizing dozens of allegedly unlicensed weapons at a time when American use of private contractors is under unusual scrutiny here, officials said.

Two employees of the Inter-Risk company were arrested during the raids in Islamabad, police official Rana Akram told a news conference. Reporters were shown the disputed weapons -- 61 assault rifles and nine pistols. Mr. Akram said police were seeking the firm's owner.

U.S. Embassy spokesman Rick Snelsire said the U.S. contract with Inter-Risk took effect at the start of 2009. It is believed to be the first contract the firm has signed with the U.S., said Mr. Snelsire, who did not have a figure for its amount.

"Our understanding is they obtained licenses with whatever they brought into the country to meet the contractual needs," he said. "We told the government that we had a contract with Inter-Risk, that Inter-Risk would be providing security at the embassy and our consulates."

Mr. Akram said he had no idea about any U.S. links to Inter-Risk, but the company was recently mentioned in local media reports that have been trying to establish the types of private security firms American diplomats use in Pakistan.

In particular, Pakistani reporters, anti-U.S. bloggers and others have suggested the U.S. is using the American firm formerly known as Blackwater -- a claim that chills many Pakistanis because of the company's alleged involvement in killings of Iraqi civilians.

The U.S. Embassy denies it uses Blackwater - now known as Xe Services - in Pakistan.

Scandals involving U.S. private contractors have occurred elsewhere in the region.

In Washington on Friday, the Commission on Wartime Contracting heard testimony about another contractor - ArmorGroup North America --involving alleged illegal and immoral conduct by its guards at the U.S. Embassy in Afghanistan.

The Iraqi government refused to grant Xe Services an operating license earlier this year amid continued outrage over a 2007 lethal firefight involving some of its employees in Baghdad, although the State Department has temporarily extended a contract with a Xe subsidiary to protect U.S. diplomats in Iraq.

Many of the reports in Pakistan have been fueled by U.S. plans to expand its embassy space and staff. Among the other rumors the U.S. denies: that 1,000 U.S. Marines will land in the capital, and that Americans will set up a Guantanamo-style prison.

The U.S. says it needs to add hundreds more staff to allow it to disburse billions of dollars in additional aid to Pakistan.

Legislation making its way through Congress will triple nonmilitary aid to Pakistan -- one version would provide $1.5 billion a year over five years in humanitarian and economic aid. The goal is to improve education and other areas, lessening the allure of extremism.

The U.S. considers stability in Pakistan critical to helping the faltering war effort in neighboring Afghanistan, and has pressed Pakistan to crack down on extremism on its soil.

Al Qaeda and Taliban fighters are believed to use Pakistan's northwestern regions bordering Afghanistan as hide-outs. Their presence has fueled violence in Pakistani territory, including attacks that pit Sunni Muslims against Shiite Muslims.

Copyright © 2009 Associated Press

Sep 16, 2009

"Probably Needed?" Mullin-McChrystal need to be blunt on what is needed


Mullen: More Troops 'Probably' Needed
Joint Chiefs Chairman Testifies Before Senate Panel as Afghanistan Debate Grows
By Ann Scott Tyson
Washington Post
September 16, 2009

The nation's top military officer told Congress on Tuesday that the U.S. war in Afghanistan "probably needs more forces" and sought to reassure lawmakers skeptical of sending additional troops that commanders were devising new tactics that would lead to victory over a resurgent Taliban.

Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said that 2,000 to 4,000 additional military trainers from the United States and its NATO partners will be needed to "jump-start" the expansion of Afghan security forces and strongly suggested that more U.S. combat troops will be required to provide security in the short term. "A properly resourced counterinsurgency probably needs more forces," Mullen said in testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee.

Mullen spoke amid a growing political debate over Afghanistan as President Obama weighs a recently completed assessment of the war by Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal, the top U.S. and NATO commander there. Sen. Carl M. Levin (D-Mich.), the committee chairman, argued strenuously Tuesday against the deployment of any more U.S. combat forces, while Sen. John McCain (Ariz.), the ranking Republican, said a delay in sending more combat forces would "repeat the nearly catastrophic mistakes" that occurred in Iraq before the ! Bush administration increased troop levels.

Pentagon spokesman G eoff Morrell said Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates remains undecided on whether more troops are needed. Morrell played down the possibility of disagreement between the Pentagon's civilian leadership and the uniformed forces, saying that Gates "clearly has a great deal of respect for Admiral Mullen," who was seeking Senate confirmation for a second term as chairman, after Gates's recommendation to Obama. But Gates, Morrell said, "is still more in the evolution process in his thinking than having arrived at a decision as to whether or not, yes, significant numbers of additional forces are needed."

Gates and Mullen are participating in high-level administration discussions of the way forward in Afghanistan, based on recommendations from McChrystal for how to implement the strategy Obama announced in March. Since then, the number of Taliban attacks and U.S. casualties have risen to their highest rates in the eight-year-old war.

With public anxiety rising, many Democratic lawmakers are awaiting a decision by the president, and a White House strategy to sell it.

"I want to hear from the president, and not just on combat troops," Sen. Ted Kaufman (D-Del.) said in an interview. "Combat troops is like the public option" in health care, he said, quoting a conversation with Levin this month when they traveled together to Afghanistan. "Everybody can understand combat troops."

For most Americans, Kaufman said, eight years "is an eternity, and now they come in asking for another batch of troops? What's that all about? This is a crescendo growing. At some point in the not-too-distant future, [Obama] has got to do this. The clock is ticking."

Lawmakers have asked to have McChrystal testify before Congress, but Morrell said Gates does not think it would be the right time.

Obama has ordered an additional 17,000 U.S. combat troops and 4,000 trainers to Afghanistan this year, which will bring the total number of American service members in the country to 68,000 by the end of the year.

Mullen told the Senate panel he did not know what ratio of combat to training forces would be needed. He estimated that NATO contributions would not be large and that it will take two to three years to produce a sufficient number of Afghan soldiers and police.

Morrell, the Pentagon spokesman, said the distinction between trainers and combat forces is sometimes blurry. "As we learned in Iraq, our best training is done not in some sterile environment behind the wire, but rather out amongst the population, operating shoulder to shoulder with our Iraqi or Afghan counterparts. And that often leads to combat situations."

Gates "believes that we have to provide more counter-IED capabilities to our forces in Afghanistan as soon as possible," Morrell said, using the abbreviation for improvised explosive device, or roadside bomb. "By that, I mean route clearance teams, explosive ordnance disposal teams, medevac teams, intelligence assets, not to mention the hardware that's required."

Mullen emphasized that the key elements of Obama's strategy are being put into place, citing a new program to offer incentives to persuade low- and mid-level Taliban fighters to abandon the insurgency. The goal would be to win over rank-and-file Taliban fighters and then target the leaders with more lethal means, officials said.

"There's a very big opportunity here to reduce violence by reaching out to some of the lower-level guys, to give them an opportunity to see a life that's better than fighting for the Taliban," said a senior official at the NATO command in Kabul who discussed the program on the condition of anonymity. "What's really important is to get a feel for where the Afghans are" on reintegration, the official said.

No decisions have been made on what the incentives would be, although the official said they could include cash and jobs.

The major challenge is to develop a program the Afghan government accepts and imple ments from the start -in contrast to Iraq, where the United States paid former fighters and then struggled to persuade the Iraqi government to integrate them into its security forces and other jobs, the senior official said. "It has to be owned and driven by them."

Retired British Lt. Gen. Graeme Lamb, who worked on the reconciliation of fighters in Iraq, is in Afghanistan heading the initiative for McChrystal, Mullen said, although he stressed that the planning is still in the early phases. "We're not very far down that road," he said.

Mullen said he and other senior military leaders -including McChrystal; Gen. David H. Petraeus, the head of U.S. Central Command; and the chiefs of military services - believe that executing Obama's strategy in Afghanistan will require not just killing insurgents but succeeding in a wide-ranging campaign to provide security, government services and economic rebuilding for the Afghan population.

"The president has given us a clear mission: disrupt, dismantle and defeat al-Qaeda and its extremist allies and prevent Afghanistan from becoming a safe haven again. You can't do that from offshore, and you can't do that by just killing the bad guys. You have to be there, where the people are when they need you there, and until they can provide for their own security. This is General McChrystal's view, and it is my view -- and that of General Petraeus and the Joint Chiefs," Mullen said in his opening remarks.

McChrystal is "alarmed by the insurgency" in Afghanistan, Mullen said, and "needs to retake the initiative from the insurgents, who have grabbed it over the last three years." Mullen said he spoke with McChrystal on Monday. "Quite honestly, he found conditions on the ground tougher than he had thought," Mullen said. (but he's Special Ops, isn't he supposed to know this stuff??)

Warned by lawmakers that U.S. public support for the war was waning, Mullen said he understood that urgent action was needed. "I worry a great deal that the clock is moving very rapidly," he said.
"Do you understand you've got one more shot back home? Do you understand that?" asked Sen. Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.)

"Yes, sir," Mullen replied.

Aug 13, 2009

Afghanistan's Future, from Karzai's Chief Opponent


How Afghans Can Build A Better Future

By Ashraf Ghani
Financial Times
August 13, 2009

((The writer is a candidate in next week's Afghan presidential election))

Afghanistan is one of the poorest countries in the world, yet it is rich in resources and potential. The upcoming elections are an opportunity for Afghans to elect a government that is committed economic growth for all, and to replacing the current predatory regime where wealth accrues to a few corrupt cronies.

From energy and agriculture to mining and construction, the country possesses the resources for robust and sustained development for decades to come. With a regional co-operation framework, Afghanistan can become a strategic land-bridge for goods, services and oil pipelines between south Asia, central Asia, the Middle East and China.

In a semi-arid region, water is everything. Afghanistan produces 80bn cubic metres of water each year, but only taps 20bn for irrigation, drinking and hydropower. The Amu River, shared with central Asian neighbours, alone has the potential to produce 10,000 megawatts of electricity a year.

As power is the critical driver of development, a regional partnership on energy initiatives could serve as the foundation stone for wider regional economic co-operation. Afghanistan sees potential electricity market partners through an electricity grid joining China, central Asia, Pakistan, Iran and eventually India.

Unfortunately, the corruption of the current regime has allowed drug trafficking to flourish across borders instead. In turn, the booming opium and heroin trade has funded the expansion of the insurgency and crippled the economy. The threat of drugs will only be eliminated when Afghan agriculture develops. Rural farmers will turn away from poppies if their incomes from staple crops rise from the current level of $1 a day to $4. That is an achievable goal for the near future, involving investment in irrigation, technology and education. In the short-term, Nato forces present a large potential purchaser and an opportunity to turn Nato into a friend of the Afghan farmer. In addition, European Union trade preferences for Afghan agriculture could provide an enormous boost for our farmers.

Afghanistan is also rich in mineral resources. US Geological Survey reports have confirmed extensive deposits of copper, gold, gas, iron and barite, as well as gemstones such as emeralds, lapis lazuli and rubies. A mining-based economy is therefore a real medium-term alternative to the current drug-based economy.

Both sectors will depend on a reliable transport network to ensure on-time and safe deliveries. Investing in roads and railways to link the major mines in southern and central areas of the country to potential markets in the region and to China is essential.

Creating a competitive national construction industry is a prerequisite for effective utilisation of domestic resources. Fortunately it is the sector able to create the greatest number of jobs immediately. Critically, it will also make foreign assistance four to nine times more effective. With a coherent infrastructure development plan, including my goal of creating 1m new homes, the Afghan construction industry can become a powerhouse for creating jobs and wealth.

Afghan entrepreneurs are not short of money, but withering security and growing corruption are forcing them to take their capital abroad. In the Gulf alone there is an estimated $16bn of Afghan money waiting to find outlets. The ministry of finance estimated, in March, that 70 per cent of potential domestic revenue is lost owing to corruption and mismanagement.

My vision of an inclusive, stable and prosperous Afghanistan is based on my experience as finance minister from 2002-04 when I worked to achieve lasting reforms. For example, in just two years we modernised communications in Afghanistan. Partnering with the minister of communications, I refused to offer sweetheart deal licences to private companies. Instead, we insisted they gain access to the Afghan market through a transparent bidding process. The number of mobile telephones in the country jumped from 100 in July 2002 to more than 1m at the end of 2005, and private investment in mobile phones exceeded $200m. A government committed to transparency, accountability and the rule of law can create a stable, business-friendly environment in Afghanistan.

The right government can help Afghanistan tap its potential. The Afghan people are ready to learn, work and do business with the world.

Aug 11, 2009

Operation Eastern Resolve 11


FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASEAugust 12, 2009
PRESS RELEASE 09-09

CAMP LEATHERNECK, Helmand Province, Islamic Republic of Afghanistan –

U.S. Marines and Afghan National Army soldiers launched Operation Eastern Resolve II in the Now Zad District of Helmand province this morning in an effort to disrupt insurgent violence and intimidation campaigns and provide freedom of movement for Afghan citizens to have the opportunity to vote in upcoming provincial and national elections.

Approximately 100 Afghan National Army soldiers and 400 Marines and sailors from Marine Expeditionary Brigade-Afghanistan constitute the bulk of the U.S. forces conducting Operation Eastern Resolve II, including Marines from Marine Aircraft Group 40, which provided helicopter lift and other aviation support for the mission.

“Our mission is to support the Independent Election Commission and Afghan national security forces. They are the ones in charge of these elections. Our job is to make sure they have the security to do their job,” said Brig. Gen. Larry Nicholson, commanding general of MEB-Afghanistan. “While we encourage every Afghan to exercise his right to vote, who he or she votes for is none of our business.”

MEB-Afghanistan is a subordinate unit of NATO’s International Security Assistance Force. The combined U.S. and Afghan mission is to provide security for population centers and connect local citizens with their legitimate government while establishing stable and secure conditions for national elections scheduled for later this month as well as enhancing security for the future.

-30-

Aug 6, 2009

Adm Mullin: Bush Administration caused current Afghan problems


Mullen Decries 'Culture Of Poverty'

Top officer sees Afghan neglect, military in hole

By Sara Carter, The Washington Times
August 6, 2009

The top U.S. uniformed military officer Wednesday offered a bleak assessment of the war in Afghanistan, saying that years of neglect before the Obama administration had starved the U.S.-led effort of funds and diplomatic heft - a condition he called "a culture of poverty."

Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told editors and reporters at The Washington Times that nearly eight years after the war began, the U.S. military is still digging its way "out of a hole" and has not reached "year zero" in the campaign to turn back Taliban advances and gain the trust of the Afghan people.

"What I do see and have seen over the last two or three trips is something that I call a 'culture of poverty' and it isn't just that we've under-resourced it - we've under-resourced it for a significant period of time," Adm. Mullen said.

He said a strategy devised since President Obama took office is intended to reverse these negative trends and hinted that another assessment to be completed late this month or in September might assign more military and civilian personnel to the war and to Afghan development.

"We now have a strategy which is a civilian-military campaign plan, a civil ian-military strategy," he said.

The administration has sent an additional 21,000 U.S. troops to Afghanistan for a total of 68,000. Casualties are at an all-time high since the U.S. toppled the Taliban in 2001, with 45 Americans killed in Afghanistan last month alone.

Anthony Cordesman, a military specialist at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, has called the situation in Afghanistan "a dysfunctional, wasteful mess."

A report titled "The Taliban's Winning Strategy in Afghanistan," by Gilles Dorronsoro, a South Asia analyst and visiting scholar at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, said "Defeating the Taliban would require at least 100,000 new reinforcements as long as the Afghan-Pakistani border remained open to insurgents. Neither the United States nor NATO is willing or able to pay the human and fiscal costs of reinforcements at this level."

The Taliban "have efficient leadership, are learning from their mistakes, and are quick to exploit the weaknesses of their adversaries," Mr. Dorronsoro wrote. He added that the militant group was building strength in the north of Afghanistan as U.S. forces surge in the south and east.

Adm. Mullen did not disagree with this assessment, saying the Taliban has become more effective and sophisticated in recent years. He said that the U.S. has 12 to 18 months "to start turning this thing around."

He added that he and Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates have put together a new team, including Gen. Stanley McChrystal as commander of U.S.-led forces in Afghanistan.

"I have taken my best people and given them to McChrystal," Adm. Mullen said. "He literally has an open book or a blank check to get the best people we have there on the military side because this is a top priority. We're at war. We're losing young people and I want the absolute best people we've got."

Gen. McChrystal is due to release a new assessment Wednesday that is expec! ted to ask for more U.S. and allied forces and to set new goals for th e Afghan army and police forces. However, Defense Department spokesman Geoff Morrell said Mr. Gates has extended the deadline until late August or early September, the Associated Press reported. "He wants [Gen. McChrystal] to take into consideration a few other ideas; he had to address some additional issues in this review of the situation on the ground," Mr. Morrell said.

Queried about the sudden appearance of two Russian nuclear submarines off the U.S. East Coast, Adm. Mullen said he did not consider the patrols a sign of resurgence of the Cold War. "I'm not alarmed by it. I'm very mindful of it and keeping an eye on it," he said.

Asked why Russia would make such a move, Adm. Mullen replied: "Some of this is to show that [Russia] can" after years of watching their military infrastructure fray.

The Joint Chiefs chairman said that Russian navy officials had advised him in advance last year when they sent a warship through the Panama Canal to Venezuela. U.S. officials said they were not told in advance of the submarine patrols.

Adm. Mullen, who has visited Afghanistan 10 times, said it was crucial to gain the trust of the Afghan people, who have endured 30 years of conflict since the Soviet invasion.

Many Afghan citizens and officials have expressed concern that the U.S. will abandon the country again as it did in 1989 after the defeat of the Soviet occupation.

"That trust was badly broken when we left [Afghanistan] before and it was badly broken in Pakistan ... when we sanctioned them [over their nuclear program]," he said. "It's going to take a lot of time to develop."

"I liken it to somebody who has been starving for a significant period of time and all the sudden you put all the food they need in the world there - they're just not going to come back overnight," he said. "So there's a culture of poverty there which is very much a part of where we are in terms of resources and this isn't j! ust on the military side - this is on the civilian side."

"I'm digging myself out of a hole in Pakistan and in Afghanistan," Adm. Mullen said. "So there's an argument to be made that I haven't gotten to year zero yet with respect to that long-term relationship, and then that gets reflected in how the people look at this. Which I understand completely."

Jul 27, 2009

Muslim Extremists vs. West; Losing, But Still Here


The Losers Hang On
By Thomas L. Friedman
New York Times
July 26, 2009

Jalozai Camp, Pakistan--After spending a week traveling the frontline of the “war on terrorism” — from the aircraft carrier U.S.S. Ronald Reagan in the seas off Iran, to northern Iraq, to Afghanistan and into northwest Pakistan — I can comfortably report the following: The bad guys are losing.

Yes, the dominos you see falling in the Muslim world today are the extremist Islamist groups and governments. They have failed to persuade people by either their arguments or their performances in power that their puritanical versions of Islam are the answer. Having lost the argument, though, the radicals still hang on thanks to gun barrels and oil barrels — and they can for a while.

Because, while the radicals have failed miserably, our allies — the pro-Americans, the Muslim modernists, the Arab moderates — have not really filled the void with reform and good government of their own. They are winning by default. More on that later.

For now, though, it is obvious that everywhere they have won or seized power, the Islamists — in Iran, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iraq, Algeria, Lebanon or Gaza — have overplayed their hands, dragged their societies into useless wars or engaged in nihilistic violence that today is producing a broad backlash from mainstream Muslims.

Think of this: In the late-1970s, two leaders made historic trips — President Anwar Sadat flew from Egypt to Israel and Ayatollah Khomeini flew from Paris to Tehran. For the last 30 years, politics in the Middle East and the Muslim world has, in many ways, been a struggle between their competing visions.

Sadat argued that the future should bury the past and that Arabs and Muslims should build their future based on peace with Israel, integration with the West and embracing modernity. Khomeini argued that the past should bury the future and that Persians and Muslims should build their future on hostility to Israel, isolation from the West and subordinating modernity to a puritanical Islam.

In 2009, the struggle between those two trends tipped toward the Sadatists. The fact that Iran’s ruling theocrats had to steal their election to stay in power and forcibly suppress dissent by millions of Iranians — according to the Committee to Protect Journalists, Iran has surpassed China as the world’s leading jailer of journalists, with 41 now behind bars — is the most visible sign of this. The Taliban’s burning down of secular schools that compete with its mosques, and its peddling of heroin to raise cash, are also not exactly signs of intellectual triumph.

The same day that President Obama spoke to the Muslim world from Cairo University, Osama bin Laden released a long statement on Islamic Web sites and on Al Jazeera. As the Egyptian Middle East expert Mamoun Fandy noted: “Obama beat Osama hands down. Ask anyone about the content of Obama’s speech and they will tell you. Ask them what Osama said and most people will say, ‘Did he give a speech?’”

In Iraq’s elections last January, nationalist and moderate Muslim parties defeated the sectarian, radical religious parties, while in Lebanon, a pro-Western coalition defeated one led by Hezbollah.

Here in Pakistan, the backlash against the Taliban has been building among the rising middle class. It started in March when a mobile-phone video of a teenage girl being held down and beaten outside her home by a Taliban commander in Pakistan’s Swat Valley spread virally across this country. In May, the Pakistani Army began an offensive against Taliban militants who had taken control of key towns in the North-West Frontier Province (NWFP), and appeared to be moving toward the capital, Islamabad.

I followed Adm. Mike Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, when he visited a vast, choking-hot and dust-covered refugee tent camp in Jalozai, where some 116,000 refugees have fled the NWFP, as the Pakistani Army moved into their hometowns to smash the Taliban in a popular operation.

“People are totally against them, but the Taliban don’t care,” a Pakistani teacher, Abdul Jalil, 41, told me while taking a break from teaching the Urdu alphabet to young boys in a sweltering tent. “They are very cruel. They chopped people’s heads off.”

To the extent that the radical Islamists have any energy today, it comes not from the power of their ideas or examples of good governance, but by stoking sectarian feuds. In Afghanistan, the Taliban play on Pashtun nationalist grievances, and in Iraq, the Sunni jihadists draw energy from killing Shiites.

The only way to really dry up their support, though, is for the Arab and Muslim modernists to actually implement better ideas by producing less corrupt and more consensual governance, with better schools, more economic opportunities and a vision of Islam that is perceived as authentic yet embracing of modernity. That is where “our” allies in Egypt, Palestine, Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan have so consistently failed. Until that happens, the Islamist radicals will be bankrupt, but not out of business.

Taliban Tough Fighters, Marines Say


Iraq Veterans Find Afghan Enemy Even Bolder
New York Times
July 26, 2009

NAWA, Afghanistan — In three combat tours in Anbar Province, Marine Sgt. Jacob Tambunga fought the deadliest insurgents in Iraq.

But he says he never encountered an enemy as tenacious as what he saw immediately after arriving at this outpost in Helmand Province in Afghanistan. In his first days here in late June, he fought through three ambushes, each lasting as long as the most sustained fight he saw in Anbar.

Like other Anbar veterans here, Sergeant Tambunga was surprised to discover guerrillas who, if not as lethal, were bolder than those he fought in Iraq.

“They are two totally different worlds,” said Sergeant Tambunga, a squad leader in Company C, First Battalion, Fifth Marines.

“In Iraq, they’d hit you and run,” he said. “But these guys stick around and maneuver on you.”

They also have a keen sense of when to fight and when the odds against them are too great. Three weeks ago, the American military mounted a 4,000-man Marine offensive in Helmand — the largest since President Obama’s troop increase — and so far in many places, American commanders say, they have encountered less resistance than expected.

Yet it is also clear to many Marines and villagers here that Taliban fighters made a calculated decision: to retreat and regroup to fight where and when they choose. And in the view of troops here who fought intensely in the weeks before the offensive began, fierce battles probably lie ahead if they are to clear the Taliban from sanctuaries so far untouched.

“It was straight luck that we didn’t have a lot more guys hit,” said Sgt. Brandon Tritle, another squad leader in Company C, who cited the Taliban’s skill at laying down a base of fire to mount an attack.

“One force will put enough fire down so you have to keep your heads down, then another force will maneuver around to your side to try to kill you,” he said. “That’s the same thing we do.”

In other parts of Helmand the Taliban have been quick to mount counterattacks. Since the offensive began, 10 Marines have been killed, many of them south of Garmser in areas thick with roadside bombs. In addition, British forces in Helmand, who often travel in lightly armored vehicles, have lost 19 men, all but two from bombs.

All told, Western troops have died in greater numbers in Helmand this month than in any other province in Afghanistan over a similar period since the 2001 invasion.

It is unclear whether the level of casualties will remain this high. But the Taliban can ill afford to lose the Helmand River Valley, a strip of land made arable by a network of canals that nourish the nation’s center for poppy growing.

“This is what fuels the insurgency,” said Brig. Gen. Larry Nicholson, commander of the Marine brigade leading the offensive.

For now, the strategy of the Taliban who used to dominate this village, 15 miles south of the provincial capital of Lashkar Gah, is to watch and wait just outside, villagers and Marines here say.

“They all escaped,” said Sardar Gul, a shopkeeper at the Nawa bazaar. Mr. Gul and others who reopened stores after the Marines arrived estimate that 300 to 600 Taliban fled to Marjah, 15 miles to the west and not under American control, joining perhaps more than 1,000 fighters.

Marine commanders acknowledge that they could have focused more on cutting off escape routes early in the operation, an issue that often dogged offensives against insurgents in Iraq.

“I wish we had trapped a few more folks,” the commander of First Battalion, Fifth Marines, Lt. Col. William F. McCollough, told the top American commander in Afghanistan, Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal, who visited Nawa. “I expected there to be more fighting.”

When the full battalion arrived in Nawa in early July, the Taliban “knew we were too powerful for them” and left, said Staff Sgt. Michael Placencia, a platoon sergeant in Company C.

But he predicted the Taliban would stand and fight if Marines were to assault Marjah, describing them as a “more efficient” foe than the insurgents he saw as a squad leader in Anbar in 2005 and 2006.

“They will come back, and they will try to take this back and pin us down,” said Maj. Rob Gallimore, a British officer who trains Afghan soldiers here. He hopes that the Marines do not spread themselves too thin and that they focus instead on building a deep bond with locals in places they occupy, a classic counterinsurgency tactic.

So Marines are bracing for a fight against guerrillas who, they discovered in June, are surprisingly proficient at tactics the Marines themselves learned in infantry school.

“They’d flank us, and we’d flank them, just like a chess match,” said Sgt. Jason Lynd, another squad leader in Company C.

In June the Marines ended up in sustained firefights the first four times they left their outpost. The Taliban were always overmatched — attacking the Marines with only one-third the number of men — but they pressed the fight, laying complex ambushes and then cutting off Marines as they made their way back to base.

One fight began after Marines stopped three vans, which they let go. Fifteen minutes later they took fire from two homes near where they had been pursuing a suspicious man they wanted to question. They cleared both buildings, but were then attacked by gunmen behind the homes, some of whom, the Marines believe, had been in the three vans, a few disguised in burqas.

Somehow, none of the Marines were hit in the secondary ambush. “They tried to suck us in, and their plan worked,” Sergeant Tritle said. “They just missed.”

No Marines were killed in the two weeks they were here in June.

In contrast to Iraqi insurgents, the Taliban do not seem to have access to large artillery shells and other powerful military munitions that Anbar fighters used to kill hundreds of Marines and soldiers. The bombs found so far have been largely homemade with fertilizer, though they have still killed more than 20 British soldiers and United States Marines to the north and south of Nawa.

“If they had better weapons, we’d be in real trouble,” said Lance Cpl. Vazgen Matevosyan.

What the Taliban lack in munitions they make up for in tactics, even practicing “information operations” and disinformation, Marines say. Knowing the Marines listen to their two-way communications, they say, the Taliban describe phony locations of ambushes and bombs.

“They’re not stupid,” said Lance Cpl. Frank Hegel. “You can tell they catch on to things, and they don’t make the same mistake twice.”

Jul 25, 2009

On Patrol: With Fox Co, 2/ 8 in Helmand


Patrolling The Challenging Landscape Of Afghanistan With US Marines

By Tom Coghlan
London Times
July 25, 2009

Twenty heavily armed American Marines, five to ten Taleban fighters, a maze of canals and a game of cat and mouse in the long grass of southern Helmand.

In this fight the odds shift from minute to minute. The Marines pack an awesome punch, but they are on unfamiliar terrain and they are being studied for their weaknesses by a hidden enemy.

Two weeks into Operation Khanjar, their largest offensive of the Afghan war, American troops have grabbed a swath of territory in the southernmost districts of Helmand. But, as their commanders acknowledge, that is the easy part.

In the opening days, the Taleban largely disappeared from view in the face of massed American firepower. But they did not cease to exist. And as anticipated they are watching, learning and starting to probe for the weaknesses of their new enemy.

When the Taleban feel the moment is right they will try to suck the Marines into a terrain of their choosing, where firepower doesn?t count, where the Americans are off guard, off balance and momentarily vulnerable.

And so it was on Thursday morning.

By 10am the patrol from 1st Platoon, Fox Company of 2nd Battalion 8th Marines had been moving south for an hour, warily and methodically, strung out in a loose column to limit casualties in the event of sudden fire or bomb blast. The thermometer was already pushing 90C and climbing towards an energy-sapping 125F.

Chest-high reeds and grasses, well-watered fields, walled compounds and a maze of canals and irrigation channels that have lifted this area out of the desert, define the terrain south of the town of Garmsir.

It is scenic but it is hard to conceive of country more perfect for an insurgent.

As the Marines passed, farmers with turbans squatted in their fields, gaunt and inscrutable.

Most, but not all, were what they seemed. The Marines had received intelligence reports from their base at Hassan Abad suggesting that they were being observed from front and rear, roadside bombs were being laid ahead of them and an ambush was being planned.

“Maybe we gonna get some today,” mused a Marine, hawking and spitting the quid of black tobacco that forms a bulge behind the lower lip of most Marines.

Their squad commander, Sergeant Richard Lacey, 23, soft-spoken in private but an assertive figure in the field, made a tactical decision.

From their position in column he shifted his men to a broad front and a bounding formation that moves the unit forward by parts so that one element is always covering the other?s advance.

Later, Marine officers would tell The Times, they estimate that only 30 or so regular Taleban fighters are operating in the area immediately south of Hassan Abad, but they enjoy the co-operation of perhaps 80 per cent of local people. How much of that support is coerced or willingly given is much harder to estimate.

“They are cunning but their command and control is limited and their teams are sparse,” said one officer. “They are usually four or five men strong, but they can reinforce those within 20 to 30 minutes.” Units of hardcore Pakistani Taleban fighters who used to own the area have been pushed a few kilometres south by the American offensive.

As the Marines continued south, the farmers in the fields around them became noticeably fewer and then disappeared entirely. As is so often the case in Helmand, they knew of impending violence long before it arrived. The only movement was flights of swallows wheeling above the canals.

As the Marines approached a village a small boy appeared at a compound door and waved uncertainly in response to the greeting of the Marines. A commanding voice sounded behind him and the boy disappeared abruptly, the door slamming behind him.

The patrol pushed on. Then another intelligence report: the Taleban had set a command-wire bomb on a bridge we had crossed earlier. It had failed to detonate.

As they passed, a local man hissed at the Marines from the shadow of a house. With apparent nervousness he whispered to the unit?s interpreter for several minutes and then disappeared inside again.

“He says that the Taleban pose as farmers and come and lay mines in the fields. There are mines in the field you have just crossed. They have been laid near the banks at the edges so that when the Taleban ambush you the Marines will lie down on them.” But still the Taleban were not showing themselves. Perhaps they had decided to save their attack for another day.

The Marines turned for home and moved back into a column to cover an anticipated threat from a canal to their west, a common Taleban firing point on patrols by the unit preceding them. Things began to seem a little more relaxed. But it was an illusion.

The first shots of the Taleban ambush were well timed and close. The hollow crack of two aimed shots was quickly followed by longer bursts of small-arms fire.

Most of the squad were already back across a canal and lost in a swaying sea of long grass. Only three men remained exposed in a ploughed field. It was a well-chosen moment to cut the tail off the patrol and cause death or injury before American firepower could be brought to bear.

“The first round was real close,” said Corporal Andrew Swoveland, dripping sweat in the aftermath of the fight. On the band holding his helmet cover in place was stencilled the legend “White Trash Workhorse”. From only 40m away, he estimated, the Taleban had failed to hit the Marines as they sprinted for cover, an exposed dash of 50m.

Suddenly rushing with adrenalin, the Marines were wired and shouting, scanning for the attackers and firing back, some from waist deep in the canal.

The Taleban fire came through the long grass close around them, a crack and angry whirr of large lumps of metal rifling through the air at tremendous speed.

“Four men moving left to right at the corner of the compound,” a voice shouted. As the Marines? weight of suppressive fire grew they were wreathed in smoke from their own guns, while the compound ahead of them, the source of the firing, danced with small explosions of dust.

The Marines? forward air controller, Captain Brian Hill, 32, asked for permission to call in fire suppression from mortars at their nearby base. It was denied, the risk to nearby civilians deemed too great.

Instead permission was given for Lance-Corporals Zachary Rash and Brad Stys, so-called “Marine Assaultman” with a 66-millimetre rocket launcher, to open fire.

An ear-bursting thud was followed by spontaneous cheering as it blew out a plume of dust and smoke close to the Taleban firing point.

“I?d like the readers of your newspaper to know that not only are we some of the best-looking gentlemen you?ve ever seen, but we are also very experienced in war fighting,” Lance-Corporal Stys told The Times, basking in the adulation of his peers after the firefight.

The fighting did not last long. As the Taleban fire slackened after five minutes, the Marines began to advance. Pushing up to the wall of the compound ahead of them, some men claimed that they could hear the attackers shouting to each other inside.

But intuition and earlier intelligence reports suggested that they were being suckered into a trap and their commanders called a halt to the advance. Another large roadside bomb lay close in front of them, a further follow-up ambush to follow once it detonated.

The Marines cursed, grumbled at being denied a decisive encounter and set their sights for home. They were unscathed and they expected that the Taleban might have casualties.

But asymmetric cunning and roadside bombs lie ahead, and so, in all likelihood, do casualties; and the Taleban have not gone away.