 |
||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Serving you since 1998 | ||||||||||||
|
|
Inside a crumbling Afghan coal mine
June 25, 2010
By Quentin Sommerville BBC News, Pul-e Khumri, northern Afghanistan
The coal wagon rattles along, descending sharply under the hills of Pul-e Khumri, deep into the mine.
Afghan minerals mean 'self sufficiency' in 10 years
June 25, 2010 BBC News
Afghanistan could be self-sufficient within a decade if its mineral resources are properly exploited, its mines minister has told the BBC.
Afghanistan Pledges 'Transparency' in Minerals Contracts
VOA News June 25, 2010
Afghanistan's mining minister is vowing transparency in the awarding of contracts to exploit what he says is the country's nearly $3 trillion in untapped mineral wealth.
Departure Of A Trusted U.S. Commander Leaves Afghans Even More Uncertain
June 24, 2010 By Abubakar Siddique Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty
As General Stanley McChrystal, the top U.S. and NATO commander in Afghanistan, prepared to face the music over his criticism of high-ranking members of the U.S. administration, he had some unlikely supporters in his corner.
As Generals Change, Afghan Debate Narrows to 2 Powerful Voices
New York Times By MARK LANDLER and HELENE COOPER June 24, 2010
WASHINGTON - The messy departure of Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal is likely to make the Obama administration’s internal debates over Afghanistan even more pointed, giving the military a powerful advocate for staying the course as it prepares for a reckoning with more impatient officials like Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr.
Obama, the decider
The Washington Post
President Obama's decision to relieve Gen. Stanley McChrystal of his oversight of the Afghanistan war Wednesday was painted by his allies -- and many in the media -- as a prime example of strong and decisive leadership.
Petraeus backs July 2011 Afghan withdrawal date
By the CNN Wire Staff June 24, 2010
Washington - Gen. David Petraeus told CNN on Thursday that he supports President Barack Obama's July 2011 deadline to start withdrawing U.S. troops from Afghanistan, a key point of contention between the president and many of his Republican critics in Congress.
U.N. upset over Afghan election vetting
Published: June 24, 2010
KABUL, Afghanistan, June 24 (UPI) -- The United Nations is disappointed with the vetting process for parliamentary elections in Afghanistan scheduled for September, the top U.N. envoy said.
'Partial victory' in challenge to UK Taliban transfers
June 25, 2010 BBC News
UK troops can continue to transfer Taliban suspects to Afghan detention but not to a Kabul site subject to an existing ban, the High Court has ruled.
Clinton confident in diplomatic team in Afghanistan: State Department
WASHINGTON, June 24 (Xinhua) -- U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has full confidence in her diplomatic team in Afghanistan, a State Department spokesman said on Thursday, in apparent refusal of some lawmakers' call for a shake-up of civilian personnel following the sacking of U.S. military chief in Afghanistan.
How a negotiated peace could leave Afghanistan looking like Lebanon
Washington Post By Daniel Serwer Friday, June 25, 2010
While President Obama is surging troops into Afghanistan and money into Pakistan, plans are being laid for a negotiated settlement to be reached before the beginning of the American drawdown in July 2011. Gen. David Petraeus's appointment this week as U.S. commander in Afghanistan increases the urgency of defining the terms of such a settlement.
Grisly Attack on Civilians Reported in Southern Afghanistan
VOA News June 25, 2010
Afghan police say they have found the mutilated bodies of 11 civilians in a field in the southern part of the country. Authorities immediately blamed Taliban insurgents for the killings.
New Australian PM Reassures US on Afghanistan
VOA News June 25, 2010 Phil Mercer | Sydney
New Australian Prime Minister Julia Gillard has reassured the White House that Canberra intends to maintain its military deployment in Afghanistan. On the first day in her new job, Ms. Gillard spoke with U.S. President Barack Obama to reaffirm Australia's commitment to the war against insurgents.
Pakistan backs Afghan reconciliation process
ISLAMABAD, June 25 (Xinhua) -- Pakistani Prime Minister Syed Yusuf Raza Gilani Friday announced Pakistan's support for the process of reconciliation and integration in the neighboring war- shattered Afghanistan and promised its help in the plan.
Pakistan, Afghanistan agree not to use territories against each others
ISLAMABAD, June 25 (Xinhua) -- Pakistan and Afghanistan Friday agreed not to allow their territories for use against each others' interests.
Australia's Gillard assures US over Afghan war backing
Friday, 25 June 2010 05:01 UK BBC News
Australia's new Prime Minister, Julia Gillard, has assured US President Barack Obama that she supports the military campaign in Afghanistan.
Pakistan wants early transit trade accord with Afghanistan
June 24, 2010
(AFP) – ISLAMABAD — Pakistan on Thursday called for early finalisation of a transit trade agreement with landlocked neighbour Afghanistan, hoping for a major increase in bilateral trade.
Building Afghan Air Corps Expensive Task
VOA News June 23, 2010 Jennifer Glasse
Kandahar - In Afghanistan, planes and helicopters are essential for moving troops and supplies, providing air support for ground forces and keeping an eye on insurgents.
Afghanistan's only golf course: Bring your clubs and AK-47
The nine-hole Kabul golf course is the only one in Afghanistan. The greens are petroleum black. The fairways filled with rocks and scrub. But that doesn't stop golf aficionados who play with a ball finder and armed security guards.
By Timothy Kenny, Contributor / June 24, 2010 The Christian Science Monitor
Qargha, Afghanistan - After war, a time for golf.
Back to Top
Inside a crumbling Afghan coal mine
June 25, 2010
By Quentin Sommerville BBC News, Pul-e Khumri, northern Afghanistan
The coal wagon rattles along, descending sharply under the hills of Pul-e Khumri, deep into the mine.
At about 100m (328ft) down, the tunnel narrows and it is striking how primitive it all looks.
The roof is held up by bent and twisted wooden stakes which look like they were put in many hundreds of years ago rather than 60 years ago, when the mine was first dug.
It was the Soviets who first discovered Afghanistan's huge mineral wealth: coal, gold, silver, iron and copper ore, and more besides.
Little safety
More recent surveys say it could be worth trillions of dollars.
But decades of war mean that these vast natural resources have hardly been touched.
And in the Pul-e Khumri coal mine, nothing much has changed since the Soviets left.
Down inside the mine, at 300m below the hills, the miners scrape the coal from the rock, and fill the wagons.
Except for a ventilation fan there is no mechanical or electrical equipment. And there's little safety gear either - everybody is absolutely filthy.
The air is cool, until the shaft takes a turn, then the heat becomes intense.
It is very hard, physical, work but there is no shortage of coal. It glistens in the wall, at times it pours from the rock face.
'Dig by hand'
But Afghanistan has neither the means nor the money to get it out of the ground.
Standing in the gloom, the air is thick with coal dust, one miner, breathing heavily, said: "I've been working here for the last 12 years. I work by hand. We push the carts by hand and you can see that we even dig by hand."
The half dozen workers here have it tough. They are bare-footed and stripped to the waist as they hack at the seams with pick axes.
The coal is a fine powder, and the dust covers them, blackening their teeth and covering their bodies.
"Things were better during the 1980s," explained another man.
"We had wood. We had equipment. Now we don't have anything, and what we do have, doesn't work. We have nothing," he said.
Nothing that is, except huge mineral wealth, which Afghanistan's neighbours, and the rest the world, want to get their hands on.
It is upon exiting the mine, stepping into the bright sunshine, that the problems confronting those wishing to exploit Afghanistan's mineral wealth become blindingly obvious.
The mine is in the middle of a desert. For miles and miles around there are barren hills and barely any roads. Certainly no paved roads reach the mine.
Backbreaking work
And, on the other side of the hills, are the Taliban. Potential investors in the mine have been to scared to visit.
And there are other worries too. Afghanistan's deep and widespread corruption means its people may not benefit from its natural riches.
"There's evidence of corruption already," says political analyst and parliamentary candidate Haroun Mir.
"The [contract for] the biggest copper mine in the region was awarded without transparency.
"There are other small mines too that were awarded to people linked to political power in Afghanistan.
"Business and politics in Afghanistan, are interlinked, you cannot become a successful businessman if you are not involved in political power," he said.
At the mine, the men bring more coal to the surface, straining as they push the heavy iron wagons full of coal.
At the end of the narrow gauge rail line, the wagon is tipped, and the coal falls to a huge black pile in the sand.
It has been back-breaking work for the miners to get it this far - but given the challenges facing Afghanistan, this may have been the easy part.
Back to Top
Back to Top
Afghan minerals mean 'self sufficiency' in 10 years
June 25, 2010 BBC News
Afghanistan could be self-sufficient within a decade if its mineral resources are properly exploited, its mines minister has told the BBC.
Wahid Shahrani is in London to encourage the world's mining companies to invest in his country.
He says his country has untapped mineral wealth worth in excess of $3tn.
Mr Shahrani says that mining could move the country from being aid dependent to being self-sufficient in 10 years.
Vast reserves
The BBC's Jill McGivering says that Mr Shahrani is on a multi-billion dollar sales tour, trying to drum up bids from the world's mining companies for his country's untapped minerals.
These include vast reserves of oil, gas, copper, gold and lithium.
Mr Shahrani sees mining as the country's economic mainstay in the future.
In seven years mining taxes should pay the government $1bn a year, he says, and within a decade Afghanistan could be self-sufficient.
In an interview with the BBC, Mr Shahrani dismissed critics who argue that such a massive influx of money raises concerns about corruption.
"We have improved our legislation, the procedures have been upgraded and we have been getting a tremendous amount of support from our international partners," Mr Shahrani said.
"In future whatever contracts would be awarded, all the information will be published, to make sure that all the relevant stakeholders, civil society and media and parliament, will have access to the information, to make sure we will have sufficient amount of the safeguards, to make sure that we will achieve the high standards of transparency."
Security is another key concern in relation to exploiting the country's mineral reserves, correspondents say.
The first big projects on offer are in the most secure regions of the country - and the government has promised investors a special mining protection security force.
Mining companies will also have to invest heavily in infrastructure - from electricity to roads and railways, Mr Shahrani said.
ESTIMATED DEPOSITS
Iron: $421bn
Copper: $274bn
Niobium: $81bn
Cobalt: $51bn
Gold: $25bn
Back to Top
Back to Top
Afghanistan Pledges 'Transparency' in Minerals Contracts
VOA News June 25, 2010
Afghanistan's mining minister is vowing transparency in the awarding of contracts to exploit what he says is the country's nearly $3 trillion in untapped mineral wealth.
Wahidullah Shahrani on Friday dismissed concerns about corruption in the bidding process. He told a reporter in London new legislation will required publication of information about all contracts that are awarded, in order to achieve "high standards of transparency."
The mining minister is in Britain seeking investors' bids for a share in Afghanistan's untapped deposits of iron, lithium, gold and other minerals. Shahrani said Afghanistan could be economically self-sufficient within a decade if its mineral resources are exploited properly.
Afghan and U.S. officials say the newfound wealth will benefit the Afghan people, but some warn it will take years to develop the mineral resources. Challenges include a lack of infrastructure and security, with some of the deposits located in Taliban strongholds.
Some information for this report was provided by AFP and Reuters.
Back to Top
Back to Top
Departure Of A Trusted U.S. Commander Leaves Afghans Even More Uncertain
June 24, 2010 By Abubakar Siddique Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty
As General Stanley McChrystal, the top U.S. and NATO commander in Afghanistan, prepared to face the music over his criticism of high-ranking members of the U.S. administration, he had some unlikely supporters in his corner.
Afghan President Hamid Karzai and his younger half-brother, Ahmed Wali Karzai, made public pleas for U.S. President Barack Obama to retain the general, despite the controversy McChrystal generated with the disparaging remarks he and members of his team made in a "Rolling Stone" profile published this week. From the Afghan perspective, the Karzais argued, McChrystal was seen as the man responsible for dramatically reducing civilian casualties and for cultivating friendships with senior Afghan officials.
But nothing could save McChrystal. He tendered his resignation and Obama accepted it on June 23. In announcing McChrystal's departure, Obama stressed that is was a "personnel decision, not a policy decision," adding that his critical statements "erode the trust that's necessary for our team to work together to achieve our objectives in Afghanistan."
Obama did express his overall support of McChrystal's counterinsurgency plans as he handed the command to General David Petraeus. As U.S. and NATO troop numbers were built up under the Obama administration, it was McChrystal who had attempted to build a bond of trust with beleaguered Afghan civilians by ordering his soldiers to protect them and to provide help in rebuilding their economy and government institutions.
Rifts Exposed?
Speaking to RFE/RL's Radio Free Afghanistan today, Karzai spokesman Wahid Omar praised McChrystal as a "commander who had the trust of Afghan government and people." With his resignation, many Afghans and international observers were left to question the counterinsurgency approach the international coalition is attempting to implement in Afghanistan.
Lawmaker Noor ul-Haq Uloomi told RFE/RL the episode exposes a rift within the U.S. administration and its international allies. And this rift, he says, has contributed recently to setbacks in Marjah and Kandahar.
Thousands of NATO troops went into the Taliban stronghold in Marjah in February. But the agricultural town in southern Helmand Province is far from stabilized.
Following his resignation, McChrystal issued a statement reaffirming his "strong support" for the Obama administration's Afghan strategy. But in the "Rolling Stone" profile, the general described the Marjah operation as a "bleeding ulcer."
Amid ongoing efforts to bring stability to Kandahar, the Taliban has mounted a counteroperation and launched a campaign of targeted murders of key officials that is hampering plans to build local institutions.
Uloomi, a former communist military commander in southern Afghanistan in the 1980s, suggests that divisions among Western leaders ultimately harm Afghans. "Who is harmed when they don't have coordination among themselves?" he asks.
“The Afghan people are at a loss when the situation deteriorates -- insecurity increases and more innocent people are killed," Uloomi says. "From the beginning the Afghans perceived the international community to be united. And [believed] that they have come to Afghanistan to implement their plans for [stabilizing] their country."
Reconstruction And Counterinsurgency
Antonio Giustozzi, a researcher at the London School of Economics and Political Science, tells RFE/RL that counterinsurgency is an improvement on previous approaches to Afghanistan, in which a small number of Western troops and special forces relied on heavy weapons to repel militants. Those tactics resulted in too many civilian casualties and did little to win Afghan hearts and minds.
McChrystal's approach, to the contrary, centered on building up troop numbers to protect the population and slowly building the economy and government institutions so they can sustain themselves.
Giustozzi, who has written books about the Taliban insurgency, said that the implementation of a counterinsurgency effort in Afghanistan is fraught with problems. "The weak spot of the counterinsurgency effort is on the political side, meaning there isn't a political strategy accompanying it,” he says.
"Tthe expansion or the strengthening of the governance on the Afghan side that should have accompanied the counterinsurgency effort is not really happening or is happening too slowly," he adds. "In theory, probably with sufficient resources and time any war can be won, but the question is whether the resources or time are there."
Petraeus, 57, is expected soon to be confirmed as the new commander of NATO and U.S. forces in Afghanistan. His job will be to lead nearly 150,000 Western troops against tens of thousands of Afghan and foreign Muslim guerillas based in teeming Afghan cities, fertile river valleys, and isolated mountain villages.
Once in command, he will face the challenge of repeating the success he had in implementing a counterinsurgency in Iraq, which basically rescued the Iraq war effort in 2007. By comparison, the task at hand in Afghanistan appears monumental.
‘Trust And Calm’
Karzai spokesman Wahid Omar tells RFE/RL's Radio Free Afghanistan that Obama spoke to President Karzai before announcing the appointment of Petraeus as his new military commander in Afghanistan, and that Karzai backs the decision wholeheartedly. "In our opinion, General Petraeus is an outstanding military commander like McChrystal," he says.
"We hope that his arrival in Afghanistan will accelerate plans that McChrystal had set in motion. This will ultimately strengthen the process for peace and stability," he adds. "And together with the Afghan government and people, he will be able to bring about an atmosphere of trust and calm in Afghanistan."
Others, too, express confidence that the change in command will not deter the trans-Atlantic alliance from its mission in Afghanistan.
Mark Sedwill, McChrystal's civilian counterpart in Afghanistan, had nothing but praise for his former colleague, calling him "an outstanding military commander" and one of the finest men he has known.
But in an interview with RFE/RL's Radio Free Afghanistan today, Sedwill dismissed the suggestion that the command change would have palpable effects on military operations in Afghanistan. "Let me reassure the people of Afghanistan that not only will the campaign remain on course, General McChrystal's departure and General Petraeus' arrival will have no impact on the outcome."
On that point, even the enemy is in agreement.
Yousuf Ahmadi, a Taliban spokesman, has said it matters little who commands NATO and U.S. forces. "We don't care whether it's McChrystal or Petraeus," he told Agence France-Presse. "We'll be fighting the invading forces until they leave."
RFE/RL Radio Free Afghanistan correspondents Abdul Hameed Mohmand and Breshna Nazari contributed reporting from Kabul.
Back to Top
Back to Top
As Generals Change, Afghan Debate Narrows to 2 Powerful Voices
New York Times By MARK LANDLER and HELENE COOPER June 24, 2010
WASHINGTON - The messy departure of Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal is likely to make the Obama administration’s internal debates over Afghanistan even more pointed, giving the military a powerful advocate for staying the course as it prepares for a reckoning with more impatient officials like Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr.
President Obama insisted he was switching military leaders, not strategies, when he fired General McChrystal, the top commander in Afghanistan, on Wednesday. But administration insiders acknowledge that there have been preliminary discussions about whether to rethink the approach to a war that is clearly bogging down.
In those deliberations, the new commander, Gen. David H. Petraeus, brings more political capital than his predecessor. The White House may find it harder to overrule the man who rode to the rescue after the McChrystal blowup, particularly since he has so much support among Republicans and Democrats on Capitol Hill. He wrote the Army’s field manual on counterinsurgency strategy, and has voiced only qualified support for Mr. Obama’s timetable to start withdrawing troops by July 2011.
Mr. Obama reiterated Thursday that the pace of withdrawal would be open to debate. “We did not say that starting July 2011 suddenly there would be no troops from the United States or allied countries in Afghanistan,” he said. “We didn’t say we’d be switching off the lights and closing the door behind us. We said that we’d begin a transition phase in which the Afghan government is taking on more and more responsibility.”
At the same time, though, the setbacks on the battlefield and persistent questions about the reliability of the Afghan president, Hamid Karzai, have strengthened Mr. Biden’s hand, some officials said. During the policy debate last fall, he argued for a narrower counterterrorism strategy with many fewer troops and a clear endgame for the United States. In many ways, setting the July 2011 date was a concession to Mr. Biden.
“There aren’t camps; there is a policy,” said Antony Blinken, the vice president’s top national security adviser. “It’s a crystal clear policy set by the president that everyone is following. He said at the West Point speech that after 18 months troops will begin to come home.”
With General Petraeus now directly responsible for reversing the tide in Afghanistan, he and Mr. Biden will loom large in the coming months, two pivotal voices as Mr. Obama weighs his strategy against the political costs of an unpopular war. The symbolism was evident in the Rose Garden on Wednesday when Mr. Obama announced the change in command, flanked by the general and Mr. Biden.
“If there continue to be problems,” a senior official said, “the debate will intensify between those who say we have to stick with it and those who say we lost the moment to go into Kandahar, and we have to go to Plan B.”
Plan B would be some combination of Mr. Biden’s stripped-down counterterrorism strategy — including a hard deadline for American withdrawal — and an accelerated effort by Mr. Karzai’s government to reconcile with the leaders of the Taliban insurgency, said the official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss the internal deliberations.
Any public showdown between the general and the vice president is likely to wait until the end of the year, when the administration begins a formal review of whether the troop surge has worked. Until then, White House officials said, Mr. Biden fully supports the strategy.
“We’ll know in December,” an official said. “By the time we get to July 2011, all the presurge forces will have been there for two years. That’s a perfectly appropriate amount of time to begin transferring troops out.”
In one way, the appointment of General Petraeus may quell the dissonant inside voices that have dogged the administration’s Afghanistan policy, if only because of his stature. But outside critics and even some insiders say more housecleaning may be needed, pointing to civilian officials like Ambassador Karl W. Eikenberry and the special representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan, Richard C. Holbrooke.
Relations between these figures have often been toxic, administration officials said, partly because the civilian side of the team has several strong-willed personalities with overlapping duties, rather than an undisputed leader like General Petraeus.
Mr. Obama maintained, however, that he did not plan to purge other senior Afghanistan advisers. “I am confident that we’ve got a team in place that can execute,” he said Thursday, answering a question from a reporter about whether he planned to fire anyone else. But, he added rather ominously, “I’m paying very close attention to make sure that they execute. And I will be insisting on extraordinary performance moving forward.”
Whatever their views on Afghanistan policy, Mr. Biden’s aides point out that he has a long history with General Petraeus, which began in 2003 during the invasion of Iraq. As a senator from Delaware and later leader of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Mr. Biden made several trips to Iraq, where he spent time with General Petraeus.
“The vice president early on in the process strongly supported the idea of asking General Petraeus to take command in Afghanistan,” said Jay Carney, Mr. Biden’s spokesman. White House officials say that during the intense two days leading up to General McChrystal’s firing, Mr. Biden was a strong advocate for General Petraeus as a replacement.
With the war effort lagging, officials said the general’s greatest immediate challenge would be convincing reluctant allies and nervous Afghans — not to mention the American public — that the strategy was still viable. Before he left, General McChrystal warned that violence in parts of Afghanistan would still be intense by late fall. Supporters of General Petraeus said he would bring a deft touch with the allies, a skill that General McChrystal sometimes lacked.
“Petraeus is extraordinarily adept in terms of international politics and in dealing with Karzai and regional powers, but he also has a feel for the insurgent groups on the ground,” said John A. Nagl, president of the Center for a New American Security, a nonpartisan policy institute in Washington. “And he has extraordinary credibility in Washington.”
Moreover, General Petraeus will surround himself with a team of military and civilian aides who are equally seasoned in the political intricacies of earlier battles in the Balkans and Iraq, and, in the words of one Army officer who knows the general well, “play well with others.”
Armed with those attributes, his backers say, the general will be able to parry any argument that a more limited strategy offers the best way out of Afghanistan for the United States.
Eric Schmitt contributed reporting.
Back to Top
Back to Top
Obama, the decider
The Washington Post
President Obama's decision to relieve Gen. Stanley McChrystal of his oversight of the Afghanistan war Wednesday was painted by his allies -- and many in the media -- as a prime example of strong and decisive leadership.
"He was resolute, " said Democratic strategist Paul Begala on CNN. "He was very serious. He was very professional about it."
Michael Crowley of Time magazine called Obama's decision to fire McChrystal and recruit Gen. David Petraeus to run the Afghanistan war the "firm action of a hands-on executive."
The rave reviews for Obama as leader stand in stark contrast to the findings of an NBC/Wall Street Journal national poll -- released Tuesday night -- that suggest the ongoing oil spill is negatively affecting Obama's image in the eyes of the American people.
According to the poll, 49 percent of respondents said Obama had strong leadership qualities -- a significant erosion from the 70 percent who said the same in a January 2009 NBC/WSJ poll.
A similar trend line was apparent when people were asked whether they agreed with the idea that Obama was "firm and decisive" (44 percent now, 63 percent in January 2009) and that he has the "ability to handle crisis" (40 percent now, 46 percent in January 2009).
The impact of the oil spill on those numbers is clear from the data. More than one in five voters (22 percent) named the oil spill as the highest priority facing the country, rivaling "job creation and economic growth" (33 percent) as the top priority.
And, on the oil spill, Obama's handling of the issue is slightly more negative -- 42 percent approve, 50 percent disapprove -- than his overall job performance number, which stands at 45 percent approve/48 percent disapprove.
For Obama, then, the crisis created by McChrystal's baffling -- at best -- comments in a Rolling Stone profile actually affords something of an opportunity to bend public perception back in his favor.
The White House moved quickly to take advantage of that opportunity -- doling out details for a series of tick-tocks written by the big media organizations (including this one) that cast Obama as simultaneously deliberate and decisive.
An example: "The president didn't want to see pettiness; that this was not about personalities or reputations. It's about our men and women in uniform and about serving the country," one senior Administration official told the New York Times.
This president and his team understand that unforeseen circumstances are forever interrupting the best-laid plans of any administration. (Remember how Obama was going to spend all of his time talking about the economy? That was, of course, pre-oil spill.)
Put another way: Any successful presidency is built on making lemonade out of lemons.
The early returns on the Obama administration's attempt to do just that when it came to McChrystal are positive. But the NBC/WSJ survey suggests that the oil spill is providing a powerful counterweight as the president seeks to reassert the image of himself as a leader that helped get him elected in 2008.
By Chris Cillizza | June 24, 2010; 2:07 PM ET
Back to Top
Back to Top
Petraeus backs July 2011 Afghan withdrawal date
By the CNN Wire Staff June 24, 2010
Washington - Gen. David Petraeus told CNN on Thursday that he supports President Barack Obama's July 2011 deadline to start withdrawing U.S. troops from Afghanistan, a key point of contention between the president and many of his Republican critics in Congress.
Petraeus -- tapped to replace Gen. Stanley McChrystal as the U.S. commander in Afghanistan -- expressed his respect and appreciation for McChrystal's work and said the circumstances surrounding the change in command are "sad."
Obama relieved McChrystal of his duties Wednesday after the general and his staff were quoted in a Rolling Stone magazine article making comments that appear to mock top administration officials.
Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Joint Chiefs Chairman Adm. Mike Mullen endorsed Obama's decision during a Pentagon news conference Thursday. Mullen said he was nearly physically "sick" when he read the Rolling Stone story. The comments in the article constituted an unacceptable challenge to civilian authority, the men said.
"We do not have the right, nor should we ever assume the prerogative to cast doubt upon the ability or mock the motives of our civilian leaders, elected or appointed," Mullen said. "We are and must remain a neutral instrument of the state."
Petraeus' remarks to CNN's Dana Bash and Ted Barrett were his first public comments since being chosen as the new U.S. military chief for the Afghan conflict. The Senate Armed Services Committee is set to begin his confirmation hearings Tuesday morning.
"I support the president's policy, and I will also provide the best professional military advice as we conduct assessments," Petraeus said.
The general said it's a privilege to serve. "It's obviously a hugely important mission," he said.
"It's very sad that I have to assume it in this manner," he said. We "all have enormous respect and gratitude to Gen. McChrystal for all that he did. He's played a key role in helping get the inputs right in Afghanistan."
Petraeus declined to immediately say whether he would fire the unnamed officers on McChrystal's staff who are quoted in Rolling Stone making disparaging remarks.
"You have to understand an officer -- a commander -- cannot prejudge a situation because that crosses the line into what is called 'command influence,'" he said. "So we'll need to sort out the facts and take the appropriate action once we've done that."
Mullen emphasized that Petraeus will have the authority to make changes to McChrystal's battle plans and tactics. Obama also reinforced the notion of both tactical and strategic flexibility at the top levels of U.S. command, stressing Thursday that the July 2011 date is only for the start of the process under which U.S. forces will be removed from Afghanistan.
The decision to replace McChrystal with Petraeus was hotly debated by top administration officials. While Gates and Mullen both publicly defended Obama's decision to remove McChrystal, Gates initially backed keeping McChrystal on the job because top Pentagon brass considered the general vital to the Afghan war effort, a senior Pentagon official told CNN's Barbara Starr.
But in a 35-minute meeting in the Oval Office on Tuesday, Obama said he wanted to replace McChrystal with Petraeus, Gates said.
"It was the president's idea," Gates told reporters Thursday. "It was the president who first raised Petraeus' name."
The appointment of Petraeus is the "best possible outcome to an awful situation," Gates said.
Military officers both in Washington and on the ground in Afghanistan have continually stressed Obama's assertion that the switch in leadership does not represent a change in policy.
"Nothing changes about our strategy," said Mullen, who is departing for Afghanistan and Pakistan on Thursday night.
"We remain absolutely focused on our tasks and the operational tempo will not miss a beat," Lt. Gen. Sir Nick Parker said Thursday. Parker, who is British, has assumed command pending Petraeus' confirmation by the U.S. Senate.
Petraeus, who also led the U.S. military surge in Iraq, expressed gratitude toward his wife Thursday, saying he had asked about her feelings on his new assignment
"She's a great wife, army daughter and army mother," he said.
CNN's Ted Barrett, Dana Bash, Barbara Starr and Alan Silverleib contributed to this report.
Back to Top
Back to Top
U.N. upset over Afghan election vetting
Published: June 24, 2010
KABUL, Afghanistan, June 24 (UPI) -- The United Nations is disappointed with the vetting process for parliamentary elections in Afghanistan scheduled for September, the top U.N. envoy said.
A vetting committee examining candidates for September disqualified only 13 of the 2,577 candidates for parliament because of links to illegal armed groups.
Staffan de Mistura, the U.N. special envoy to Afghanistan, said he wasn't pleased with the effectiveness of the vetting committee.
"The vetting committee could have done a more thorough job and at this stage we are disappointed," he said in a statement by the U.N. Assistance Mission in Afghanistan.
The commission findings now head to the U.N.-backed Electoral Complaints Commission and the Afghan Independent Election Commission for review in accordance with Afghan law.
Afghan President Hamid Karzai stoked controversy in February when he moved to take control over the appointment of members of the ECC. U.N. officials said then they would examine the legality of the move.
The Afghan president later said de Mistura could pick two international panelists to serve on the ECC.
The ECC in an October investigation said there was "clear and convincing evidence of fraud" in the August contest that secured a second term for Karzai.
Back to Top
Back to Top
'Partial victory' in challenge to UK Taliban transfers
June 25, 2010 BBC News
UK troops can continue to transfer Taliban suspects to Afghan detention but not to a Kabul site subject to an existing ban, the High Court has ruled.
The legal challenge by anti-war activist Maya Evans, from East Sussex, claimed the policy led to "horrible abuse" and violated international law.
Judges said the practise could continue with other detention facilities if existing safeguards were strengthened.
The government welcomed the decision and said monitoring was in place.
The High Court judges said Ms Evans had won "a partial victory" but had not succeeded in her attempt to stop all transfers.
Ms Evans's lawyers told the High Court that detainees handed over to the National Directorate of Security (NDS), a secret service organisation in Afghanistan, had been tortured.
They said detainees had suffered beatings, electrocution, sleep deprivation, been forced into stress positions, and undergone whipping with rubber cables.
They also said the process of handing over suspect insurgents to the NDS was "emphatically not" compatible with Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
Transfer conditions
But the judges refused to rule the transfer policy unlawful, considering instead the individual history of each NDS detention facility - NDS Kabul, NDS Kandahar and NDS Lashkar Gah.
They said: "There is a real risk that detainees transferred to NDS Kabul will be subjected to torture or serious mistreatment.
"Transfers would therefore be in breach of the secretary of state's policy and unlawful."
Transfers could lawfully be made to NDS Kandahar and NDS Lashkar Gah, "provided that existing safeguards are strengthened by observance of specified conditions".
The judges also ruled that isolated examples of abuse at those facilities "are possible, but the operation of the monitoring system - including observance of the specified conditions - will be sufficient to guard against abuse on such a scale as to give rise to a real risk of torture or serious mistreatment".
Ms Evans, from St Leonards, is a peace activist who was arrested for reading out the names of British soldiers killed in Iraq during a protest at the Cenotaph in London.
'Specific safeguards'
Speaking outside court, she said: "We are very pleased with the outcome.
"Transfers to Kabul have stopped as a result of this case and transfers to Kandahar and Lashkar Gah are now subject to conditions.
"The British must be able to access prisons and interview Afghan detainees privately and if any allegations of mistreatment or abuse are made by Afghan detainees, transfers must stop immediately."
Defence Secretary Liam Fox said he also welcomed the ruling.
He said: "The claimant in this case sought to end the practice of transferring insurgents to Afghan custody. She failed to do so.
"Bringing to justice those who seek to kill and maim British troops, coalition forces and Afghan civilians, including through indiscriminate methods like the laying of roadside bombs, forms an essential part of our current operations.
"There is no place for the abuse of detainees. We have always recognised that this is a difficult and challenging area in which our people have to operate and that is why we have specific safeguards and monitoring arrangements in place. These will be reinforced in line with the court's recommendations."
Back to Top
Back to Top
Clinton confident in diplomatic team in Afghanistan: State Department
WASHINGTON, June 24 (Xinhua) -- U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has full confidence in her diplomatic team in Afghanistan, a State Department spokesman said on Thursday, in apparent refusal of some lawmakers' call for a shake-up of civilian personnel following the sacking of U.S. military chief in Afghanistan.
"The secretary has full confidence in her team in Afghanistan as well as in Ambassador Holbrooke and his team here," State Department spokesman Mark Toner told reporters. "And as the president put it very clearly yesterday, now is the time to move forward and get on with the job at hand."
The spokesman made this comment just a day after Gen. Stanley McChrystal, commander of U.S. forces in Afghanistan, was fired by President Barack Obama after making contemptuous remarks of senior administration officials, including Vice President Joe Biden, ambassador to Kabul Karl Eikenberry and special Representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan Richard Holbrooke.
Some lawmakers argued Wednesday that the resignation of McChrystal should lead the Obama administration to re-evaluate their civilian Afghanistan team as well.
"The civilian side is, in my view, completely dysfunctional," said Republican Senator Lindsey Graham. "I would urge the president to look at this as a chance to put new people on the ground without old baggage. And if we don't change quickly, we're going to lose a war we can't afford to lose."
Independent Senator Joe Lieberman said that the controversial magazine article, which led to McChrystal's stepping down, " revealed what we have known, that there is not the kind of unity in Afghanistan between our civilian and military leadership" that is necessary.
Editor: Mu Xuequan
Back to Top
Back to Top
How a negotiated peace could leave Afghanistan looking like Lebanon
Washington Post By Daniel Serwer Friday, June 25, 2010
While President Obama is surging troops into Afghanistan and money into Pakistan, plans are being laid for a negotiated settlement to be reached before the beginning of the American drawdown in July 2011. Gen. David Petraeus's appointment this week as U.S. commander in Afghanistan increases the urgency of defining the terms of such a settlement.
For those of us who listen carefully to silence, the most interesting part of the president's West Point commencement address last month was his failure to declare any end state for the war in Afghanistan and Pakistan. He was clear he wanted "an Iraq that provides no safe haven to terrorists; a democratic Iraq that is sovereign, stable and self-reliant." But he said nothing comparable about Afghanistan.
This notable silence is rooted in the growing conviction that even if the United States and its coalition allies can succeed this summer in clearing a town like Kandahar of Taliban fighters, there is no one to hold the terrain, build the necessary institutions or accept responsibility once the military has completed its work. This spring's experiment in clearing Marja, where Taliban fighters have been leaking back in, has demonstrated how difficult the task is likely to be in Kandahar.
The State Department and the U.S. Agency for International Development, which have quadrupled the number of civilians in Afghanistan in the past year, are still not confident of civilian capabilities. The Afghan government clearly cannot carry the burden.
So the administration is looking for a decent, negotiated exit. The Pakistani intelligence service would act as a surrogate (and guarantor) for the Taliban, as Slobodan Milosevic did for the Bosnian Serbs 15 years ago. The Americans would deliver Kabul. The deal might leave the Taliban in control of large parts of Afghanistan but keep al-Qaeda in Pakistan, where Islamabad would agree to deal harshly with its fighters.
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has repeatedly enunciated her "red lines" for such an agreement: Taliban renunciation of violence and willingness to abide by the Afghan constitution (which guarantees women equal rights), as well as refusal to allow al-Qaeda or others to operate against the United States.
If the Taliban does come to power in part of Afghanistan -- say, controlling the south and sharing power in Kabul -- Afghanistan could start to look like Lebanon: Hezbollah controls large portions of the country, operates its own military forces and delivers services to large parts of the population, but the United States and other countries have embassies in Beirut, deal regularly with the government and parliament, and try to persuade Lebanese authorities to limit the sway and reach of Hezbollah.
The parallels suggest less palatable comparisons: Hezbollah-controlled territory is far from free. It is hard to imagine that Taliban-controlled territory would be more so. At least Hezbollah is contained by strict Israeli border security. Nothing like that exists on the highly porous Afghan-Pakistan border. The Taliban is far less interested in governing than Hezbollah is and is far less popular.
Hezbollah projects Iranian influence and is an important source of regional instability, training and arms to those who threaten Israel and more moderate Arab states. Even if the Taliban did not try to attack the United States, it could still prove inimical to U.S. interests, as it has in Pakistan.
While Afghan President Hamid Karzai would gladly end a war that pits him against fellow Pashtuns, the Taliban's Afghan enemies -- the Tajik- and Uzbek-dominated Northern Alliance -- are unlikely to appreciate a large fraction of their country being turned over to those who regard the Quetta Shura, which runs the most important segment of the Taliban, as the ultimate authority.
Karzai recently fired two key security officials, ostensibly for allowing attacks on the national peace conference (jirga) that gave him more or less a blank check in dealing with the Taliban. The men he fired were tough Afghan nationalist opponents of the Quetta Shura and their perceived backers in Pakistan.
Who replaces them as interior minister and intelligence chief will send signals to Pakistan and the Taliban. If Karzai replaces them with people more to the liking of Islamabad, and the Americans nod approvingly, it will indicate that the door is open to negotiations.
What is not clear is whether the Taliban wants to come calling. The fighters seem to be feeling little pain despite courageous Afghan and American efforts on the battlefield. And Pakistan may not be willing, or able, to force the Taliban to deal.
Assuming negotiations start in earnest by fall, it is doubtful that Clinton's red lines can be made to hold in any part of Afghanistan under Taliban control. The only one that seems really to matter to Obama is blocking al-Qaeda's return to Afghanistan. The women of southern Afghanistan already wear burqas. What will be their fate if the United States accepts Taliban control?
Other outcomes are still possible. The president should start by specifying his desired end state. "An Afghanistan that provides no safe haven to terrorists, ensures equal rights to all its citizens and maintains its sovereignty with international help but without foreign troops on its territory" might be a good place to start. But then he would likely have to keep U.S. troops in Afghanistan well past the next election, as he seems increasingly to be recognizing. Petraeus would do well to insist on a clearly defined end state as he takes up his new responsibilities.
The writer is vice president for Centers of Peacebuilding Innovation at the United States Institute of Peace. The views expressed here are his own.
Back to Top
Back to Top
Grisly Attack on Civilians Reported in Southern Afghanistan
VOA News June 25, 2010
Afghan police say they have found the mutilated bodies of 11 civilians in a field in the southern part of the country. Authorities immediately blamed Taliban insurgents for the killings.
The discovery was made in the Khas Uruzgan district of Uruzgan province. Local officials said some of the victims had been decapitated.
The Associated Press quotes a deputy provincial police chief as saying the Taliban carried out the killings after accusing the civilians of spying or working for the Afghan government.
Meanwhile, NATO said two more of its troops died in other attacks in Afghanistan's eastern and southern provinces.
News reports indicate at least 81 U.S. and NATO troops have been killed this month - the worst casualty toll for international forces in Afghanistan since the conflict began in 2001.
NATO reported its troops killed a mid-level Taliban commander and several insurgents during an operation in Kandahar province on Thursday. The Taliban commander, known as Faizullah, was responsible for numerous roadside bombings and linked to the death of a coalition soldier in March.
Militants have been increasing attacks ahead of a planned military effort by NATO to drive Taliban insurgents out of southern Kandahar city and surrounding areas.
Some information for this report was provided by AP and AFP.
Back to Top
Back to Top
New Australian PM Reassures US on Afghanistan
VOA News June 25, 2010 Phil Mercer | Sydney
New Australian Prime Minister Julia Gillard has reassured the White House that Canberra intends to maintain its military deployment in Afghanistan. On the first day in her new job, Ms. Gillard spoke with U.S. President Barack Obama to reaffirm Australia's commitment to the war against insurgents.
In a 20 minute telephone conversation Friday, Ms. Gillard said her government's commitment to the U.S.-led campaign in Afghanistan would continue despite mounting public opposition to the war at home.
Canberra has deployed 1,550 troops to the south of Afghanistan, including elite commandos, military training specialists and reconstruction units.
Ms. Gillard told reporters in Canberra that Australia remains committed to the war effort.
"I fully support the current deployment and I indicated to President Obama that he should expect to see the Australian efforts in Afghanistan continuing."
Earlier this week, Defense Minister John Faulkner said Australia could start withdrawing troops from Afghanistan in two years if their mission to train local soldiers went ahead as planned. It was the first time a senior government figure offered a possible timetable on pulling forces out of the troubled country.
Anti-war campaigners in Australia have urged the new Gillard government to end the Afghanistan deployment, insisting that the war against insurgents was both "unwinnable" and "futile."
Recent opinion polls have suggested that Australians are tiring of the distant conflict, especially after the deaths of three commandos last week. Sixteen Australian soldiers have died in Afghanistan.
Ms. Gillard has said the alliance with the United States is the cornerstone of Australia's security policy, pledging to strengthen during her tenure. The prime minister's newly-appointed deputy, Wayne Swan, will represent Australia at a G20 meeting in Canada set to open this weekend.
Back to Top
Back to Top
Pakistan backs Afghan reconciliation process
ISLAMABAD, June 25 (Xinhua) -- Pakistani Prime Minister Syed Yusuf Raza Gilani Friday announced Pakistan's support for the process of reconciliation and integration in the neighboring war- shattered Afghanistan and promised its help in the plan.
Gilani declared support in his meeting with visiting Afghan Foreign Minister Zalmai Rassoul, who met him at the Prime Minister 's House, officials said.
The prime minister reaffirmed his government's position of strict neutrality and non-interference in Afghanistan's internal affairs, a statement from the PM office said.
Pakistan, he said, has consistently supported the Afghan-led process of reconciliation and integration as its neighbor, sharing culture, values and traditions.
"Pakistan nonetheless is ready to lend a helping hand to the Afghan government if desired, in the reconciliation and reintegration process," the statement said.
The prime minister drew the Afghan foreign minister's attention to the fact that Pakistan has been consistently calling for installation of Biometric System along the border and increase in the posts to check the cross border movement of undesirable elements from both sides. He hoped that the Afghan Government will be able to give this proposal due consideration.
The prime minister reiterated Pakistan's offer of training the Afghan National Army, National Police and civil bureaucracy and recalled that Pakistan had doubled the number of scholarships for the Afghan students from this year.
Rassoul in his response termed Pakistan-Afghanistan relations as most important for his country and added that without close cooperation of Pakistan, the Afghan government cannot succeed in restoration of peace, the statement said.
Afghanistan also needs Pakistan's support, he said, in the implementation of its strategy of reconciliation and reintegration in the country. He assured Gilani that the government of Afghanistan would never allow any country to use its territory against Pakistan.
Back to Top
Back to Top
Pakistan, Afghanistan agree not to use territories against each others
ISLAMABAD, June 25 (Xinhua) -- Pakistan and Afghanistan Friday agreed not to allow their territories for use against each others' interests.
In a joint statement issued at the end of a 2-day visit to Islamabad by Afghan Foreign Minister Zalmai Rassoul, both countries reaffirmed their commitment to enhance cooperation and coordination bilaterally as well as within the framework of regional and international agreements to counter terrorism.
They emphasized the need to strengthen further economic and commercial ties and to facilitate trade and transit, with a view to realizing the full potential of the two countries, the statement said.
They agreed to take all possible steps to increase the current volume of bilateral trade (currently 1.5 billion U.S. dollars) to 5 billion dollars by 2015 as agreed during President Karzai's visit to Pakistan on March 10-11 2010.
Both countries reiterated that bilateral relations of the two countries were based on respect for each other's sovereignty, territorial integrity and non-interference in internal affairs.
Zalmai Rassoul provided a detailed briefing on the outcome of the Afghan Peace Jirga, held at Kabul on June 2-4 2010, the joint statement said.
Pakistan reaffirmed full support to the roadmap announced by Afghan President Hamid Karzai and to the Afghan-owned and Afghan- led process of reconciliation.
The ministers agreed to establish a "Joint Commission on Border Cooperation and Visa Regime" to facilitate and oversee the cross- border movement of humans and vehicles. Ministers of Interior will co-chair this commission once a year.
Back to Top
Back to Top
Australia's Gillard assures US over Afghan war backing
Friday, 25 June 2010 05:01 UK BBC News
Australia's new Prime Minister, Julia Gillard, has assured US President Barack Obama that she supports the military campaign in Afghanistan.
She said she had told him by phone "he should expect to see Australian efforts in Afghanistan continuing".
Australia has about 1,550 soldiers in Afghanistan, mostly training Afghan National Army recruits.
Mr Obama sacked his commander in Afghanistan this week after Gen Stanley McChrystal mocked his officials.
Appointing Gen David Petraeus in his place, the US leader said US strategy would not be affected.
Ms Gillard became Australia's first female PM after ousting her predecessor Kevin Rudd in a leadership challenge.
She is due to preside over her first cabinet meeting later on Friday.
"I assured President Obama that my approach to Afghanistan will continue the approach taken to date by the Australian government," she told reporters.
'Enduring alliance'
Ms Gillard said Australia and the US had a strong and enduring relationship.
"We are close as nations, we are in an enduring strategic alliance, we are close as peoples. We have fought together around the world, and we continue to fight together in Afghanistan," she said.
"We spoke about the cost this causes to our nations, but our determination to continue the deployment continues."
The recent deaths of five Australian soldiers have brought Canberra's involvement in the campaign under closer scrutiny at home.
Ms Gillard said President Obama had expressed regret at having to twice postpone a visit to Australia.
She told him that "any time he chooses to travel to Australia he would be very welcome".
Ms Gillard, who was born in Barry, Wales, was sworn in as prime minister after a surprise leadership vote in the ruling Labor Party on Thursday.
Mr Rudd chose not to take part in the ballot knowing he would suffer an embarrassing defeat to his deputy, correspondents say.
The Labor Party has suffered a sharp drop in support and Ms Gillard vowed to revive its fortunes ahead of a general election due in October.
Back to Top
Back to Top
Pakistan wants early transit trade accord with Afghanistan
June 24, 2010
(AFP) – ISLAMABAD — Pakistan on Thursday called for early finalisation of a transit trade agreement with landlocked neighbour Afghanistan, hoping for a major increase in bilateral trade.
"The early finalisation of Afghan Transit Trade Agreement is in our mutual interest," Pakistan foreign minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi told a joint press conference with Afghan counterpart Zalmai Rasoul.
Qureshi said that there could be a significant boost to bilateral trade between the neighbours during the next five years.
"Currently the bilateral trade is around 1.5 billion dollars, and with this new arrangement in place we can easily enhance our bilateral trade to five billion dollars by 2015," Qureshi said.
"The relevant ministers will be meeting in Pakistan shortly," he added.
Qureshi said that the both sides agreed during talks to increase high-level interaction and set up joint commissions on matters including education.
Pakistan also offered Afghanistan training for its soldiers, police and diplomats and proposed to set up a commission on border security, he added.
Rasoul said he briefed Qureshi about the security situation and peace efforts in Afghanistan.
"It is in the interest of both the countries to commit each other together for the fight against terrorism and extremism and my brother agreed to the concept," he said.
Rasoul also said he was pleased that Pakistan was supporting the peace process.
Relations between Kabul and Islamabad have been marked by distrust, but there have been growing signs of rapprochement and Afghan President Hamid Karzai in March welcomed an offer from Pakistan to help with peace efforts.
Back to Top
Back to Top
Building Afghan Air Corps Expensive Task
VOA News June 23, 2010 Jennifer Glasse
Kandahar - In Afghanistan, planes and helicopters are essential for moving troops and supplies, providing air support for ground forces and keeping an eye on insurgents.
The war in Afghanistan makes Kandahar air field one of the busiest single runway airports in the world. It is located in the country's south, and jets and helicopters take off and land every few minutes all day and all night long.
In one corner of the vast airfield, Afghan technicians bring in a (Soviet-era) helicopter for repair. The technicians are part of the Afghan Air Corps -- a force NATO hopes someday will take over this airfield and others around the country.
Colonel Abdul Halim heads maintenance here. He says under the Taliban, the Air Corps was essentially held prisoner and forced to fly and to maintain the aircraft. Now he says, the Afghans are basically starting from nothing.
Captain Chris Tooman says these helicopters may be more than 30 years old, but they can take off and land at high altitudes in relatively small spaces, and are mechanically robust. "Extremely reliable, we have very few issues with them. They're perfect for this type of environment," he said.
At this weekly meeting, the Afghan Air Corps officers discuss their concerns with NATO officers.
The Afghans say they can not get the supplies or the support they need from their fellow Afghans and NATO. Colonel Bernard Mater, the chief NATO mentor, understands the problem. "There aren't enough resources to be able to do all of the missions and all of the support that's necessary to help the government of Afghanistan to improve their capacity to support the people of Afghanistan," he stated.
The Air Corps' main task now is moving Afghan troops and officials around the country. In Kandahar, the Corps has only four helicopters and one is out of commission because of a damaged rotor. Overall the force has about 50 helicopters and aircraft. NATO wants to triple that and more than double the number of personnel -- from 3,300 today to 8,000.
Building Afghanistan's Air Corps will take some time. It takes years to train a pilot, and Afghans have to learn not only how to fly the plane, but also how to speak English, the language of international aviation.
The average age of an Afghan pilot is 45, and so far only one new Afghan pilot has completed training. And because of their age, most pilots will need to be replaced in the next decade. During the civil wars and Taliban rule of the 1990s, Afghans did not develop aviation skills. NATO officials say it will be years before Afghans can control their own air space and patrol their own skies. Even so the Afghan president wants the corps to be known as an air force.
There was a recent sign of progress though, when a commercial aircraft crashed in a remote area of Afghanistan in May, the Afghan Air Corps led the search and recovery effort.
Back to Top
Back to Top
Afghanistan's only golf course: Bring your clubs and AK-47
The nine-hole Kabul golf course is the only one in Afghanistan. The greens are petroleum black. The fairways filled with rocks and scrub. But that doesn't stop golf aficionados who play with a ball finder and armed security guards.
By Timothy Kenny, Contributor / June 24, 2010 The Christian Science Monitor
Qargha, Afghanistan - After war, a time for golf.
There is nary a blade of grass at the Kabul Golf Club, just outside Afghanistan’s capital. The greens are not green; they are hard-packed brown sand, laced with oil and swept clean to keep the putting surface smooth. The fairways are rock-strewn and scrub-filled.
Ball finders – required, according to course rules – accompany golfers and their caddies, who carry a swatch of artificial turf and tee up each new shot. Without the ball finders to search in all the brush and undergrowth, a round of golf would likely be much shorter here at Afghanistan’s only course. Why? Because most golfers would give up before finishing.
Michael Alexander, a Londoner who has played his way across some of Britain’s best courses, notes that golf at the nine-hole Kabul Golf Club provides moments that playing at St. Andrews can’t.
“The Army checkpoint,” for example, he says. “The free [ball] drop at the Army checkpoint – that was the real difference with St. Andrews,” says Mr. Alexander, tongue in cheek.
A recent charity tournament here brought out 44 golfers, paying $100 each, for the privilege of playing the hard-scrabble course west of Kabul.
The tournament netted $4,000 last year for two local charities, said tournament director Richard Day, a Canadian working in Afghanistan since November 2006. This year’s outing, the third in three years, is expected to donate a like amount to two local nongovernmental groups, the Women of Project Hope and PARSA, which work to assist disadvantaged members of Afghan’s society such as the disabled, widowed, or orphaned.
Course founder and club pro, Mohammad Afzal Abdul, opened the course in 2004, after the Taliban first fled Afghanistan and a generation-long era of war had begun to fade. Security remains tight however during the tournament. Police toting AK-47s keep a watchful eye from nearby hilltops as two dozen or so armed men walk the course.
The future of golf in Afghanistan may appear uncertain over the near term, but not to Mr. Abdul. “I teach [every week] 100 to 110 boys, after-school students,” he said. “I want to teach everyone golf.”
Back to Top
Disclaimer:
This news site is mostly a compilation of publicly accessible articles
on the Web in the form of a link or saved news item. The news articles
and commentaries/editorials are protected under international copyright
laws. All credit goes to the original respective source(s).