Monday, November 30, 2009
Taliban offered to surrender bin Laden before and after 9-11
This is from a Counterpunch story from 2004, which says that through an Afghan employed by the US government, the Taliban had offered repeatedly to hand in bin Laden before and after 9-11--but the Bush administration did not take the opportunity. Before 9-11, the Taliban thought bin Laden to be an embarrassment that could attract US retaliation, for instance for the USS Cole bombing in 2000.
Iran nuclear
Varadarajan has an excellent piece on the Iranian nuclear issue and the proposed swap.
As he said in another article, Iran accepted a fuel swap with Russia and France if the swap took place inside Iran, but the US (Obama) did not take this chance to solve the crisis:
In the first official confirmation that Iran is leaning towards accepting some version of the US-backed proposal for a nuclear fuel swap, Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki told The Hindu the proposed exchange of low enriched uranium would have to take place inside Iran, meaning the Islamic Republic will make no prior shipment of 3.5 per cent LEU to Russia before some part of the 20 per cent LEU needed for the Tehran Research Reactor lands on its own territory...
17 November 2009
The Hindu
Iran wants nuclear fuel swap to take place on its own soil
Siddharth Varadarajan
New Delhi: In the clearest statement to date of Tehran’s attitude to the U.S.-backed proposal for a nuclear fuel swap as a step towards building trust with Washington, Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki has said his government takes a positive view of the plan provided the exchange of enriched uranium takes place inside Iran.
Mr. Mottaki told The Hindu in an exclusive interview on Monday that Iran is not keen to send its own nuclear fuel out of the country before the fuel it is to receive for the Tehran Research Reactor (TRR) arrives on its territory.
Under the original proposal made last month by the U.S. and its partners, Iran is supposed to ship 1200 kg of 3.5 per cent low enriched uranium (LEU) to Russia, where it would be further enriched to 20 per cent. The 20 per cent LEU would then be sent to France for fabrication into fuel rods. Eventually, the rods would be shipped to Iran for use in the TRR, which produces medical isotopes.
Mr. Mottaki said Iran and was in the process of sending and receiving suggestions to the other side. With a positive view regarding the essence and nature of the proposal, we are reviewing the possibility of exchanging this fuel inside Iran.
Asked whether the insistence on exchange inside Iran meant the TRR fuel must come first, Mr. Mottaki replied: Well, if there is going to be any exchange of fuel inside Iran, this must mean one side of the fuel exists in Iran and the other side should come, the 20 per cent.
The U.S. says its main interest in the original proposal of Iran shipping out virtually its entire stockpile of LEU is to buy time, since the fuel would no longer be available for weaponisation should Tehran choose to break out of the NPT.
As he said in another article, Iran accepted a fuel swap with Russia and France if the swap took place inside Iran, but the US (Obama) did not take this chance to solve the crisis:
In the first official confirmation that Iran is leaning towards accepting some version of the US-backed proposal for a nuclear fuel swap, Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki told The Hindu the proposed exchange of low enriched uranium would have to take place inside Iran, meaning the Islamic Republic will make no prior shipment of 3.5 per cent LEU to Russia before some part of the 20 per cent LEU needed for the Tehran Research Reactor lands on its own territory...
17 November 2009
The Hindu
Iran wants nuclear fuel swap to take place on its own soil
Siddharth Varadarajan
New Delhi: In the clearest statement to date of Tehran’s attitude to the U.S.-backed proposal for a nuclear fuel swap as a step towards building trust with Washington, Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki has said his government takes a positive view of the plan provided the exchange of enriched uranium takes place inside Iran.
Mr. Mottaki told The Hindu in an exclusive interview on Monday that Iran is not keen to send its own nuclear fuel out of the country before the fuel it is to receive for the Tehran Research Reactor (TRR) arrives on its territory.
Under the original proposal made last month by the U.S. and its partners, Iran is supposed to ship 1200 kg of 3.5 per cent low enriched uranium (LEU) to Russia, where it would be further enriched to 20 per cent. The 20 per cent LEU would then be sent to France for fabrication into fuel rods. Eventually, the rods would be shipped to Iran for use in the TRR, which produces medical isotopes.
Mr. Mottaki said Iran and was in the process of sending and receiving suggestions to the other side. With a positive view regarding the essence and nature of the proposal, we are reviewing the possibility of exchanging this fuel inside Iran.
Asked whether the insistence on exchange inside Iran meant the TRR fuel must come first, Mr. Mottaki replied: Well, if there is going to be any exchange of fuel inside Iran, this must mean one side of the fuel exists in Iran and the other side should come, the 20 per cent.
The U.S. says its main interest in the original proposal of Iran shipping out virtually its entire stockpile of LEU is to buy time, since the fuel would no longer be available for weaponisation should Tehran choose to break out of the NPT.
Ritter on Chilcot
Scott Ritter writes:
The evidence needed to undermine any WMD-based case for war, derived from the work of the UN weapons inspectors, was always available to those officials in a position to weigh in on this matter, but either never consulted or deliberately ignored.
Until he calls upon UN weapons inspectors themselves to deliver testimony before his inquiry, Sir John Chilcot perpetuates the perception that Britain simply can't handle the truth when it comes to uncovering the level of official British culpability in the deliberate fabrication of a case for war against Iraq that everyone knew, or should have known, was false.
The evidence needed to undermine any WMD-based case for war, derived from the work of the UN weapons inspectors, was always available to those officials in a position to weigh in on this matter, but either never consulted or deliberately ignored.
Until he calls upon UN weapons inspectors themselves to deliver testimony before his inquiry, Sir John Chilcot perpetuates the perception that Britain simply can't handle the truth when it comes to uncovering the level of official British culpability in the deliberate fabrication of a case for war against Iraq that everyone knew, or should have known, was false.
Sunday, November 29, 2009
Uk Iraq enquiry
Two good articles on the Chilcot enquiry.
One says that Blair had been told by his attorney general that the war on Iraq was illegal; the other says that Blair had made up his mind to go to war long before March 2003.
And a third summarizing what we have learned so far.
And a fourth saying the Gordon Brown is attempting to block the release of certain documents.
One says that Blair had been told by his attorney general that the war on Iraq was illegal; the other says that Blair had made up his mind to go to war long before March 2003.
And a third summarizing what we have learned so far.
And a fourth saying the Gordon Brown is attempting to block the release of certain documents.
Tajik dominate Afghan Army
Tajik domination of the ANA feeds Pashtun resentment over the control of the country’s security institutions by their ethnic rivals, while Tajiks increasingly regard the Pashtun population as aligned with the Taliban. This could lead to civil war.
The leadership of the army has been primarily Tajik since the ANA was organized in 2002, and Tajiks have been over-represented in the officer corps from the beginning. But the original troop composition of the ANA was relatively well-balanced ethnically.
But the latest report of the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction, issued Oct. 30, shows that Tajiks, which represent 25 percent of the population, now account for 41 percent of all ANA troops who have been trained, and that only 30 percent of the ANA trainees are now Pashtuns.
A key reason for the predominance of Tajik troops is that the ANA began to have serious problems recruiting troops in the rural areas of Kandahar and Helmand provinces by mid-2007.
The leadership of the army has been primarily Tajik since the ANA was organized in 2002, and Tajiks have been over-represented in the officer corps from the beginning. But the original troop composition of the ANA was relatively well-balanced ethnically.
But the latest report of the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction, issued Oct. 30, shows that Tajiks, which represent 25 percent of the population, now account for 41 percent of all ANA troops who have been trained, and that only 30 percent of the ANA trainees are now Pashtuns.
A key reason for the predominance of Tajik troops is that the ANA began to have serious problems recruiting troops in the rural areas of Kandahar and Helmand provinces by mid-2007.
Meanwhile, Tajiks have maintained a firm grip on the command structure of the ANA. . Marshall Fahim put commanders from the Tajik-controlled Northern Alliance in key positions within the Ministry of Defense as well as the ANA command.
Mason recalled that the United States thought it had an agreement with President Hamid Karzai under which the command structure of the ANA would be reorganized on the basis of ethnic balance, starting with the top 25 positions.
But Karzai never acted on the agreement, Mason said.
Even after Fahim was stripped of his government and military positions by Karzai in 2004, his appointee as ANA chief of staff, Gen. Bismullah Khan, remained as head of the army. Tajiks have continued to occupy the bulk of the positions in the Ministry of Defense
A United Nations official in Kabul estimated that, as of spring 2008, no less than 70 percent of all kandaks (battalions) were commanded by Tajiks, as reported by Italian scholar Antonio Giustozzi.
Funds to provide employment in Afghanistan
An article about the efforts of the US as that are poppy free to reward them. Their effectiveness in reducing opium growing all depends on whether or not the funds will actnd UK to provide Afghans with jobs by lending them money: the goal is to reduce unemployment and drag people away form the Taliban.
There are also funds that will be given to provinces that become poppy free to reward them.
Their effectiveness will depend on whether or not they will actually be disbursed, if they will be distributed fairly as opposed to swallowed up by corrupt officials, and if they will be used in projects that make sense.
There are also funds that will be given to provinces that become poppy free to reward them.
Their effectiveness will depend on whether or not they will actually be disbursed, if they will be distributed fairly as opposed to swallowed up by corrupt officials, and if they will be used in projects that make sense.
Saturday, November 28, 2009
US black jail in Afghanistan
The US is running a black jail in Afghanistan at Bagram (but different from the regular Bagram prison), where the Red Cross is not allowed, and where detainees are mistreated and often mistaken for Taliban etc., and held for months, and not given any compensation, another great display of US arrogance.
US Bagram prison
The US unveils its new prison in Afghanistan, at Bagram. It cost $60 million and can hold up to 1100 detainees.
By the end of this year about 700 prisoners from the old Bagram prison will be transferred to the new facility.
By the end of this year about 700 prisoners from the old Bagram prison will be transferred to the new facility.
Friday, November 27, 2009
Canada torture issue in Afghanistan
Emails sent to then-foreign affairs minister Peter MacKay's office expressed alarm over the treatment of Afghan detainees on behalf of the International Red Cross Committee; as early as 2006, senior diplomat Richard Colvin was conveying distressing information from the most direct and trusted of sources, the Red Cross.
Two emails that reached MacKay's office outlined a litany of Red Cross concerns, including worries about the treatment of detainees, Canadian tardiness in reporting their detention to the international agency, lack of proper information to identify the prisoners and one pointed reminder of Canadian responsibility.
Two emails that reached MacKay's office outlined a litany of Red Cross concerns, including worries about the treatment of detainees, Canadian tardiness in reporting their detention to the international agency, lack of proper information to identify the prisoners and one pointed reminder of Canadian responsibility.
Thursday, November 26, 2009
Wednesday, November 25, 2009
Obama's state dinner
For an example of the most uncritical coverage of the NYT, see this article describing Obama's state dinner, with which flowers he chose and all that crap.
The only important point, that he's hoping to establish solid links with India, wasn't made.
The only important point, that he's hoping to establish solid links with India, wasn't made.
Tuesday, November 24, 2009
Obama backs Patriot Act provisions
With the health care debate preoccupying the mainstream media, it has gone virtually unreported that the Barack Obama administration is quietly supporting renewal of provisions of the George W. Bush-era USA PATRIOT Act that civil libertarians say infringe on basic freedoms.
Blackwater's secret activities in Pakistan
From 2003 to 2008 McChrystal headed JSOC, which is headquartered at Pope Air Force Base and Fort Bragg in North Carolina, where Blackwater's 7,000-acre operating base is also situated.
At a covert forward operating base run by the US Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC) in the Pakistani port city of Karachi, members of an elite division of Blackwater are at the center of a secret program in which they plan targeted assassinations of suspected Taliban and Al Qaeda operatives, "snatch and grabs" of high-value targets and other sensitive action inside and outside Pakistan, an investigation by The Nation has found. The Blackwater operatives also assist in gathering intelligence and help run a secret US military drone bombing campaign that runs parallel to the well-documented CIA predator strikes, according to a well-placed source within the US military intelligence apparatus.
In 2006, the United States and Pakistan struck a deal that authorized JSOC to enter Pakistan to hunt Osama bin Laden with the understanding that Pakistan would deny it had given permission. Officially, the United States is not supposed to have any active military operations in the country.
A former senior executive at Blackwater confirmed the military intelligence source's claim that the company is working in Pakistan for the CIA and JSOC, the premier counterterrorism and covert operations force within the military. He said that Blackwater is also working for the Pakistani government on a subcontract with an Islamabad-based security firm that puts US Blackwater operatives on the ground with Pakistani forces in counter-terrorism operations, including house raids and border interdictions, in the North-West Frontier Province and elsewhere in Pakistan. This arrangement, the former executive said, allows the Pakistani government to utilize former US Special Operations forces who now work for Blackwater while denying an official US military presence in the country. He also confirmed that Blackwater has a facility in Karachi and has personnel deployed elsewhere in Pakistan.
The covert JSOC program with Blackwater in Pakistan dates back to at least 2007, according to the military intelligence source.
In addition to planning drone strikes and operations against suspected Al Qaeda and Taliban forces in Pakistan for both JSOC and the CIA, the Blackwater team in Karachi also helps plan missions for JSOC inside Uzbekistan against the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan, according to the military intelligence source. Blackwater does not actually carry out the operations, he said, which are executed on the ground by JSOC forces.
Blackwater, according to the military intelligence source, is not doing the actual killing as part of its work in Pakistan. "The SELECT personnel are not going into places with private aircraft and going after targets," he said. "It's not like Blackwater SELECT people are running around assassinating people." Instead, US Special Forces teams carry out the plans developed in part by Blackwater.
The former Blackwater executive, when asked for confirmation that Blackwater forces were not actively killing people in Pakistan, said, "that's not entirely accurate." While he concurred with the military intelligence source's description of the JSOC and CIA programs, he pointed to another role Blackwater is allegedly playing in Pakistan, not for the US government but for Islamabad. According to the executive, Blackwater works on a subcontract for Kestral Logistics, a powerful Pakistani firm, which specializes in military logistical support, private security and intelligence consulting.
The Blackwater personnel are technically advisers, but the former executive said that the line often gets blurred in the field. Blackwater "is providing the actual guidance on how to do [counterterrorism operations] and Kestral's folks are carrying a lot of them out, but they're having the guidance and the overwatch from some BW guys that will actually go out with the teams when they're executing the job," he said. "You can see how that can lead to other things in the border areas." He said that when Blackwater personnel are out with the Pakistani teams, sometimes its men engage in operations against suspected terrorists. "You've got BW guys that are assisting... and they're all going to want to go on the jobs--so they're going to go with them," he said. "So, the things that you're seeing in the news about how this Pakistani military group came in and raided this house or did this or did that--in some of those cases, you're going to have Western folks that are right there at the house, if not in the house." Blackwater, he said, is paid by the Pakistani government through Kestral for consulting services. "That gives the Pakistani government the cover to say, 'Hey, no, we don't have any Westerners doing this. It's all local and our people are doing it.' But it gets them the expertise that Westerners provide for [counterterrorism]-related work."
While JSOC has long played a central role in US counterterrorism and covert operations, military and civilian officials who worked at the Defense and State Departments during the Bush administration described in interviews with The Nation an extremely cozy relationship that developed between the executive branch (primarily through Vice President Dick Cheney and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld) and JSOC. During the Bush era, Special Forces turned into a virtual stand-alone operation that acted outside the military chain of command and in direct coordination with the White House. Throughout the Bush years, it was largely General McChrystal who ran JSOC. "What I was seeing was the development of what I would later see in Iraq and Afghanistan, where Special Operations forces would operate in both theaters without the conventional commander even knowing what they were doing," said Colonel Wilkerson. "That's dangerous, that's very dangerous. You have all kinds of mess when you don't tell the theater commander what you're doing."
The military intelligence source said that when Rumsfeld was defense secretary, JSOC was deployed to commit some of the "darkest acts" in part to keep them concealed from Congress.
At a covert forward operating base run by the US Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC) in the Pakistani port city of Karachi, members of an elite division of Blackwater are at the center of a secret program in which they plan targeted assassinations of suspected Taliban and Al Qaeda operatives, "snatch and grabs" of high-value targets and other sensitive action inside and outside Pakistan, an investigation by The Nation has found. The Blackwater operatives also assist in gathering intelligence and help run a secret US military drone bombing campaign that runs parallel to the well-documented CIA predator strikes, according to a well-placed source within the US military intelligence apparatus.
In 2006, the United States and Pakistan struck a deal that authorized JSOC to enter Pakistan to hunt Osama bin Laden with the understanding that Pakistan would deny it had given permission. Officially, the United States is not supposed to have any active military operations in the country.
A former senior executive at Blackwater confirmed the military intelligence source's claim that the company is working in Pakistan for the CIA and JSOC, the premier counterterrorism and covert operations force within the military. He said that Blackwater is also working for the Pakistani government on a subcontract with an Islamabad-based security firm that puts US Blackwater operatives on the ground with Pakistani forces in counter-terrorism operations, including house raids and border interdictions, in the North-West Frontier Province and elsewhere in Pakistan. This arrangement, the former executive said, allows the Pakistani government to utilize former US Special Operations forces who now work for Blackwater while denying an official US military presence in the country. He also confirmed that Blackwater has a facility in Karachi and has personnel deployed elsewhere in Pakistan.
The covert JSOC program with Blackwater in Pakistan dates back to at least 2007, according to the military intelligence source.
In addition to planning drone strikes and operations against suspected Al Qaeda and Taliban forces in Pakistan for both JSOC and the CIA, the Blackwater team in Karachi also helps plan missions for JSOC inside Uzbekistan against the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan, according to the military intelligence source. Blackwater does not actually carry out the operations, he said, which are executed on the ground by JSOC forces.
Blackwater, according to the military intelligence source, is not doing the actual killing as part of its work in Pakistan. "The SELECT personnel are not going into places with private aircraft and going after targets," he said. "It's not like Blackwater SELECT people are running around assassinating people." Instead, US Special Forces teams carry out the plans developed in part by Blackwater.
The former Blackwater executive, when asked for confirmation that Blackwater forces were not actively killing people in Pakistan, said, "that's not entirely accurate." While he concurred with the military intelligence source's description of the JSOC and CIA programs, he pointed to another role Blackwater is allegedly playing in Pakistan, not for the US government but for Islamabad. According to the executive, Blackwater works on a subcontract for Kestral Logistics, a powerful Pakistani firm, which specializes in military logistical support, private security and intelligence consulting.
The Blackwater personnel are technically advisers, but the former executive said that the line often gets blurred in the field. Blackwater "is providing the actual guidance on how to do [counterterrorism operations] and Kestral's folks are carrying a lot of them out, but they're having the guidance and the overwatch from some BW guys that will actually go out with the teams when they're executing the job," he said. "You can see how that can lead to other things in the border areas." He said that when Blackwater personnel are out with the Pakistani teams, sometimes its men engage in operations against suspected terrorists. "You've got BW guys that are assisting... and they're all going to want to go on the jobs--so they're going to go with them," he said. "So, the things that you're seeing in the news about how this Pakistani military group came in and raided this house or did this or did that--in some of those cases, you're going to have Western folks that are right there at the house, if not in the house." Blackwater, he said, is paid by the Pakistani government through Kestral for consulting services. "That gives the Pakistani government the cover to say, 'Hey, no, we don't have any Westerners doing this. It's all local and our people are doing it.' But it gets them the expertise that Westerners provide for [counterterrorism]-related work."
While JSOC has long played a central role in US counterterrorism and covert operations, military and civilian officials who worked at the Defense and State Departments during the Bush administration described in interviews with The Nation an extremely cozy relationship that developed between the executive branch (primarily through Vice President Dick Cheney and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld) and JSOC. During the Bush era, Special Forces turned into a virtual stand-alone operation that acted outside the military chain of command and in direct coordination with the White House. Throughout the Bush years, it was largely General McChrystal who ran JSOC. "What I was seeing was the development of what I would later see in Iraq and Afghanistan, where Special Operations forces would operate in both theaters without the conventional commander even knowing what they were doing," said Colonel Wilkerson. "That's dangerous, that's very dangerous. You have all kinds of mess when you don't tell the theater commander what you're doing."
The military intelligence source said that when Rumsfeld was defense secretary, JSOC was deployed to commit some of the "darkest acts" in part to keep them concealed from Congress.
Monday, November 23, 2009
NATO takes command of Afghan army, police training
NATO took command of the training of the Afghan army and police on Saturday to consolidate efforts on building an effective security force, a vital precondition for the withdrawal of foreign troops.
The existing U.S. training mission, CSTC-A, until now responsible for most of the training, is to merge with the new "NATO Training Mission-Afghanistan" (NTM-A), under a single NATO command, commanders said on Saturday at a ceremony in Kabul.
The existing U.S. training mission, CSTC-A, until now responsible for most of the training, is to merge with the new "NATO Training Mission-Afghanistan" (NTM-A), under a single NATO command, commanders said on Saturday at a ceremony in Kabul.
Israel kills Palestinians
The Israeli-Palestinian conflict has claimed almost 8,900 lives in two decades, the vast majority of them Palestinians, the Israeli human rights group B'Tselem said in a statement published on Sunday.
Israeli forces killed 7,398 Palestinians, including 1,537 minors, both in Israel and the occupied territories during that period, while Palestinians killed 1,483 Israelis, including 139 minors, B'Tselem said.
US military bases in the Persian Gulf
Nick Turse on the many US military bases being built and/or upgraded in the Middle East, which show that even with a withdrawal from Iraq, the US will not have withdrawn from the region.
See also this 2005 article saying that the US military is involved in building or upgrading 16 air bases in the Middle East.
And one by Chalmers Johnson.
And another one about US use of bases in Colombia following the refusal of Ecuador to renew the lease on their base.
See also this 2005 article saying that the US military is involved in building or upgrading 16 air bases in the Middle East.
And one by Chalmers Johnson.
And another one about US use of bases in Colombia following the refusal of Ecuador to renew the lease on their base.
Much of the new US strategy was clearly set out in May in an enthusiastic US Air Force (USAF) proposal for its military construction programme for the fiscal year 2010. One Colombian air base, Palanquero, was, the proposal said, unique "in a critical sub-region of our hemisphere where security and stability is under constant threat from... anti-US governments".
The proposal sets out a scheme to develop Palanquero which, the USAF says, offers an opportunity for conducting "full-spectrum operations throughout South America.... It also supports mobility missions by providing access to the entire continent, except the Cape Horn region, if fuel is available, and over half the continent if un-refuelled". ("Full-spectrum operations" is the Pentagon's jargon for its long-established goal of securing crushing military superiority with atomic and conventional weapons across the globe and in space.)
Blair lied about Iraq War
Leaked British documents show that then PM Tony Blair had secretly agreed to go to war against Iraq with George W. Bush and had begun operational planning in February, 2002, but lied to parliament about it, claiming that disarmament was the issue, not regime change. Blair ordered the British military not to engage in proper preparations for the war, since such steps would be observed by parliament and the representatives of the people might get a clue as to what was really going on. He therefore sent his troops, ill-equipped and unprepared, into battle. They also had no instructions or training as to Phase IV or post-war security and reconstruction, for which they were nevertheless made responsible. As a result of their unpreparedness, Iraq fell into chaos with the fall of the government and Basra was looted. The University of Basra lost most of its equipment and its entire library was stolen or burned, under the tender mercies of Mr. Blair's civilizing mission.
US pours millions into anti-Taliban militias
US special forces are supporting anti-Taliban militias in at least 14 areas of Afghanistan as part of a secretive programme that experts warn could fuel long-term instability in the country.
The Community Defence Initiative (CDI) is enthusiastically backed by Stanley McChrystal, the US general commanding Nato forces in Afghanistan, but details about the programme have been held back from non-US alliance members who are likely to strongly protest.
The attempt to create what one official described as "pockets of tribal resistance" to the Taliban involves US special forces embedding themselves with armed groups and even disgruntled insurgents who are then given training and support.
In return for stabilising their local area the militia helps to win development aid for their local communities, although they will not receive arms, a US official said.
Special forces will be able to access money from a US military fund to pay for the projects. The hope is that the militias supplement the Nato and Afghan forces fighting the Taliban. But the prospect of re-empowering militias after billions of international dollars were spent after the US-led invasion in 2001 to disarm illegally armed groups alarms many experts.
According to some western officials, the US government will make a pot of $1.3bn (£790m) available for the programme, although the US embassy said it could not yet comment on CDI.
Another controversial aspect of the programme is the involvement of Arif Noorzai, an Afghan politician from Helmand who is widely distrusted by many members of the international community.
Although many western officials want to sideline Noorzai and give oversight to the Afghan army and police, some of the CDI militias will build upon the 12,500 militiamen in 22 provinces Noorzai helped to set up this summer in the run up to the presidential elections on 20 August, an official said.
McChrystal "wanted to move to a much more informal model, which is far less visible and unaccountable, using Noorzai to find people through his own networks and then simply paying out cash for them to defend their areas."
Saturday, November 21, 2009
Akhundzada switched his militia's allegiances
Mr Akhundzada, a former mujahideen fighter against the Russians, was governor of Helmand from 2001 to 2005 until he was dismissed.
He was a member of a prominent southern Afghan clan and was tainted by association with the drug industry. Nine tons of opium were found in his cellars in 2005.
"When I was no longer governor the government stopped paying for the people who supported me," he said. "I sent 3,000 of them off to the Taliban because I could not afford to support them but the Taliban was making payments.
President Karzai is known to share the view that Mr Akhundzada's removal was a disaster and has publicly praised the senator for holding the Taliban at bay.
"We removed Akhundzada on the allegation of drug-running, and delivered the province to drug runners, the Taliban, to terrorists, to a threefold increase of drugs and poppy cultivation," Mr Karzai declared three years ago.
Mr Karzai is now rumoured to be considering restoring Mr Akhundzada, who is now an Afghan senator, to his old job in a forthcoming reshuffle. Experts believe he is one of a number of former warlords promised a post in return for supporting him in the August election.
Friday, November 20, 2009
Pakistan's dilemma
This article says that Pakistan faces a dilemma: either it can do Washington's bidding and attack insurgents in Pakistan to contribute to US plans to fight Taliban in Pakistan and Afghanistan; but by doing so it jeopardizes the possibility that Pakistan could use those insurgents as allies (proxies) to do its own bidding Afghanistan, for example when the US will leave, so it shouldn't upset those militants today.
Thursday, November 19, 2009
OXfam Afghan opinion survey
Oxfam's survey found the following:
- one in five Afghans have been tortured since the wars began in 1979; just 1% reported receiving any form of compensation or apology for the harm done to them.
- three quarters of Afghans have been forced to leave their homes since then.
Canada covered up torture in Afghanistan
Canada's government covered up reports of torture in Afghanistan that could involve Canadian troops as they handed prisoners to Afghan prisons where they could be tortured.
Canadian diplomats in Afghanistan were ordered in 2007 to hold back information in their reports to Ottawa about the handling of the prisoners, say defence and foreign affairs sources.
Canadian diplomats in Afghanistan were ordered in 2007 to hold back information in their reports to Ottawa about the handling of the prisoners, say defence and foreign affairs sources.
Obama's new military commissions
An article summarizing some of the changes and the flaws.
In 2006, the Supreme Court declared unconstitutional the Military Tribunals set up by the Bush administration to try terror suspects at Guantánamo. Congress then passed the Military Commissions Act (MCA) of 2006, "To authorize trial by military commission for violations of the law of war." But the MCA was also declared unconstitutional two years later. Now, it is possible that Obama's new 2009 amended version of the MCA will also be ruled to be unconstitutional.
In 2006, the Supreme Court declared unconstitutional the Military Tribunals set up by the Bush administration to try terror suspects at Guantánamo. Congress then passed the Military Commissions Act (MCA) of 2006, "To authorize trial by military commission for violations of the law of war." But the MCA was also declared unconstitutional two years later. Now, it is possible that Obama's new 2009 amended version of the MCA will also be ruled to be unconstitutional.
Provinical elections in Afghanistan
At the same time as the presidential elections on August 20, the provincial elections were held in Afghanistan, but the results are still not out. Corruption is also a problem at this level.
Karzai appoints the provincial governors, but provincial councils are elected.
Karzai appoints the provincial governors, but provincial councils are elected.
Wednesday, November 18, 2009
Jordan's services to US control of Middle East
An article about the center for training police for the Middle East in Jordan. US officers train police for Iraq, for instance. Also, police are trained to support Fatah against Hamas, showing that Fatah collaborates with the US and Israel to implement US goals in Palestine.
Since graduating its first class in November 2003, JIPTC has trained more than 50,000 police officers bound for Iraq. The academy has trained four battalions of the Palestinian security forces, deployed under the auspices of US security coordinator, General Keith Dayton, to back the "caretaker" Palestinian government of Mahmoud Abbas and Salam Fayyad in the West Bank.
With little fanfare, JIPTC has Jordan's regime playing a frontline role in the US project to transform the Middle East.
"Jordan continues to be a key partner and to play a positive role in the region," General David Petraeus, the US commander responsible for the region, told a Senate Armed Service Committee meeting in April.
"Jordan participates in many regional security initiatives and has placed itself at the forefront of police and military training for regional security forces."
The Palestinian forces have an open agenda to target Hamas and other Palestinian factions. In May, six people were killed when Dayton's forces attacked Hamas activists in the West Bank town of Qalqilya, sparking a gun battle that lasted several hours and took place without Israel's interference.
Hamas characterized the attack as "an awful crime" committed by "collaborators", while Abbas declared that his forces would continue to strike opposition groups "with an iron fist".
Dayton, in his only major policy speech to date, told the stridently pro-Israel think-tank, The Washington Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP), that JIPTC-trained Palestinian security forces had engaged in a series of violent raids that were "surprisingly well coordinated" with Israel. Dayton characterized the results as "electric".
"They have caught the attention of the Israeli defense establishment for their dedication, discipline, motivation and results," Dayton said. "The Jordanian-trained guys are the key."
To this end, Dayton told the WINEP audience: "You might ask, why Jordan? The answer is pretty simple. The Palestinians wanted to train in the region, but they wanted to be away from clan, family and political influences. The Israelis trust the Jordanians, and the Jordanians were anxious to help."
Since graduating its first class in November 2003, JIPTC has trained more than 50,000 police officers bound for Iraq. The academy has trained four battalions of the Palestinian security forces, deployed under the auspices of US security coordinator, General Keith Dayton, to back the "caretaker" Palestinian government of Mahmoud Abbas and Salam Fayyad in the West Bank.
With little fanfare, JIPTC has Jordan's regime playing a frontline role in the US project to transform the Middle East.
"Jordan continues to be a key partner and to play a positive role in the region," General David Petraeus, the US commander responsible for the region, told a Senate Armed Service Committee meeting in April.
"Jordan participates in many regional security initiatives and has placed itself at the forefront of police and military training for regional security forces."
The Palestinian forces have an open agenda to target Hamas and other Palestinian factions. In May, six people were killed when Dayton's forces attacked Hamas activists in the West Bank town of Qalqilya, sparking a gun battle that lasted several hours and took place without Israel's interference.
Hamas characterized the attack as "an awful crime" committed by "collaborators", while Abbas declared that his forces would continue to strike opposition groups "with an iron fist".
Dayton, in his only major policy speech to date, told the stridently pro-Israel think-tank, The Washington Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP), that JIPTC-trained Palestinian security forces had engaged in a series of violent raids that were "surprisingly well coordinated" with Israel. Dayton characterized the results as "electric".
"They have caught the attention of the Israeli defense establishment for their dedication, discipline, motivation and results," Dayton said. "The Jordanian-trained guys are the key."
To this end, Dayton told the WINEP audience: "You might ask, why Jordan? The answer is pretty simple. The Palestinians wanted to train in the region, but they wanted to be away from clan, family and political influences. The Israelis trust the Jordanians, and the Jordanians were anxious to help."
50 million hungry in US
President Barack Obama, who pledged to eradicate childhood hunger, has described as "unsettling" the agriculture department survey, which says 50 million people in the US – one in six of the population – were unable to afford to buy sufficient food to stay healthy at some point last year, in large part because of escalating unemployment or poorly paid jobs. That is a rise of more than one-third on the year before and the highest number since the survey began in 1995.
More than half of those affected are minorities, principally black people and Hispanics.
More than half of those affected are minorities, principally black people and Hispanics.
Millions more Americans do not go hungry only because they are so poor they receive government food stamps or rely on handouts from food banks such as Feeding America. In some states, such as West Virginia, one in six of the population is on food stamps.
"Although these new numbers are staggering, it should be noted that these numbers reflect the state of the nation one year ago, in 2008. Since then the economy has significantly weakened, and there are likely many more people struggling with hunger than this report states," she said.
Cost of Afghan surge
The White House Budget Office estimates that it will cost about $1 million for each additional soldier sent to Afghanistan. So, a surge of 30,000 to 40,000 troops -- which is what Army Gen. Stanley McChrystal is recommending -- would add $30 billion to $40 billion a year to the deficit.
At the Pentagon, the comptroller disagrees, estimating the cost of deploying and maintaining one soldier in Afghanistan for a full year at $500,000. So, bottom line would be $15 billion to $20 billion.
At the Pentagon, the comptroller disagrees, estimating the cost of deploying and maintaining one soldier in Afghanistan for a full year at $500,000. So, bottom line would be $15 billion to $20 billion.
Tuesday, November 17, 2009
Corruption and waste in Afghanistan
Pratap Chatterjee writes about the corruption in Afghanistan. For instance, VP Fahim's two brothers have a company that gets big contracts for reconstruction:
Fahim's brothers, notably Abdul Hasin, started to build a business empire -- and not long after, good fortune began to rain down on the family in the form of lucrative "reconstruction" contracts.
This leads to the waste of much international aid.
Fahim's brothers, notably Abdul Hasin, started to build a business empire -- and not long after, good fortune began to rain down on the family in the form of lucrative "reconstruction" contracts.
This leads to the waste of much international aid.
Monday, November 16, 2009
Friday, November 13, 2009
US pays Taliban
The US indirectly pays the Taliban through paying trucking companies in Afghanistan to move their supplies. The trucking companies have to pay the Taliban (and warlords, regional powerbrokers, etc.) to ensure safe passage wherever they go in Afghanistan.
Private security companies are also hired for security of the convoys, but the security firms don't really protect convoys of US military goods here because they simply can't; they need the Taliban's co-operation.
The Taliban/insurgents make good money out of this:
"It's a big part of their income," one of the top Afghan government security officials admits. In fact, US military officials in Kabul estimate that a minimum of 10% of the Pentagon's logistics contracts – hundreds of millions of dollars – consists of payments to insurgents.
As a military official in Kabul explained contracting in Afghanistan overall, "We understand that across the board, 10-20% goes to the insurgents. My intel [intelligence] guy would say it is closer to 10%. Generally, it is happening in logistics."
In other news, about 2000 civilians have been killed so far in 2009, more than in earlier years.
More civilians have died in attacks by Taliban insurgents than by aerial strikes and military operations by pro-government Afghan and international forces: According to UNAMA, 1,397 were killed by anti-government elements, 465 by pro-government forces and 165 by other actors.
Private security companies are also hired for security of the convoys, but the security firms don't really protect convoys of US military goods here because they simply can't; they need the Taliban's co-operation.
The Taliban/insurgents make good money out of this:
"It's a big part of their income," one of the top Afghan government security officials admits. In fact, US military officials in Kabul estimate that a minimum of 10% of the Pentagon's logistics contracts – hundreds of millions of dollars – consists of payments to insurgents.
As a military official in Kabul explained contracting in Afghanistan overall, "We understand that across the board, 10-20% goes to the insurgents. My intel [intelligence] guy would say it is closer to 10%. Generally, it is happening in logistics."
In other news, about 2000 civilians have been killed so far in 2009, more than in earlier years.
More civilians have died in attacks by Taliban insurgents than by aerial strikes and military operations by pro-government Afghan and international forces: According to UNAMA, 1,397 were killed by anti-government elements, 465 by pro-government forces and 165 by other actors.
Wednesday, November 11, 2009
Blackwater offered bribes, still in Iraq
Blackwater top executives offered bribes to Iraqi officials to reduce criticism of shootings in 2007 in which Blackwater killed 17 Iraqis.
And US government officials were aware of those plans of bribery: A senior State Department official said that American diplomats were not aware of any payoffs to Iraqi officials. Ms. Butenis, now the United States ambassador to Sri Lanka, declined to comment for this article. But other State Department officials confirmed that embassy officials had met with Blackwater executives to encourage them to compensate the victims of Nisour Square.
The State Department replaced Blackwater with a rival company in May, but Blackwater still does some work for the department in Iraq on a temporary basis.
And US government officials were aware of those plans of bribery: A senior State Department official said that American diplomats were not aware of any payoffs to Iraqi officials. Ms. Butenis, now the United States ambassador to Sri Lanka, declined to comment for this article. But other State Department officials confirmed that embassy officials had met with Blackwater executives to encourage them to compensate the victims of Nisour Square.
The State Department replaced Blackwater with a rival company in May, but Blackwater still does some work for the department in Iraq on a temporary basis.
Tuesday, November 10, 2009
Monday, November 9, 2009
Saturday, November 7, 2009
More US soldiers kill at bases
Rolling Stone reports on US soldiers killing other soldiers at Fort Carson.
The point of the article is that it's not only muslims at Fort Hood who kill people when they return from battle.
The point of the article is that it's not only muslims at Fort Hood who kill people when they return from battle.
US, warlrods, Karzai, AfPak
Gareth Porter discusses an important subject in Afghanistan: the tension between the US policies of supporting the Karzai government to make it look legitimate and honest vs. the US support for warlords and commanders regionally to maintain "stability":
There is no evidence that the administration is moving toward a more aggressive posture toward the warlords in general. Instead, the problem is viewed as one in which U.S. interests in supporting the central government must be balanced with its interests in cooperation with provincial and sub-provincial power holders, IPS has learned.
Pepe Escobar argues that the reasons why the US is in AfPak are geopolitical and geoeconomic: breaking the Asian Energy grid seems to be the main one:
Think-tankers in their comfy leather chairs do entertain the dream of the Pakistani state unraveling for good - victim of a clash within the military of Punjabis against Pashtuns. So what's in it for the US in terms of balkanization of AfPak? Quite some juicy prospects - chief of all neutralizing the also relentless Chinese drive for direct land access, from Xinjiang and across Pakistan, to the Arabian Sea (via the port of Gwadar, in Balochistan province).
Washington's rationale for occupying Afghanistan - never spelled out behind the cover story of "fighting Islamic extremism" - is pure Pentagon full spectrum dominance: to better spy on both China and Russia with forward outposts of the empire of bases; to engage in Pipelineistan, via the Trans-Afghan (TAPI) pipeline, if it ever gets built; and to have a controlling hand in the Afghan narco-trade via assorted warlords. Cheap heroin is literally flooding Russia, Iran and Eastern Europe. Not by accident, Moscow regards opium/heroin as the key issue to be tackled in Afghanistan, not Islamic fundamentalism.
It all harks back to a 1997 Brookings Institution publication by Geoffrey Kemp and Robert Harkavy, Strategic Geography and the Changing Middle East, in which they identify an "energy strategic ellipse" with a key node in the Caspian and another in the Persian Gulf, concentrating over 70% of global oil reserves and over 40% of natural gas reserves. The study stressed that the resources in these zones of "low demographic pressure" would be "threatened" by the pressure of billions living in the poor regions of South Asia. Thus the control of the Muslim Central Asian "stans" as well as Afghanistan would be essential as a wall against both China and India.
So all along the watchtower, the princes of war keep their view. That spells balkanization all along. It's full spectrum dominance against the Asian energy security grid. The Pentagon well knows that AfPak is the key land bridge between Iran to the west and China and India to the east; and that Iran has all the energy that both China and India need. The last thing full spectrum dominance wants is to have the AfPak theater subjected to more influence from Russia, China and Iran.
While the McChrystal show amuses the galleries, what's really at stake for Washington is how to orchestrate a progressive encirclement of Russia, China and Iran. And the name of the game is not really AfPak - even with all the breaking up and balkanization it may entail. It's all about the New Great Game for the control of Eurasia.
There is no evidence that the administration is moving toward a more aggressive posture toward the warlords in general. Instead, the problem is viewed as one in which U.S. interests in supporting the central government must be balanced with its interests in cooperation with provincial and sub-provincial power holders, IPS has learned.
Pepe Escobar argues that the reasons why the US is in AfPak are geopolitical and geoeconomic: breaking the Asian Energy grid seems to be the main one:
Think-tankers in their comfy leather chairs do entertain the dream of the Pakistani state unraveling for good - victim of a clash within the military of Punjabis against Pashtuns. So what's in it for the US in terms of balkanization of AfPak? Quite some juicy prospects - chief of all neutralizing the also relentless Chinese drive for direct land access, from Xinjiang and across Pakistan, to the Arabian Sea (via the port of Gwadar, in Balochistan province).
Washington's rationale for occupying Afghanistan - never spelled out behind the cover story of "fighting Islamic extremism" - is pure Pentagon full spectrum dominance: to better spy on both China and Russia with forward outposts of the empire of bases; to engage in Pipelineistan, via the Trans-Afghan (TAPI) pipeline, if it ever gets built; and to have a controlling hand in the Afghan narco-trade via assorted warlords. Cheap heroin is literally flooding Russia, Iran and Eastern Europe. Not by accident, Moscow regards opium/heroin as the key issue to be tackled in Afghanistan, not Islamic fundamentalism.
It all harks back to a 1997 Brookings Institution publication by Geoffrey Kemp and Robert Harkavy, Strategic Geography and the Changing Middle East, in which they identify an "energy strategic ellipse" with a key node in the Caspian and another in the Persian Gulf, concentrating over 70% of global oil reserves and over 40% of natural gas reserves. The study stressed that the resources in these zones of "low demographic pressure" would be "threatened" by the pressure of billions living in the poor regions of South Asia. Thus the control of the Muslim Central Asian "stans" as well as Afghanistan would be essential as a wall against both China and India.
So all along the watchtower, the princes of war keep their view. That spells balkanization all along. It's full spectrum dominance against the Asian energy security grid. The Pentagon well knows that AfPak is the key land bridge between Iran to the west and China and India to the east; and that Iran has all the energy that both China and India need. The last thing full spectrum dominance wants is to have the AfPak theater subjected to more influence from Russia, China and Iran.
While the McChrystal show amuses the galleries, what's really at stake for Washington is how to orchestrate a progressive encirclement of Russia, China and Iran. And the name of the game is not really AfPak - even with all the breaking up and balkanization it may entail. It's all about the New Great Game for the control of Eurasia.
Friday, November 6, 2009
Israeli ethnic cleansing in East Jerusalem
Al-Jazeera reports on Israeli ethnic cleansing of Palestinians in East-Jerusalem:
Iraq oil contracts
Global oil companies are returning to Iraq.
And contracts are being signed.
In June many of the oil majors walked away from signing energy deals with Iraq. But now they are agreeing to the June terms and signing the contracts. The following contracts have been agreed:
-ENI: a contract to boost production in the Zubair field near Basra, which it estimates has 6 billion barrels of reserves. ENI and its partners, Occidental Petroleum and Korea Gas, plan to increase output at Zubair from the current level of 190,000 barrels per day to 1.125 million within seven years. The companies will recover all costs and receive $2 in profit for each barrel above today's production level. In June they had insisted on $4.80 per incremental barrel. But after BP agreed to $2 per incremental barrel for tripling production at Rumaila-signing a deal on Nov. 3 in Baghdad-the benchmark price had been set.
-ExxonMobil-Royal Dutch Shell: West Qurna oil field.
-BP-CNPC: Rumailla
Shell, Exxon, and ConocoPhillips also are in talks that could help boost Iraq's oil production to more than 6 million barrels per day-behind only Saudi Arabia in OPEC.
Iraq is planning a second bidding round on Dec. 11-12. Forty-five international oil companies will compete for development right for 10 oil projects.
And contracts are being signed.
In June many of the oil majors walked away from signing energy deals with Iraq. But now they are agreeing to the June terms and signing the contracts. The following contracts have been agreed:
-ENI: a contract to boost production in the Zubair field near Basra, which it estimates has 6 billion barrels of reserves. ENI and its partners, Occidental Petroleum and Korea Gas, plan to increase output at Zubair from the current level of 190,000 barrels per day to 1.125 million within seven years. The companies will recover all costs and receive $2 in profit for each barrel above today's production level. In June they had insisted on $4.80 per incremental barrel. But after BP agreed to $2 per incremental barrel for tripling production at Rumaila-signing a deal on Nov. 3 in Baghdad-the benchmark price had been set.
-ExxonMobil-Royal Dutch Shell: West Qurna oil field.
-BP-CNPC: Rumailla
Shell, Exxon, and ConocoPhillips also are in talks that could help boost Iraq's oil production to more than 6 million barrels per day-behind only Saudi Arabia in OPEC.
Iraq is planning a second bidding round on Dec. 11-12. Forty-five international oil companies will compete for development right for 10 oil projects.
UN endorses Goldstone report
The Goldstone report was endorsed in the UN General Assembly.
The vote was 114 in favor and 18 against, with 44 abstentions.
The 18 countries that voted against the resolution included the United States, Australia, Canada, Germany, the Netherlands, Italy and Israel.
Ambassador Riyad Mansour, Permanent Observer of Palestine to the United Nations, singled out Ireland, one of the few Western nations to vote for the resolution, for "supporting" it.
Thursday, November 5, 2009
US, Pakistan, Afghanistan
A good article at ATOnline claiming that when Clinton went to Pakistan she reached the following agreements:
Abdullah Abdullah was pressured by the US to drop out of the election race (which Pakistan likes) and in exchange Pakistan would mediate between the US and the Taliban to make sure the US can eventually withdraw with honor. So this means that the Afghanistan solution will be dealt with with Pakistan, not so much the other regional countries.
Abdullah Abdullah was pressured by the US to drop out of the election race (which Pakistan likes) and in exchange Pakistan would mediate between the US and the Taliban to make sure the US can eventually withdraw with honor. So this means that the Afghanistan solution will be dealt with with Pakistan, not so much the other regional countries.
Karzai, warlords, elections
A very good article here on the challenges ahead in the short term for Afghanistan and Karzai: it says that because Karzai used the support of so many warlords, druglords and other shady figures in order for them to mobilize voters in his favor for the elections, now, Karzai has to pay them all back with government positions (at the central and provincial levels). The problem is that Karzai is also feeling the pressure from the West to clean up his government to look better in the eyes of the international community and legitimize US efforts in Afghanistan.
The following weeks, when Karzai will make his appointments, are therefore crucial.
Excerpts:
Many U.S. officials, Western diplomats and other experts fear that Karzai will have to award positions in the central and provincial governments to unsavory figures, including regional militia leaders and power brokers who oversaw the massive ballot box-stuffing on his behalf, in return for backing his re-election.
The following weeks, when Karzai will make his appointments, are therefore crucial.
Excerpts:
Many U.S. officials, Western diplomats and other experts fear that Karzai will have to award positions in the central and provincial governments to unsavory figures, including regional militia leaders and power brokers who oversaw the massive ballot box-stuffing on his behalf, in return for backing his re-election.
Karzai "is too beholden to these types and he doesn't see it yet in his interest to remove them and start a clean government and be a genuine partner with the international community," said Rachel Reid, who monitors Afghanistan for U.S.-based Human Rights Watch.
"The next few days, weeks and months are almost more important than the election itself as we see who Karzai appoints to his new government," she said. "This will send the signal of whether we see a new kind of governing, a more credible form of governing, or whether Afghanistan will continue to spiral into further corruption and insecurity."
"It's not enough to blame Karzai," Reid continued. "The U.S. and other major players in Afghanistan are complicit in this impunity culture. They have relationships with many of the most notorious former warlords, current criminals and militia leaders. They have high-level meetings with them, they use their armed gangs to guard their bases, they invite them to the White House. They, too, must clean up their act, or they don't have a leg to stand on when they come to tell Karzai to change his allegiances."
Other figures of concern who provided critical support for Karzai's re-election include former Helmand province governor Sher Mohammad Akhundzada, who was found with nine tons of drugs in 2005; Assadullah Khalid, a former governor of Kandahar province; and parliamentarian Abdul Rasul Sayyaf, a former anti-Soviet guerrilla leader and hard-line Islamist linked to Osama bin Laden who's accused of war crimes and land theft.
Karzai also received considerable help from his brother, Ahmad Wali Karzai, the main power in Kandahar, who's allegedly involved in drug trafficking and other abuses, but also reportedly receives payments from the CIA. He denies the allegations.
The U.S. defense official said there are concerns that Karzai may find himself in deep political trouble because he may be unable to keep all of the power-sharing promises he made to unsavory figures in return for votes.
"He can't deliver all the jobs he promised," the U.S. defense official said.
Wednesday, November 4, 2009
Tuesday, November 3, 2009
Afghanistan
Joya on Afghanistan as quoted by Hedges:
“In eight years less than 2,000 Talib have been killed and more than 8,000 innocent civilians has been killed,” she went on. “We believe that this is not war on terror. This is war on innocent civilians. Look at the massacres carried out by NATO forces in Afghanistan. Look what they did in May in the Farah province, where more than 150 civilians were killed, most of them women and children. They used white phosphorus and cluster bombs. There were 200 civilians on 9th of September killed in the Kunduz province, again most of them women and children. You can see the Web site of professor Marc Herold, this democratic man, to know better the war crimes in Afghanistan imposed on our people. The United States and NATO eight years ago occupied my country under the banner of woman’s rights and democracy. But they have only pushed us from the frying pan into the fire. They put into power men who are photocopies of the Taliban.”
Thousands of Afghan civilians have died from insurgent and foreign military violence. And American and NATO forces are responsible for almost half the civilian deaths in Afghanistan. Tens of thousands of Afghan civilians have also died from displacement, starvation, disease, exposure, lack of medical treatment, crime and lawlessness resulting from the war.
“In eight years less than 2,000 Talib have been killed and more than 8,000 innocent civilians has been killed,” she went on. “We believe that this is not war on terror. This is war on innocent civilians. Look at the massacres carried out by NATO forces in Afghanistan. Look what they did in May in the Farah province, where more than 150 civilians were killed, most of them women and children. They used white phosphorus and cluster bombs. There were 200 civilians on 9th of September killed in the Kunduz province, again most of them women and children. You can see the Web site of professor Marc Herold, this democratic man, to know better the war crimes in Afghanistan imposed on our people. The United States and NATO eight years ago occupied my country under the banner of woman’s rights and democracy. But they have only pushed us from the frying pan into the fire. They put into power men who are photocopies of the Taliban.”
Thousands of Afghan civilians have died from insurgent and foreign military violence. And American and NATO forces are responsible for almost half the civilian deaths in Afghanistan. Tens of thousands of Afghan civilians have also died from displacement, starvation, disease, exposure, lack of medical treatment, crime and lawlessness resulting from the war.
Iran nuclear deal
Sahimi on why the deal proposed by the West for Iran to ship all its LEU in one batch is not so good and Iran has good reasons to doubt Russia and France's behavior.
Another article here says that Iran would prefer to buy the fuel on the market rather than ship it outside Iran.
Another article here says that Iran would prefer to buy the fuel on the market rather than ship it outside Iran.
Monday, November 2, 2009
NATO taxing drugs in Afghanistan?
See here.
Occupiers involved in drug trade: Afghan minister
Occupiers involved in drug trade: Afghan minister
The Afghan minister of counter narcotics says foreign troops are earning
money from drug production in Afghanistan.
Press TV
Sunday, Nov 1st, 2009
The Afghan minister of counter narcotics says foreign troops are earning
money from drug production in Afghanistan.
General Khodaidad Khodaidad said the majority of drugs are stockpiled in two
provinces controlled by troops from the US, the UK, and Canada, IRNA
reported on Saturday.
He went on to say that NATO forces are taxing the production of opium in the
regions under their control.
Afghanistan is the world's biggest supplier of opium.
Drug production in the Central Asian country has increased dramatically
since the US-led invasion eight years ago.
A recent report by the United Nations states that Afghan opium is having a
devastating impact on the world, killing thousands in consumer countries.
Meanwhile, The New York Times reported on Wednesday that Ahmad Wali Karzai,
a brother of the Afghan president, is involved in the opium trade, meets
with Taliban leaders, and is also a CIA operative.
Sunday, November 1, 2009
Iran nuclear deal
An article reminding us that:
Iran had originally proposed to refuel the Tehran research reactor through purchasing fuel assemblies from international providers, including the United States -- in fact, involving the United States was Iran’s idea of a confidence-building measure. There was a clear consensus within the Iranian leadership in support of this proposal, with President Ahmadinejad speaking about it publicly.
Iran had originally proposed to refuel the Tehran research reactor through purchasing fuel assemblies from international providers, including the United States -- in fact, involving the United States was Iran’s idea of a confidence-building measure. There was a clear consensus within the Iranian leadership in support of this proposal, with President Ahmadinejad speaking about it publicly.
The United States responded with interest to Iran’s initiative but proposed, instead, that Iran ship most of Iran’s low enriched uranium stockpile outside the country for fabrication into fuel rods for the reactor in question. From an Iranian perspective, there are two potential flaws with this approach. First, Iran’s experience of prior cooperation with international actors on its nuclear program has been disappointing. During the 1970s, Iran invested more than $1 billion to build a French reactor which was contractually supposed to guarantee Iran access to that reactor’s fuel. But, when the Islamic Republic was established, France reneged. Now Iran is being called on to trust France, again, to return its fuel.
Second, at Iran’s current production rate for low enriched uranium, it would take Tehran nine to 12 months to replenish the uranium that would be sent out of the country under this deal, if it were sent out in a single batch. For serious national security planners in Tehran, whether they like Ahmadinejad or not, this is potentially problematic as it leaves almost a year’s window of increased vulnerability to an Israeli or U.S. military attack.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)