 |
||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Serving you since 1998 | ||||||||||||
|
|
The Loneliness of the Afghan President: Karzai on His Own
By Aryn Baker time.com Thursday, May. 31, 2012
Kabul - Afghan President Hamid Karzai has one of the toughest jobs in the world — and he's held it for a decade. With NATO forces set to depart Afghanistan over the next couple of years, the pressure on Karzai is only going to increase.
Attack on US base kills 15 in Afghanistan: NATO
AFP News via Yahoo! Singapore News - Fri Jun 1, 10:07 am ET
A suicide truck bomber attacked a US-run base on Friday, sparking clashes that killed up to 15 people in eastern Afghanistan near the Pakistani border, officials said.
Charges Amended for Soldier Accused in Civilian Deaths
By JAMES DAO The New York Times June 1, 2012
The Army has amended its charges against Staff Sgt. Robert Bales, the soldier accused of murdering civilians in southern Afghanistan in March, reducing the murder count by one, to 16, and adding charges of illegal steroid use and alcohol consumption.
Feature: War-weary Afghan children long for peace, schooling
by Faird Behbud, Chen Xin
KABUL, June 1 (Xinhua) -- "We want peace and schooling," said Shah Mirza, an 11-year-old Afghan child, although he was unaware of the International Children's Day which falls on June 1 every year.
Tajik Citizens Jailed In Afghanistan Refuse To Return Home
By RFE/RL's Tajik Service June 1, 2012
DUSHANBE -- Officials say the refusal of five Tajik citizens jailed in Afghanistan to return home is stalling the return to Afghanistan of nearly 100 Afghans jailed in Tajikistan.
Khomeini Commemorations Met With Resistance By Afghan Youth
By Frud Bezhan June 1, 2012 Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty
Young people swept through the streets of Kabul this week, defacing and tearing down posters of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini plastered throughout the city.
UN Says Civilian Death Rate in Afghanistan is Unacceptable
Larry Freund VOA News May 31, 2012
NEW YORK - The United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan (UNAMA) says civilian casualties from the Afghan conflict remain at "unacceptably high levels" despite a 21-percent drop in conflict-related deaths during the first four months of this year.
Afghanistan's Rambo
Aljazeera By Bernard Smith May 31, 2012
Rambo shows me the marks around his wrists, left after being chained up by the Taliban for more than five months.
Afghanistan War--not one more drop of blood!
Examiner.com By Kimberly Dvorak Homeland Security Examiner May 31, 2012
The Afghanistan War has been stuck in a holding pattern for 10 years now. Despite commanders on the ground, rank and file and a handful of journalists reporting the REAL battle conditions in the war-torn tribal nation- American blood continues to spill. It’s enough. Not one more life, arm, leg or finger should be lost.
US pushes Australia to take command
Sydney Morning Herald By Mark Baker June 1, 2012
THE federal government has bowed to United States pressure and will take full control of military operations in Afghanistan's Oruzgan province as international forces prepare to withdraw from the country over the next two years.
One Afghan’s Three-Generation Quest for Peace
New York Times By ADAM KLEIN May 31, 2012
Two years ago, I began working with Afghan writers in workshops, introducing them to short narratives from around the world, frequently from postwar writers. Most of my students weren’t raised reading stories in English, and very few had ever sat down to write their own in a second or third language. Unlike an American workshop,
Fear in the classrooms: is the Taliban poisoning Afghanistan's schoolgirls?
Hundreds in hospital – but are terror attacks on schools to blame, or mass hysteria?
The Independent By Lianne Gutcher Friday 01 June 2012
Kabul - Hundreds of Afghan schoolchildren have been admitted to hospital in the past six weeks after falling victim to what appears to be six separate major poison attacks. Three alleged attacks have occurred in northern Takhar province in the past week alone, affecting more than 300 girls.
Back to Top
The Loneliness of the Afghan President: Karzai on His Own
By Aryn Baker time.com Thursday, May. 31, 2012
Kabul - Afghan President Hamid Karzai has one of the toughest jobs in the world — and he's held it for a decade. With NATO forces set to depart Afghanistan over the next couple of years, the pressure on Karzai is only going to increase. The question for his country — and for his legacy — is whether Karzai can finally step up. In an hour-long interview with TIME's Aryn Baker at the presidential palace in Kabul, Karzai talks about his tumultuous relationship with the West, the troubled peace process with a resurgent Taliban and the coming transition of power in 2014. Following is the full transcript of Baker's May 13 interview with the Afghan president:
(MORE: See TIME International's Cover Story on Karzai)
I am so sorry to hear about the assassination this morning of Arsala Rahmani.
A good man, a very good man.
Yes, he was someone I enjoyed meeting quite a bit. What do you think the assassination means?
This means somebody doesn't want peace.
So what does this mean for the peace process?
The process will continue. We cannot abandon seeking peace. No society can abandon seeking peace, so the process will continue, this is something that we will continue, something we are willing to give more sacrifice for, something that the Afghans want and deserve and must have.
We have seen this assassination, and now both the Taliban and Hizb-i-Islami have said that because you signed the security agreement with the United States that they have no choice but to pull out of reconciliation talks and continue jihad. Is this the end of the peace process?
The partnership deal is one that we worked on with great dedication. We had certain conditions, that the U.S. finally met. And after having met those conditions which we considered important for Afghanistan's sovereignty and to the Afghan people, we then entered into negotiations for the strategic partnership. Now the partnership itself, any partnership is a give and take. You take something and you give something. Afghanistan is a country in need. Afghanistan needs to protect itself in the region; Afghanistan needs to secure itself within the country. Afghanistan needs to develop its forces, and Afghanistan needs to provide stability to the people. Now this is what we need.
The United States has needs in this region. Whether for the war on terror or for other interests,which is something we are not aware of, whatever they might be. Now in this interest of the United States, and the interests that we have we have come together to bring something to Afghanistan, and give something to the other side. We have reached a good deal. The deal is in the interest of the Afghan people and the U.S. Just about the time that we finalized this deal with the United States, a delegation of Hizb-i-Islami came here and they met with me, and I talked to them about this partnership, and I asked them to go and see the document, and meet with the national security advisor, my chief of staff together, to explain the whole document to the Hizb-i-Islami delegation. They saw it and they said 'this is great.' And it was so good; they didn't find anything for the United States in this document. So the question was 'well, everything is here for us, what is in it for the United States?' And I said, that is what we must do to answer and to find. There fore I am surprised tofind that they say it is not good, because the delegation, they more than liked it.
So what is behind this?
I don't know.
Does this make your task of pursuing peace more difficult?
Not at all.
The two biggest insurgent groups have stood against this agreement.
It will happen.
You are a man of extreme confidence.
It will come out.
Last month Afghanistan and the United States agreed on a strategic partnership agreement that defines the relationship between the two countries after the foreign forces pull out in 2014. Many thorny issues remain, however. What else would you like to see in the post 2014 relationship that is not included in this document?
This document, in general terms, is good. It has taken into account what Afghanistan sees as its main interests. But this is preliminary document. Upon this will be built the security agreement. That it is where we will have a very difficult and serious negotiation. The United States will be asking for immunity. Where the U.S. will be asking for the use of our military facilities. Where Afghanistan will be dealing on both these issues, keeping the past ten years in mind.
MORE: Obama's Afghanistan Problem: Neither Karzai Nor the Taliban Like the 'Reconciliation' Script
The question of immunity is particularly sticky. You have asked for limits on immunity for U.S. forces, why?
Well, if immunity means giving the ability to someone like the gentleman who killed people in Panjwai and Kandahar, or if immunity means bombardment of our villages, and getting immunity for that, that the Afghan people will not accept, that will be extremely difficult for the Afghan people to accept. And I hope the United States will understand.
[Interrupts to offer coffee, water and tea.]
So that will be very difficult. But we are willing to negotiate with the United Sates, where the U.S. will understand the Afghan circumstances, and respect the lives and values of the Afghan people and whereby most important question here, especially after the signing of the partnership agreement is that the Afghan people have told me clearly when I began to consult with them on the partnership agreement two years ago, they repeatedly and at all the meetings, they said, 'President, sign the partnership with America, so peace can come to Afghanistan.' So they have signed the partnership with the United States, for the hope, in the hope that Peace will come to Afghanistan, and that stability will come with it, and that the Afghan life and property will not be violated. So for us it was not only a document towards the future, it was also a document that turned a new page in relations between us and the United States, a new page in which theprevious page is gone, and we don't want to look at it anymore. And the new page is where no raids on Afghan homes will be conducted, no Afghans will be arrested, no violation of Afghan homes will take place, no bombardment of Afghan villages will take place, for we have already and for years have said that the war on terror is not in the Afghan villages and towns. From that perspective we have signed it, and if that is fulfilled, the next stage of the security agreement will be easy. If that is not done, then the people have no reason to go into a security agreement.
You have made clear your stance on air strikes, yet NATO strikes have mistakenly killed several civilians in the past two weeks. How has this affected relations?
It is a serious issue. I have raised it with the U.S. government and NATO. Its something we take extremely seriously, and it is something wewill be talking about to the NATO leaders in Chicago.
You said at the time that if it happens again Afghans may have to reconsider the security agreement.
Of course. What is the partnership for? What are the Afghan objectives of a partnership with the United States? Well, it has negatives for us too. Neighbors don't like it; the region doesn't like it. We will be paying a price for this.
And the insurgent groups don't like it.
Well the insurgent groups are mostly related to the neighbors. But the neighbors...in any case the neighbors don't like it and the region doesn't like it and we are falling into a rivalry which isn't ours and which we can't pay for. Therefor what is it in this partnership that Afghans will get, that they are seeking, knowing that all the neighbors don't like it. It is the security of Afghanistan, the return of peace to Afghanistan, and it is the build up of the Afghan state structure. The institutions of state governance, the military, the police, and the assistance that it should bring to Afghanistan. Which is what this agreement should bring.
Do you have a number of foreign troops you would like to see?
Well the number of troops is not so much an issue. Of course the bulk of the current troop...the troops will all leave Afghanistan by 2014. So after that as a result of the agreement, if there are 10,000 or 15,000 or more or less is something that the U.S. has to decide. But the partnership that we signed, also addresses that. The security agreement would address the scope, the responsibilities, the obligations and the hows and wheres of thesecurity arrangements.
What do you think would be ideal for Afghanistan, in terms of numbers. If you had your wish?
Well we of course would like to have a security agreement that completely respects the sensitivities of the Afghan people and Afghan laws, and is not seen by the Afghan people in any way as reducing from their sovereignty or their well being, and that it provides good guarantees to the region and neighbors that Afghanistan will not be used against them.
But that is what you have already. So going forward in terms of concrete commitments, what would you like to see in the next step?
Well, clear support to the Afghan forces. We have a force of 350,000 right now, but its more a ground force. Without the tools of a modern military. We must have aircraft, our radars, we must have our...all other necessities for a good army met. And Police. And our economy must grow well, and the conditions that I had earlier, the security.
You want the Americans to assist with the delivery of air force, radar and economic assistance?
We must be a properly equipped country.
And you want the Americans to assist you with this?
The Americans and others. Because when the Soviets left we had an air force of nearly 450 planes, and a formidable arrangement of armored vehicles, and mechanized and tank divisions, and all other, you know, equipment for the army and armed forces. Unfortunately they were all destroyed in our internal upheavals.
And used against the Afghan people.
Unfortunately, yes. Used against our own people.
So how would you explain to an American public suffering its own economic upheavals, that they should be spending their money on Afghanistan's army?
Well, it's in America's interest. If the United States has an interest in this region, and on the war on terror, and if in that Afghanistan is important, then they have to build it for us. Its not...it's up to them. We are not forcing the U.S. to do this. The Americans are asking us for something, and we are asking for something in return. It's a give and take. Its not a matter of the United States helping us, it's a matter of we give something, they give something in return.
So you are giving them...?
We are giving them security, our facilities, the use of parts of our installations, and in return they are giving us A, B, C and D.
When you speak of American security interests, the priority is on preventing al Qaeda from finding a safe haven once again, coming back to Afghanistan.
They don't want terrorism, they don't want al Qaeda coming back, they want a region that's good for them, all of those things are what the U.S. is seeking here.
But the insurgency is not using aircraft, so why would the Afghan military need air force?
We don't need a military to tackle the insurgency at all. If this is even an insurgency. By the way, we have a problem of definition. I never call it an insurgency. I call it terrorism. The west has begun to call it terrorism, in the media and in their official language. We never call it an insurgency, this is terrorism. If it is an insurgency, then it is an Afghan problem and an outsider has nothing to do with it. In that case an outsider is taking a gun against one Afghan for another Afghan, and that is interference. So if it's an insurgency, I would not seek any U.S. assistance. I would rather be against such a U.S. presence in Afghanistan on such assistance. If it is terrorism, if it is war on terror, then the Afghan people will join you on terror. But the war on terror as I have repeatedly said in the past, and the Afghan people believe in it, in truth, is that the war on terror is not in the Afghan villages or homes. Its in the sanctuaries, it is in the training grounds, its in the motivation factors and the money that comes to it. So that definition has to be...in other words, we distinguish it as such.
The sanctuaries. Do you see Pakistan as an ally or an enemy at this point?
I would not use the word enemy, I have never used the word enemy. I don't find it easy to use such words. I would never call a neighbor an enemy. But I would request the neighbor to be a good neighbor, to see that the neighbor's interest is a stable prosperous neighbor, a neighbor that is doing well. Therefore I would continue with my pursuit of a friendly neighborly strong relationshiptowards which we have taken some very fundamentally strong steps, the number of phases from both countries, the number of pledges from both countries, some where a delivery has been made, elsewhere where they have not been made, and it is the elsewhere that is the war on terror. An effective war on terror that has not been done, and we must do it together. The other point is for both of us to seek to bring the reconcilable in this process to reconciliation, to peace and Afghanistan should help Pakistan do it in their own territory, and Pakistan I hope will help us do it in our own territory.
The United States has often complained that Pakistan is not doing enough to fight terror on its own territory.
I agree. They could do a lot more. Look, this is very clear.
You have had reconciliation with the Taliban a key goal of your time left in office. Do you think it issomething possible to achieve in the 2 years you have left?
Well, I will keep trying to the last day of my tenure in office. Whether we achieve it or not is a different question. It is something that is good, that you must work for. If you achieve it, great. Happy. If you don't then let the next president continue the work.
So how long do you think it would take?
Well I would want it today, but if it is not possible today, then I would want it tomorrow, then the day after tomorrow, then next week. So I will continue to work for the peace process by all the means that I have, by all the power that I have, by all the persuasion that I have, and get it done with and I would hope also that the United states and our other allies and our neighbors will be sincere intheir work for the peace process for them and for us.
MORE: Talks with the Taliban Are Inevitable, but Who Will Be at the Table?
Given this morning's assassination, Rabbani's, the others, the terrorism, the IEDs, the numbers of casualties, do you think its more important to defeat the Taliban or to attempt to bring them to the table?
Defeat where? I have said...Command and control centers in the sanctuaries, defeat them. Fighting them in Afghanistan is not defeating them. It is adding to the fire. Because...unless you address thesanctuaries, it will not help. But there are other aspects to this. There are some Taliban who...or some individuals, I like to put it that way, who are ideologically against Afghanistan's vision for the future. And for today. There are some Taliban who are with al Qaeda, who are with terrorist networks, in the grips of foreign intelligence agencies, who we cannot reconcile or who would not come to reconcile with us and withwhom we are not seeking reconciliation. But there are other Taliban, who have been driven out of their homes, by the mistakes of NATO and American forces and by the mistakes of the Afghan government. Their homes were violated, they were driven out of their homes, they were forced to flee against their own country and take a gun against their own people. Those Taliban are not the enemies of their own people, they are Afghans like any Afghans, and they are welcome to come back and that is who we are trying to bring back. And there are thousands of Taliban in the Afghan villages who are driven by these factors who should be brought back to Afghanistan. Night raids, what a terrible thing in this country, that drove so many people out of desperation to take up guns against their own country, their own people. That is what I am talking about when I say reconciliation, and that is what we should be seeking.
Some initial discussions about starting talks have stalled recently over the reluctance to release these 5 detainees from Guantanamo bay. How important is the transfer of those detainees is to the current state of negotiations?
Hmm. Takes sip of coffee. Now...we sent a delegation to Guantanamo to meet with those prisoners. We asked them that whether they were willing to go to Qatar as part of a deal. They said they were willing to go to Qatar. Not as prisoners but as people who would go to Qatar to rejoin theirfamilies. That we support. If those five prisoners are willing to go to Qatar out of their own decision and will, we will back this, and we support this and we have done it. And we have communicated to the U.S. government as well. So this is good for the process and we should support it. There are also about 20 more Afghans there. Who are innocent, to the extent that we know, and whose release we are seeking from Guantanamo back to Afghanistan. Therefore we are in support of any release of those in Guantanamo back to Afghanistan or back where they are willing to go.
Do you think it will help the peace process?
Yes it will.
How?
Well it just gives an indication of a willingness to engage in the peace process. So far that indication is not coming.
From the U.S.?
Yes.
So to your knowledge, what is holding the U.S. up?
I have no idea.
Have you been putting pressure on the U.S. to release these five prisoners?
Yes, we have been doing that.
And the response has been?
Not positive at all.
Can the process continue without the release of these detainees?
As far as Afghanistan is concerned the process will continue by all means.
But this stall or slow things down?
It doesn't slow things for us. No we will continue to work for the peace process as we have, and we will continue to seek the release of these prisoners in Guantanamo and also the ones who are in Bagram, up to the time where the transfer is completed to Afghanistan. After that is the Afghan law that will take over.
The Taliban I speak with, tell me that they want nothing to do with the Afghan government. They feel that the power is with the U.S., and that they must negotiate first with the Americans. Are you being sidelined?
Well, they are talking to us.
But they say they are not. Why do they say they are not talking to you.
They are talking to us. I don't know why they say they are not.
Is it propaganda, does it undermine their credibility to be seen talking to you?
No, they look good if they are seen talking to us.
So why do they deny it?
Probably you have not asked the right people. Those who talk to us will tell you that they are talking to us. The press is talking to some spokesman.
TIME is talking to more than just Zabiullah Mujahid, we are also talking to commanders on both sides of the border.
Well they are talking to us. They have spoken to us in Dubai, in Qatar. They also talk to us in Kabul.
Do you see a split, between some Taliban who want to reconcile, and some who do not?
I have met some of them myself. Those who meet with us, or those who have met with us, or the ones who very much want to have peace come back to their country. Look, they are suffering. They are suffering in Pakistan. They are being put in prison. When they are not following the Pakistani line. And some of them are not suffering in Pakistan because they follow the Pakistani line. But the patriotic ones are around, and they are suffering.
How do you see the end state of reconciliation? Power sharing? Entering political office? Ministries? Regional control?
Afghanistan has a constitution. And the constitution is democratic. There are elections of Parliament, for president. Those Taliban who want to come back and accept the Afghan constitutions, they have the right to stand for president, they have the right to stand for parliament, they have the right to stand for provincial councils as well. Nobody can stop them from that. Those who want to be part of the government, they are welcome, there are people who are from Hizb-i-Islami who are part of this government, there are people from Jebet-i-islami who are part of this government. There are people from Sharal i-waazin, Hizbi-wadat who are part of this government. There are Afghan Millat, and the former communists, the Khalkh and Parchama who are part of this government. So can be the Taliban. Why not?
Do they see it as defeat if they have to accept the government and the constitution? Because they say they don't believe in either.
They have never told us that. Really, never, have they discussed the constitution with us. They have discussed the Americans with us. They have discussed the atrocities with us. They have discussed the civilian casualties. They have never discussed the constitution.
So the constitution is not a problem for them?
Not to those to whom we are speaking.
Now, going on. The next two years before the withdrawal, before the elections. They will pass quickly. There is great anxiety about what happens next. What do you want your legacy to be at the end of your term? At the end of the American and NATO withdrawal?
Well, in a way my legacy is already set. For me the greatest of my achievements would be that Afghanistan became the home of all Afghans. From all walks of life, from all political tendencies, from all parts of the country. They came back to Afghanistan and they found a place here to take the opportunity of life. The...the brutal side of governance in Afghanistan I have struggled to contain. Not that I have been able to abolish completely. But I have struggled against it. No Afghan has gone to prison for his or her political views. Never. The country's education has flourished like never before. The thousands and thousands of Afghan boys and girls that have been able to go to universities inside and outside the country. The country's return to the world community from a miserable isolation. To now having representation all over the world, at meetings and conferences. A better economy. A better living standard. But yes, one of the greatest shortcomings that I will remember painfully is that peace did not come to the Afghan people the way they wanted. Security did not come to the Afghan people the way they deserved, the way they wanted it. Short of that, the rest is good.
You mentioned briefly, Do you think the U.S. has the best interests of Afghanistan in the way it pursues its military solution in the country, or is it making more problems than it is solving?
This is very important question. It's a question that I have thought about so often and so many times. And a question of which...serious tensions have emerged between the U.S. and the Afghans, almost to the point of saying goodbye.
That bad?
Worse than that even. So I don't have a good view. No.
Why not?
In its time here the United States could have done a lot better for Afghanistan. The Afghan people for the first time in their history welcomed a foreign force. Never in the history of the Afghan people have they welcomed a foreign force. I was a witness to that myself. So were you. We called them liberators. But then they did not regard the homes of Afghan villagers as homes that gave the United States and NATO a welcome. And in the name in the War on Terror, which everybody knew was to be fought elsewhere, too many innocent Afghans lost their lives. Too many were wounded, too many homes were violated. When...as the president of Afghanistan, and as an Afghan citizen, it was my job to protect the Afghan people, it was my job to do all I could to bring safety to Afghan homes, just like the U.S. president's job is to bring security to the American homes. We were not anti-American. We are notanti-American. We are rather pro-American. But I have to protect Afghan homes. The U.S. media understood it as Afghan belligerence. Or opposition to the U.S. It was opposition to a method applied to Afghanistan. And that had to improve. And I am willing to do a lot more in order to bring to Afghan life a safety andsecurity interpretation they deserve.
You mean you are defending Afghanistan in this way?
Like hell.
Do you think that over the past decade the Americans have done more harm than good?
Well, the Americans have done well by providing us the opportunity to educate our children. By providing us the opportunity to bring us better health care, by helping us reach our ambitions world wide for Afghanistan to be once again a member of the world community and in a great way. For doing lots of other good things in Afghanistan, like building roads for us, building a better economy. But the American presence and the NATO presence in Afghanistan did not bring security to the Afghan people. As they deserved it. It did not bring the defeat of terrorism, as we thought it would. It did not fight the war in terrorism in a manner that wefelt was right. It was fought against our own will, against our own advice. But the American presence did bring an overall stability to Afghanistan which is very important.
Were the lives of American, NATO and Afghan soldiers wasted?
The...well I...see...I can't ever say that a life is wasted. The...it could have been done in a matter where there would have been less casualties of our U.S. and NATO allies and less damage and suffering for the Afghan people. But the overall stability in Afghanistan is established. That is a very good thing. That is why the Afghan view is still seeking the U.S. presence, but in another form. The answer to your question has to be explained in a context. Some things were good, some things were not good.
I am sure you have heard reports that U.S. has been using Hizb-i-Islami forces against the Taliban. What is your reaction?
I have only seen the Washington Post story. I am not aware of things like that. But it's not...it can't be unusual. It's not something that would surprise me. Now to judge it is a different issue. I am not trying to judge it here. As something that may have been done by the U.S., it is not impossible. They could have done it. We also have reports that they are supplying the Taliban from time to time. Those reports are there. But to judge it is a different issue. And this time, since I don't have solid information that I know of...the things I have spoken about t in Afghanistan for the past ten years and have done so often are things I know of for a fact, and I don't take government reports as the basis of my knowledge and information. I call the people directly, I speak to them. And they tell me 'yes president' this has happened and this has not. Even in the recent bombardment of civilians in Helmand and Badghis and Logar and Kapisa, I first called the governors. And once I got to know more that I would further, especially in Helmand and Badghis where there were high casualties, I called the district chiefs, and from the district chiefs I went to the families. I telephoned them and spoke to them and got the facts that they had.
You learned that way about the death of the mother by an air attack last week?
A mother and her five children. And in Bagdhis, eight people killed.
You threatened, when that happened, you threatened the U.S. ambassador to bring up such incidents to the UN Security Council.
Well, if they are repeated, sure.
Does it not seem inevitable that in the course of war, that this will continue to happen?
There is no war. I don't think there is a war. There is no war. There is no war in Afghanistan. There is no war in Afghanistan. If this is a campaign against terrorism, then it has to be addressed where it, where it , where it rises. It is not in Afghanistan.
Do you think the U.S. should be fighting in Pakistan then?
I don't say that. I don't think the U.S. should be fighting Pakistan. But I think all of us should work honestly. And with sincerity. Towards a common objective. If terrorism is a threat to all of us, and indeed it is a threat to Pakistan as well, massively a threat to Pakistan. Massively a threat to Pakistan.
Do you think Pakistanis see it that way?
I think they do. I think they do. I think they do. A great many of them do. If this is a threat to all of us, then we all must join hands to fight it together. The United States has to prove its sincerity in the war on terror to Pakistan, to Afghanistan and to others. And this is what I have been telling Americans for a long time now. And we have to prove to Pakistan that we will be of no danger to them. And Pakistan has to prove itself to us as well, and to the Americans. So it's an all rounder. We all have to make sure that the other side understands us better, that our motivations are understood, that our purposes are clear and understood, and that we work towards the same objective. This has not been the case unfortunately, either because of the incidents that darkens the environment, or for whatever reasons. So there has to be a sincere, clear, effort.
There are conflicting assessments of how strong the Taliban is at this point as a moment. Military and Ambassadors say that they are a declining threat, they are weakened divided and split. Then we have American intelligence that says they are getting stronger, they have shadowgovernors in most provinces and that they could pose a threat to the Afghan government in the future. What is your assessment of their strengths?
No. No. Look, now there is a lot in the Western press about the Taliban coming back and all that. If you asked me three years ago, I would have not answered you in the positive. I would have said 'I don't know', or 'you are probably right', or somewhere in between. But now I can tell you withconfidence, ma'am, that the Taliban as a force to threaten the government of Afghanistan, or the way of life we have chosen is no longer there. That the withdrawal of international forces from Afghanistan will not lead to the Taliban coming back. That rather when that happens the Afghan people will be more effective in their fight against terrorists that come to Afghanistan. That in the absence of the international forces, the Afghan people will be more effectively defending their country and the Afghan forces will be more effectively campaigning for their own security. So I have no worry about that.
Well if the incidents of terrorism increase of decrease is a different question. If you are talking about the Taliban as a movement coming to take over, no. But incidents of terrorism, that is something that we all have to be concerned about and which might increase, which is not so much the Taliban, the traditional Taliban, but more other factors than the traditional Taliban. So no, I am not concerned about that.
But that brings us to another question. Eventually it's the Afghan people and what they do that will determine the future of Afghanistan. If we as a nation take the right decisions, move in the right direction, do the right thing, and establish a government that is in the service of the Afghan people, we would not at all be damageable as a system as a constitutional body. But if...and this has been a struggle for me, this has been a struggle for me...if the Afghan people see that their own government is violating their homes, that there is any illegitimate use of force, and that the constitution of Afghanistan, the laws of Afghanistan and the security and safety and dignity of the Afghan people is not taken care of, then of course I as an Afghan too would not tolerate and do all I can to bring me safety and security.
Do you feel as if the West is with you or against you?
As an individual, or a country?
You as an individual.
Well the West has been against me, clearly. For the stance that I had, and regardless of whether I am liked or disliked by elements in the West, or all of the governments there, or some of the elements or individuals there, my job is for Afghanistan. I have been doing all I can for Afghanistan, so just like the U.S. president has the right, and he should protect the life of the American people. See if you hear President Obama, he always goes to the American people and says that he has committed these American troops to Afghanistan in order to bring safety and security to American people. It's the American people for President Obama. It's the Afghan people for Hamid Karzai. That's as simple as it is. It's the Afghan people that I am working for. And in order to bring protection and security to the Afghan people I am willing to take wrath from all over the world.
What about from within your own government? Last week your finance minister, Omar Zakhilwal was complaining in a press conference that your government has done nothing to stop corruption.
That's a different thing.
He said, "Up until now, anti-corruption efforts have been made only to satisfy donors; it's not enough."
Well, he's right about that.
That the moves you have made so far are only to satisfy donors?
In the sense that the corruption thing is more a donor drama. It is less a concern about corruption in Afghanistan, as it is true. There is corruption in Afghanistan, no doubt, and more and more of the Afghan people come and tell me. More and more of the Afghan people come and tell me that there is corruption in Afghanistan on account of the Afghan government, and the prevailing environment, and also on account of a mess of the way money has been spent by donors in Afghanistan. The contracts given to people, the way contracts are used to leverage the Afghan government officials and parliamentarians, and the way that feeds into more corruption in Afghanistan, and one we have discussed before. I don't want to continue with something we have discussed before. I have very particular feelings about that.
You are announcing the transfer of responsibly to Afghan security forces, 75% of the population, and all provincial capitals will betransferred to the care of the Afghan Security Forces.
Yes, it has been announced.
That is much faster progress than originally anticipated.
That's good for us.
So at this rate when do you think Afghan forces will take the lead countrywide?
2013.
Beginning or end?
Around the middle, towards the end.
Does that mean the foreign forces can withdraw early?
They can withdraw early, yes. As far as we are concerned, yes.
Do you want them to? Before the original deadline?
Yes. If they can, yes.
Why?
It's good for us. Good for us and good for them. Good for us and good for them. Good for us because it's our country and we must defend it. Good for them because I don't want anymore international forces' lives lost in Afghanistan. I don't want their money spent in Afghanistan when the things they are doing we can do. So when we can do something, why should we have ayoung boy or girl from Germany or Netherlands, or the United States or France go through the trauma or endanger her or his life. Therefore it's good for our international partners, its good for us. With the right partnership, with the right support to Afghanistan, it's good for all of us. Good for them and good for us.
So will you ask them to leave early?
We will not ask them to leave early. If everything is done in time, and they want to leave early, we will welcome it. I mean if everything is done before time.
As I am sure you are aware, yet another man in Afghan army uniform killed an American soldier and trainer this week. There was another attack yesterday. There have been some 22 so-called green-on-blue incidents this year, and 35 last year. Do you think American and NATO soldiers should continue training Afghan troops with this kind of threat?
The training I think when the whole context of operations changes the threat will recede.
How so?
Well, now look, I don't think it's advisable that I talk about this, because there are reasons for this. And I have discussed this with NATO officials, and it's probably not advisable for me to say any more about it. I hope you understand that.
Ok, but you only get one pass.
Laughter
The Afghan security forces, particularly the police and the auxiliary have been accused of flouting the law, misusing their positions, and in some cases pretty gruesome human rights abuses. Does thisstrengthen the Taliban's assertion that these government forces are working against the people of Afghanistan?
Well the Taliban cannot claim a thing like that. The Taliban have been unfortunately hurting so many innocent Afghans, burning schools, destroying homes, and committingunbelievable atrocities against the Afghan people in the name of fighting Americans. So they cannot come to us to claim the higher ground. But, with or without the Taliban, with or without the Taliban the Afghans suffered massively. So Afghanistan, has suffered as I have said before, at the hands of foreign forces and from their own government for 30 years now, beginning with the soviets till today. And an Afghanistan where the government has militias to intimidate people will never be a peaceful Afghanistan. Therefore this is an extremely important question for me personally. I took a gun against the Soviet Union and their puppets because I had to, because oftheir atrocities. I stood against the United States because of what I believe were atrocities. And I will stand against any authority in Afghanistan, and within the Afghan government as well. On this. It's my job. And I don't know if they have told you, I almost have a daily reminder to them. Almost a daily reminder to them, to Afghan intelligence, to Afghan army to Afghan police, that our job is to protect the Afghan people and not to hurt them. So I am strongly strongly strongly as a human being committed to this. And there are incidents of this kind, no doubt, and that is one of our struggles. Afghan homes are still not secure. Any home can be violated.
By the Afghan security forces, or foreign forces?
By both the foreigners and the Afghans. It's happening, unfortunately.
And are you able to prosecute them?
Oh yes, we can. We absolutely prosecute them and bring them to justice, but this is an uphill struggle. It's a massive thing for us, Massive and important and difficult as well. Some thing I am aware of, and something I have been working on from the very first day with success but not with satisfaction. With success but not with satisfaction.
The Afghan constitution prevents you from running for a third term.
Yes.
Do you feel that you will have met your goals by the time you step down in 2014?
No. There is plenty that I would have wished I could have done that I have not been able to do.
Do you regret not being able to run again?
No, not at all. No, I think two terms is a very long time. You need fresh energy, you need fresh thinking, someone with more...untested ideas should come forward and build on what we could not improve upon. The western press is full of stories, though, about my trying to seek a third term.
But the constitution won't allow it.
But they say the President will try this or that, to stay on. It's fictional.
Ok, well, would you? Would you try to stay in power or extend your term?
No, no.
Not under any circumstances, not even if the people asked you to stay on past the end of your term? You will not stay on past 2014?
No. Not at all. Because beyond that I will be illegitimate. And beyond that if I tried to do anything it will not help Afghanistan, it will hurt it forever. I don't want to be the president of Afghanistan one day beyond my term.
The term that ends in 2014.
Exactly, any longer than that will be illegitimate.
Now the strategic document has an interesting clause that says the elections must be free of foreign and government interference. What are you concerned about?
Yes. I had to put this in with a lot of persuasion. I had to ask the U.S. government to put in that line about external interference, because the last elections were intervened, with very...they were actually rigged by foreign embassies and governments.
Not very effectively it seems.
Well, they tried, but they did it badly. But the did damage our elections. They did damage the reputation of our elections. They did damage the legitimacy of the process at that time. That makes me think as to what their intention is in this country. That is why we are so careful now. That is why we are so suspicious, that is why we are turning every stone to find out if there is something else in the corner waiting for us, of that nature. That was the terminal mistake on the part of all of those Western governments, they did not respect democracy, they did not respect the vote of the Afghan people and the scope of democracy issomething that people see with suspicion because of that election. And it was with that in mind that I insisted that the question of interference in the next elections should also be in the strategic partnership document.
Then do you think that elections can be held while foreign forces are still in the country? With out interference.
They can be held, yes. That might provide grounds for interference, but that is why I put in the clause there that it should be avoided, and wewill make sure that it is avoided.
There are many who say one of your failings of apresident is bringing the dead warlords back to life. Giving them power andposition in government instead of rule of law. What is your response?
Is that true? I wasn't in Bonn when they made that arrangement in 2001. I was in the mountains of central Afghanistan, in Uruzgan. So I had no hand in forming the government. I was myself picked up by that group to be heading the government. I didn't give millions of dollars to the mujahidin who then became strongmen in areas of the country. The U.S. did. The Europeans did. We didn't do that. Second, there are people that when they...when Dostum talks to me, the New York Times and the Washington Post and even Time Magazine dubbed them as warlords. When they go to meet with U.S. congress people to meet in Berlin, they are called allies and whatever, liberators of Afghanistan. So there is a serious question of credibility indeed in the Western application of standards. When you like someone he is a liberator and a great guy, and when that doesn't suit the objective, he is termed a warlord. I needed to bring this country out of factional fighting, out of ideological conflicts, out of people grabbing power by force and by intimidation into a country that all joined hands to do well. And this has worked well. We have gone from 10 years from a country where people were at each others throats — when I say people, I don't mean people, I mean factions, the powerful ones — to now all of them sitting together in parliament. To them working for Afghanistan. So it has helped.
So you have to give these guys positions in government to keep them from erupting into fighting again?
No, its not to keep them from fighting each other, but to help them build this country, and they now all have a stake in a good Afghanistan, for themselves and for the country. And I hope it will continue as it is, that the next president will make his own cabinet and decide his own way, but I am sure that whatever he will do will be with an eye on the overall stability of the country.
Do you have anyone in mind of who that next person could be?
I am thinking of some people, I have met with some people on this question, and I am busy working on this question, this is one of my jobs, one of my perhaps most important responsibilities.
So you are already working on finding a successor?
Very very much. I must find someone that will be an Afghan, will be a patriot, will be good to the Afghan people and tough with our Allies, good to the Afghan people and kind to the Afghan people and tough with our allies, that will not be vindictiveagainst the Afghan people or against those that, who are against the press, or...who will take the country forward...who will have relative security...who will not be against all that I have done.
Who have you found?
Well, it's a bit premature to say. Maybe I can say in a year from now.
What will you do once your term does end? Will you remain in politics?
I will be an Afghan citizen, and stay in Afghanistan. Not a political person.
You don't want to stay in politics?
I never was in politics by the way.
You are the president of Afghanistan, how is that not in politics?
Politics is...that's not politics. I would not be...if you, if you, if you mean by politics someone who tries to have issues raised and issues created and to be involved, no. I'll be an ex-president of Afghanistan, where if I can work as a citizen for furthering the stability and well being of the Afghan people I will continue to do that. If I am asked for advice for things, by the then president I will be willing and honored to give that advice. But I won't be an interventionist. If by political, you mean interventionist, no, I will not do that. I will support the president. I know what it takes to be the president of Afghanistan in these conditions. I know thepressures on the president. It will be much less than what it is today, but I will understand his environment, and from that background that I have gained, I will be a great supporter of the president, and I will advise people to make his life easier and to help him.
What will you do with your time? Golf?
Golf, sure. Or horse riding. Or mountain walking, or just walking around the city. Those will be...I miss that terribly.
When was the last time you walked in the city?
Almost seven years ago. Almost seven years ago in the city of Kabul. I used to do that. That is what I will have to do again.
Thank you, Mr. President.
All the best.
Back to Top
Back to Top
Attack on US base kills 15 in Afghanistan: NATO
AFP News via Yahoo! Singapore News - Fri Jun 1, 10:07 am ET
A suicide truck bomber attacked a US-run base on Friday, sparking clashes that killed up to 15 people in eastern Afghanistan near the Pakistani border, officials said.
NATO's US-led International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) said none of its personnel was killed in the attack in Khost province, a Taliban flashpoint that borders Pakistan.
The Taliban militia, which is leading a 10-year insurgency against foreign troops and the Kabul government, claimed responsibility for the attack.
But the precise details of what happened were murky.
An Afghan security official told AFP that the bomber drove a truck packed with explosives into the outer security checkpost of Forward Operating Base Salerno, which is run by the US military.
"Initial information shows that seven Afghans have been killed and 13 others injured," the official told AFP on condition of anonymity because he was not authorised to speak to the media.
According to the official, the victims were Afghan workers involved in a construction project at the base.
But Khost provincial police chief Sardar Mohammad Zazai later told AFP that only three attackers were killed as they stormed the base.
"Four civilians were injured when the roof of a nearby house collapsed as a result of the explosion," Zazai said, adding that the bodies of three attackers had also been recovered.
ISAF, however, said 14 insurgents were killed. It later confirmed the death of one Afghan civilian, but released no further details.
A spokesman for the Taliban claimed that a "large number" of foreign soldiers were killed, but the militia is known to exaggerate its claims.
"One of our mujahideen rammed a vehicle packed with ten tons of explosives into a NATO base in Khost city and detonated the truck near the restaurant of the base", said Taliban spokesman Zabiullah Muhahid to AFP.
FOB Salerno is close to FOB Chapman, another US-run base in Khost where an Al-Qaeda triple agent blew himself up killing seven CIA agents and his Jordanian handler in December 2009, the deadliest attack on the US intelligence agency since 1983.
On August 28, 2010 NATO said about two dozen Taliban militants were killed in a failed attempt to storm both US-run bases in a city in eastern Afghanistan, NATO said.
Khost is one of the most volatile parts of the country.
It shares a porous border with Pakistan's tribal belt, which lies outside government control, and where US officials say the Taliban and Al-Qaeda have carved out rear bases for operations in Afghanistan.
Khost province borders Pakistan, which is widely believed to be a key source of fighters, funds and supplies for the Taliban.
Back to Top
Back to Top
Charges Amended for Soldier Accused in Civilian Deaths
By JAMES DAO The New York Times June 1, 2012
The Army has amended its charges against Staff Sgt. Robert Bales, the soldier accused of murdering civilians in southern Afghanistan in March, reducing the murder count by one, to 16, and adding charges of illegal steroid use and alcohol consumption.
In its statement accompanying the amended charges, the Army did not explain why it had eliminated one of the murder counts, though it initially reported 16 dead shortly after the killings.
The added charge of alcohol consumption was expected, as military officials had previously said that soldiers on Sergeant Bales’s combat outpost in Kandahar Province reported seeing him drinking the night of the killings.
But the report of steroid use is new. The Army’s new charging sheet said that Sergeant Bales had illegally possessed and used stanozolol, an anabolic steroid commonly used by athletes to build muscle mass.
While anabolic steroids can promote rapid muscle growth, they carry an array of risks, including for higher blood pressure and cancer, and have been linked to psychological changes.
The Army has been trying to crack down on the illegal use of steroids by soldiers, particularly in combat zones. But it has struggled: An investigation by The Seattle Times in 2010, for instance, found evidence that about a dozen soldiers bound for Afghanistan from Joint Base Lewis-McChord in Washington had admitted to illegal steroid use.
Sergeant Bales was based at Joint Base Lewis-McChord. He is currently being held at the military prison at Fort Leavenworth in Kansas.
John Henry Browne, Sergeant Bales’s lawyer, said in an interview that the steroids probably showed up in blood taken from the soldier the night he was arrested. The lawyer also suggested that the finding might provide a new avenue for the defense.
“If the government can prove the case, then the steroids will become an issue — and where he obtained the steroids will become an issue,” Mr. Browne said. “We all know what steroids can do to people.”
Back to Top
Back to Top
Feature: War-weary Afghan children long for peace, schooling
by Faird Behbud, Chen Xin
KABUL, June 1 (Xinhua) -- "We want peace and schooling," said Shah Mirza, an 11-year-old Afghan child, although he was unaware of the International Children's Day which falls on June 1 every year.
Attired in school uniform, Mirza was in a hurry on Thursday morning to reach the classroom on time.
Mirza, the fourth-grader who wanted to become an engineer in the future, was studying in a local school set up by a Non- Governmental Organization (NGO). "My dream is to become an engineer and build houses for my people because I do not want people to live in tents, as we live here in this refugee camp," he said.
Mirza, who lost his father during the Taliban regime, lives with his mother, one brother and two sisters in a tent in Chaman-e- Huzuri camp in the central part of Kabul which houses more than 120 families of Internally Displace Persons (IDPs).
When asked if he knows about the International Children's Day, he said, "I don't know it. What is it like?"
Aschiana, an Afghanistan-based NGO, has been collecting street children and provides shelter, education and vocational courses to them.
"During the Taliban regime (1969-2001), my father was killed in a landmine blast in our village in northern Kabul. Years later, we moved to Kabul city because we lost everything. We don't have any shelter in our village anymore," he said.
Although the Afghan children know little about the International Children's Day, the welfare of the children has been improving gradually in the war-torn country, as nearly 8.4 million children with 39 percent of them girls go to school in Afghanistan today, Afghan Education Minister Farooq Wardak said recently.
However, He said that there are still 4.2 million children with no access to school, mainly due to security reasons and the lack of schools in remote districts across the country.
The on-going Taliban-led insurgency has led to the closure of some 530 schools, mostly in the southern and eastern region where Taliban fighters are active. And according to the Education Ministry, trauma has prevented more than 500,000 children from schooling.
Afghanistan still has a long way to go to recover from the war aftermath and to rebuild educational institutions, thus enabling all Afghan children to get education.
Many children suffering from war and instability in Afghanistan are seen in the capital city Kabul, busily engaged in forced labor including car-washing, shoes-polishing and street vendors.
"I have been forced to join hundreds of children workers in Kabul and to work in a brick factory as a bread earner for my family, because my father is sick," Mohammad Qadir, 17, told Xinhua in a recent interview, adding that his family won't survive if he quit the work.
Mohammad Qadir, whose family has ten members including three older sisters, said that he could earn some 100 to 200 Afghanis (2 to 4 U.S. dollars) daily. "I have no option but to work, to pay off loans taken by my family for basic necessities, and the medical expenses of my father."
The child labor has remained rampant in the brick industry of the war-ravaged Afghanistan, according to a survey by the United Nations International Labour Organization (ILO) in February.
The survey, titled "Buried in Bricks," and aiming to provide an accurate picture of the bonded and child labor in brick factories in two provinces of Afghanistan, Nangarhar and Kabul, said that 56 percent of brick makers in Afghanistan are children under the age of 18, among which 58 percent are boys and 42 percent are girls; while 47 percent are children under the age of 14, among which 33 percent are boys and 14 percent are girls.
"I come to this brick factory at early morning every day. I would love to go to school, to read and write. But I don't have a chance to join school children," said Ahmad Zai, another child labor.
At the same time, Afghan school children also face intimidation and threat by unknown people since the beginning of the educational year in late March, particularly the several toxic gas attacks against schools across the country.
At least eight incidents of poisoning and gas attacks have been registered this year.
Over 120 girls were poisoned on Wednesday in northern Takhar province and over 400 boys were poisoned in eastern Khost province earlier this month.
Ahead of the Children's Day, the UN mission in the country on Thursday called on warring sides to protect civilians especially women and children.
"UNAMA expresses its strong concerns that conflict-related violence continues to kill and injure many Afghan women, men and children throughout the country. 2011 marked the fifth year in a row that civilian casualties increased in the armed conflict in Afghanistan," the UN mission said in a statement.
"UNAMA documented 3,021 civilian deaths in 2011 with 77 percent of all civilian deaths attributed to anti-Government elements and 14 percent to pro-Government forces - Afghan National Security Forces (ANSF) and international forces," it said.
"Conflict-related violence still harms Afghan children, women and men every day across Afghanistan," said Jan Kubis, United Nations Special Representative for the Secretary-General in Afghanistan and head of UNAMA. "Protecting civilians from the consequences of war and preventing civilian casualties should always be the highest priority and strengthened even further during transition of security responsibilities."
The Children's Day has been celebrated in various countries around the globe, but in Afghanistan, the best gift for children is a safe and secure environment for them to grow up.
Back to Top
Back to Top
Tajik Citizens Jailed In Afghanistan Refuse To Return Home
By RFE/RL's Tajik Service June 1, 2012
DUSHANBE -- Officials say the refusal of five Tajik citizens jailed in Afghanistan to return home is stalling the return to Afghanistan of nearly 100 Afghans jailed in Tajikistan.
An official in Tajikistan's Interior Ministry told RFE/RL on June 1 that 97 Afghan nationals -- serving prison terms in Tajikistan for illegal drug trafficking and violating immigration laws -- have been unable to serve their terms in Afghanistan, in line with a prisoner exchange agreement, because of the dispute.
It was not immediately clear why the five Tajiks, who are serving jail terms for similar crimes in Afghanistan, are refusing to go back to Tajikistan to continue serving their sentences.
Afghanistan's Ambassador to Tajikistan, Abdulgafuri Orzu, told RFE/RL that according to Tajik-Afghan agreements, the forcible repatriation of prisoners is not acceptable.
Back to Top
Back to Top
Khomeini Commemorations Met With Resistance By Afghan Youth
By Frud Bezhan June 1, 2012 Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty
Young people swept through the streets of Kabul this week, defacing and tearing down posters of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini plastered throughout the city.
Meant to commemorate the anniversary of the death of the former Iranian supreme leader, the posters and large billboards have offended many in Afghanistan, a Sunni-majority country whose relations with its western neighbor have recently soured.
Demonstrations have been staged daily in the Afghan capital ahead of the June 3 anniversary.
Scores of young people gathered on June 1 in front of a looming billboard of Khomeini, some carrying placards reading: "This Is Kabul Not Tehran."
"Why are we celebrating Khomeini's day here?" asked Kabul University student Ahmad Jan Kandahari. "He is an Iranian figure. Why do we need to celebrate him here in Afghanistan? Here we have our own cultural icons and jihadi figures. They should be the ones celebrated in Afghanistan."
'Direct Attack'
During a rally on May 31, a Kabul high-school student named Arash described efforts to honor Khomeini as a grave injustice to the Afghan nation.
"As you see, posters of Ayatollah Khomeini are hanging in the intersections," he said. "This is a direct attack against Afghan culture and own national heroes."
The social-networking site Facebook was abuzz with comments and photos after the posters were put up. And while many were critical of the move, some defended Khomeini as a great leader of the Islamic faith.
"Khomeini is one of the leaders of the Islamic faith," wrote Ashraf Frugh, a member of the Shi'ite Hazara ethnic minority. "He doesn't just belong to Iran but to all countries where he has followers."
Those followers are the ones the Islamic Shura of Kabul, the Shi'ite council that put up the posters, intended to lure to the streets on June 1. The posters, which the council put up with the permission of local authorities, feature a large image of Khomenei and announce a "big gathering" in large letters. All comers are invited to celebrate the 23rd anniversary of the "Great Leader...saying goodbye to this world."
The religious council expects hundreds to pour through the Mazari Mosque in a mass prayer to pay their respects.
Fierce Political Debate
Coming amid increased tensions between Tehran and Kabul, with some Afghan lawmakers accusing Iran of meddling in Afghanistan's internal affairs, the issue has become fodder for a fierce political debate.
"Iranian leaders are not the leaders of Afghanistan!" wrote Kabul University student Rohullah Elham in one Afghan forum. "The policies of Iran do not favor Afghanistan. The Islamic regime in Iran is not our government. Those of you who have sold your souls, wake up!"
Ahmad Saeedi, a Kabul-based political analyst, says the marking of Khomeini's death in Afghanistan is a worrying indication of Iran's growing influence in the country.
"The cultural, economic, and political influence of Iran starts from the presidential office and spreads throughout the country," Saeedi says. "This is ensuring that the rules and traditions of Iran are overriding those in Afghanistan."
Observers say the main source of recent Afghan-Iran tensions is Kabul's signing of a long-term strategic agreement with United States on May 1, which raised Iranian fears of an extended American presence in Afghanistan.
Some Afghan lawmakers and officials have accused Tehran of launching a campaign aimed at derailing the U.S.-Afghan partnership, notably through bribing influential Afghan lawmakers and by inciting anti-American and antigovernment sentiment through media outlets it funds.
Written and reported by Frud Bezhan, with additional reporting by RFE/RL's Radio Free Afghanistan
Back to Top
Back to Top
UN Says Civilian Death Rate in Afghanistan is Unacceptable
Larry Freund VOA News May 31, 2012
NEW YORK - The United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan (UNAMA) says civilian casualties from the Afghan conflict remain at "unacceptably high levels" despite a 21-percent drop in conflict-related deaths during the first four months of this year.
In a report released Thursday, UNAMA said 2011 marked the fifth year in a row in which civilian casualties increased in Afghanistan. The group said it documented more than 3,000 civilian deaths last year, three-quarters linked to violence by anti-government forces.
The continued violence has raised concerns about the ability of Afghan forces to handle security beyond 2014, when most NATO forces are planning to conclude their combat role.
Brookings Institution Foreign Policy Senior Fellow Michael O'Hanlon says he does not expect a significant decrease in the conflict-related deaths in the near future.
"I am just not persuaded that there is any realistic hope that the numbers are going to go down that much in the next two or three years," said O'Hanlon. "I think that unless the Taliban decides to be serious about peace talks, we are probably going to have to hope the numbers just don't get much worse as we carry out a transition to primary Afghan responsibility for security throughout the country."
UNAMA said improvised explosive devices (IED's), used by anti-government forces, were the single largest killer of civilians, accounting for one-third of the deaths.
On Wednesday, the group said it had documented 579 civilian deaths for the first four months of 2012, a one-fifth decrease compared to the same time last year. However, it said the region's harsh winter may have contributed to the decrease.
Meanwhile, Afghan officials say explosions killed at least seven police officers on Thursday.
A spokesman for the provincial governor in Kandahar province says a car bombing at a police checkpoint in Argistan killed at least five officers.
There was no immediate claim of responsibility. Kandahar is the birthplace of the Taliban, which earlier this month announced the start of a spring offensive.
Afghan officials say a second explosion at a checkpoint in Jalalabad killed two police officers.
Back to Top
Back to Top
Afghanistan's Rambo
Aljazeera By Bernard Smith May 31, 2012
Rambo shows me the marks around his wrists, left after being chained up by the Taliban for more than five months.
"When the US marines leave, we will have to fight to protect our people," he says.
Rambo is a policeman in Kajaki district in Helmand province. His real name is Omar Gul, but he only answers to the moniker of the action-movie hero made famous by Sylvester Stallone.
Rambo hates the Taliban. He somehow managed to shoot his way out of their custody. Now he wants revenge. That drive makes him stand out against his fellow police officers and highlights the challenges Afghan security forces will face as US and NATO troops pull out of Afghanistan.
The other police officers we met in Kajaki and elsewhere across this country are not motivated like Rambo.
They just need the money. There is no real loyalty to the leadership of one of the most corrupt countries on earth. So, when the foreign troops leave, it is hard to imagine poorly paid and poorly equipped police officers standing and fighting against determined Taliban.
Kajaki has only been under central government influence for a little more than seven months. Out on patrol with troops of the US Marine Corps, we walk past fields of poppy stalks. Their sap has just been harvested for opium. The Americans do not destroy this harvest because, they say, they do not want to alienate the local population.
One US soldier tells me that this area was so detached from the Afghan government that, before they arrived here in October, local farmers did not know that poppy cultivation is illegal.
Hard work
We are embedded with a detachment of 18 US soldiers. They live with Rambo and his colleagues in a police compound in Kajaki's bazaar. The Americans are here to mentor the Afghans, to get them ready to go it alone in perhaps just a few months. It is hard work.
The Marines Corps are part of arguably the best-equipped military machine in the world. They have heavily armoured. mine-resistant. ambush-protected vehicles, MRAPS, which can withstand roadside bombs.
They have sophisticated spy cameras fastened to blimps that float high above towns and villages. They can call in air support if the going gets really tough. The US soldiers we were with were fit, disciplined, committed and professional men.
The Afghans, meanwhile, must manage with Ford Ranger pick-up vehicles, AK-47s, and not much else.
When we ask the US military how the Afghans will cope when they lose foreign military support, the answer is "local knowledge". Which means building local relationships to gather intelligence to maintain stability.
On a walking patrol through Kajaki’s bazaar we see this strategy in action. The police talk to the locals while the Americans look on from a distance. It all seems very friendly. But when we approach shopkeepers, some, out of earshot of the police, complain of official corruption. Others say they are too afraid to talk.
Stability in Kajaki seems fragile, and not every police officer is like Rambo.
Back to Top
Back to Top
Afghanistan War--not one more drop of blood!
Examiner.com By Kimberly Dvorak Homeland Security Examiner May 31, 2012
The Afghanistan War has been stuck in a holding pattern for 10 years now. Despite commanders on the ground, rank and file and a handful of journalists reporting the REAL battle conditions in the war-torn tribal nation- American blood continues to spill. It’s enough. Not one more life, arm, leg or finger should be lost. Whether American troops leave tomorrow, next week or next year the outcome will be the same.
A Congressional hearing was held today at Rayburn House to begin unraveling the problems that plague the 10-year Afghanistan War.
Conditions on the ground suggest Afghanistan is headed to a bloody civil war. Military intelligence officers say that every time a drone strikes and kills a suspected terrorist, America creates 10 new enemies. Therefore, the number of Afghan causalities is meaningless for insurgent warlords, but it’s infinitely important to the U.S. military. Because there is no real roadmap for victory, America’s GI's are fighting for the Military-Industrial-Congressional Complex. That's it.
“(There’s) no doubt Petraeus hammered the Taliban extremely hard. I am sure that some of them are more willing to parlay. But, equally, for every dead Pashtun warrior there will be 10 pledged to revenge. I’m afraid I don’t think the present increase in violence is right or proper and its nightly slaughter of the Taliban without a political strategy in place is tactics, not strategy. It is profoundly wrong and it is not conducive to a stable political settlement,” said Sherard Cowper-Coles, former British Ambassador to Afghanistan.
Another American miscalculation is the nation building theory. Afghanistan is a tribal society stuck in the Middle Ages, giving them “democracy” hasn’t worked and it’s time for the cowardly political leaders as well as the Pentagon’s feckless military officers to put their collective feet down and recite—“enough is enough.” No more execution-style murders of U.S. soldiers by ungrateful Afghanistan Security Forces (America is purportedly training Afghanis to “keep the peace” once the stars and stripes ship out, but increasingly it seems we are training our own executioners). It’s time for NATO generals serving in the tribal nation to report the facts, set forth a plausible exit strategy and end the bloodshed. The callous inaction by Washington DC politicos will not change the end result, but it will further hinder a generation of soldiers to lifelong suffering and medical treatment.
The purview of winning “hearts and minds” is nothing more than a pipe dream. And those 535 lawmakers inside the beltway are solely responsible for the continuation of Obama’s “right” war. Don’t believe it? Under the guise of “national security” Congress feeds the defense contracting industry that strategically places manufacturing plants in 42 critical states ensuring their prosperity and eagerly purchasing lawmaker’s souls in the form of campaign money. It’s the ole pimp and whore routine.
Equally abhorrent is President Obama’s “kill list” and the weekly meetings he hosts at the White House to determine who lives and who dies. While this secret practice began under the Bush Administration, President Obama has embraced the program and even boasts about the list with senior reelection campaign officials.
“In the name of fighting demons in pick-up trucks and wars that Congress has never declared, the government shreds our rights, taps our cellphones, reads our emails, kills innocents abroad, strip searches 87-year-old grandmothers in wheelchairs and three-year-old babies in their mothers' arms, and offers secrecy when the law requires accountability,” Judge Andrew Napolitano wrote. “Obama has argued that his careful consideration of each person he orders killed and the narrow use of deadly force are an adequate and constitutional substitute for due process. The Constitution provides for no such thing. He has also argued that the use of drones to do his killing is humane since they are 'surgical' and only kill their targets. We know that is incorrect. And he has argued that these killings are consistent with our values. What is he talking about? The essence of our values is the rule of law, not the rule of presidents.”
Taking this into considering one would think lawmakers could unite and end the usurping of Congressional powers, cut the Afghan War funding and bring the brave men and women serving in an unwinnable quagmire home.
There are a number of reasons why victory remains elusive
In February an analysis of the Afghan war was published in the Armed Forces Journal that challenged the “accuracy and veracity” of how some senior defense officials have characterized the state of affairs in Afghanistan. Based on a year traveling throughout that country and talking to hundreds of Soldiers, Army LTC Daniel Davis argued the situation had consistently worsened since the launch of the Afghan surge. One reoccurring theme LTC Davis heard from leaders in Afghanistan was “nothing is what it seems.”
Last week NATO met in Chicago to discuss the Afghanistan War and leaders shared a rosy snapshot with fellow allies.
“In the ten years of our partnership the lives of Afghan men, women and children, have improved significantly in terms of security, education, health care, economic opportunity and the assurance of rights and freedoms. There is more to be done, but we are resolved to work together to preserve the substantial progress we have made during the past decade,” the signed declaration read.
However, esteemed foreign policy expert, Anthony Cordesman, of the Center for Strategic and International Studies published a report that represents a stark contrast to NATO’s assessment.
“As in Vietnam, the insurgents can lose every major tactical engagement and still win control in some Pashtun areas once U.S. and ISAF forces are gone If there is a solution, it lies in accepting the reality that the present strategy will almost certainly fail to secure the south and the east of Afghanistan Pursuing today’s ‘strategy’ and illusions offers almost no hope at all,” Cordesman said.
“(ISAF) needs to address corruption, the steady outflow of capital, the inability to determine what portion of spending is actually spent in – and stays in – Afghanistan. They need to address the fact that narcotics and gray and black economic activity is a major part of the Afghan domestic economy. They need to stop making absurdly optimistic assumptions about the ‘New Silk Road,’ future domestic revenues and exports, and the other techniques being used to promise progress that cannot happen. At present, no official source of economic data and analysis – US, allied, Afghan or international – meets these basic tests of professional integrity.” Cordesman’s Afghan War conclusion leaves no stone unturned and he calls NATO out for either misrepresenting facts or omitting key variables that result in systematic dishonesty.
Further compounding the war’s failure is highlighted in the German Institute for International and Security Affairs report titled; “Is Afghanistan on the Brink of a New Civil War?”
The German think tank concludes; “Despite overriding economic and profit interests, the ethno-political polarization (will) intensify to such an extent that the army and the police as well as the Karzai government (will) collapse. Local warlords and uncontrollable insurgent groups (will) battle each other (and) crime (will) spiral out of control. The central power (will) cease to exist even in nominal terms; it is a war of shifting alliances or one in which “everyone fights everyone.”
“It is crucial to note that all the above statements, reports, and analysis have been produced, not by some propaganda arm of the Taliban – but by people on our side,” LTC Davis said. “They want us to succeed as much, and in some cases more, than we do. How can it be then that with such an unbridgeable gulf between official statements and the large and growing body of work that comes to a very different conclusion, why does Congress refuse to even ask questions?"
Of greater concern to Davis, however is “the men and women in the Armed Forces who will pay with their lives, their body parts, their flesh and blood, and suffer continued degradation to their emotional and psychological well-being in pursuit of a strategy that will not benefit America.
Taking all of these factors into consideration, Americans can draw two conclusions—either Congress is ignorant or they are pacifying their defense industry donors in an effort to retain power inside the beltway. Either option is unacceptable and our service members deserve to serve with honor instead of dying for ungrateful politicians seeking to make a quick buck.
Back to Top
Back to Top
US pushes Australia to take command
Sydney Morning Herald By Mark Baker June 1, 2012
THE federal government has bowed to United States pressure and will take full control of military operations in Afghanistan's Oruzgan province as international forces prepare to withdraw from the country over the next two years.
For the first time since Australian troops were deployed to the southern province eight years ago, Australian commanders will also direct US, Afghan, Singaporean and Slovak soldiers.
The Defence Minister, Stephen Smith, denied the decision would increase the danger faced by the more than 1500 Australian troops now operating in Afghanistan, or require additional forces to be deployed.
The Americans will continue to provide some headquarters staff, medical support and helicopters for operations in the province but an Australian officer will replace the US colonel now in command.
The Defence Force chief, General David Hurley, said the change would make it easier to transfer responsibility to Afghan forces and prepare the withdrawal of Australian troops and equipment over the next 12 to 18 months.
''What this decision does is put us in the driving seat to control the interaction with those processes over the next year or so,'' General Hurley said. ''This is a major operational phase.
''For our forces outside the wire in Oruzgan it will make no difference at all.''
But the Australia Defence Association executive director, Neil James, said there would be ''an element of increased risk'' for Australian troops as the US role in Oruzgan decreased - and the size of the Australian force in the province may need to be increased as the Australian withdrawal got under way. He said Australia should not have resisted taking over the leadership role in Oruzgan in 2010 when Dutch forces withdrew.
The government had rejected pressure from Washington to take command despite the willingness of senior Australian officers to assume the role.
''The American military have been laughing at us for years,'' Mr James said. ''They say, 'Don't you have any brigadiers or colonels in the Australian Defence Force?' ''
The defence analyst Hugh White said he believed the government had only relented and agreed to accept the command role now that there was a clear timetable for the withdrawal of Australian forces.
''There was a lot of US pressure on us to take it over in 2010 and significant disappointment that we hadn't been willing to,'' Professor White said.
Mr Smith said the national security committee of cabinet had approved the new role in Oruzgan this week and it would smooth the scheduled withdrawal of Australian forces from Afghanistan by 2014.
''Australia taking on the leadership now puts us in a better position to manage the transition process,'' Mr Smith said.
He said the security situation in the province had improved substantially over the past two years.
During the past month, General Hurley said, a small team had been conducting an audit of equipment to determine what will come home and what will stay in Oruzgan.
The Afghan president, Hamid Karzai, announced on May 13 that the province would begin the transition to Afghan-led security responsibility in the middle of this year.
Back to Top
Back to Top
One Afghan’s Three-Generation Quest for Peace
New York Times By ADAM KLEIN May 31, 2012
Two years ago, I began working with Afghan writers in workshops, introducing them to short narratives from around the world, frequently from postwar writers. Most of my students weren’t raised reading stories in English, and very few had ever sat down to write their own in a second or third language. Unlike an American workshop, it was rare to find an Afghan who felt their story warranted such attention, theirs or mine, or who wanted their work to ever appear in print.
Through a process of close conferencing, the stories developed, as did trust, and eventually a desire to see their work published — preferably outside Afghanistan, where candor is still risky. At the same time, I asked students to bring me pictures or documents, imagining that I might help start an image archive — something online that could one day be used for research and couldn’t be destroyed by the Taliban or others who find photography incongruous with Islam.
Few students brought photographs or letters, stating that their provinces were too dangerous to return to, or that no such documents or letters survived the war, the Taliban, or their sometimes dramatic, overland escapes from the country.
Though my intention was to help create a book of their stories, in their words, I had one student who brought in a trove of images, letters, and most surprisingly, pictures of Muhammad Ali with his father, as well as New York protest permits. I was hooked. Kakail Nuristani began to relay his father’s story to me. Over time, I realized that this was more than a story of Kakail’s father’s optimistic, driven youthfulness and sense of destiny. Rather, it unearthed the murky world of American power players and Afghan dissidents on the other side of the world — the side of policy-makers, shape-shifters, early war profiteers claiming to work on behalf of Afghan victims. Kakail’s story is one of destiny forestalled for three generations. He asked me to help him put this together, sensing there was a national narrative here. When we’d finally finished it, the images laid before us, I saw it starkly. Power is only as good as those who gain access to it. The rest is fallout.
As told by Kakail Nuristani: A Forefather Who Ran With Kings
My grandfather’s aunt was taken forcibly from Nuristan to be either a wife or courtesan of the Emir Abdur Rahman Khan sometime in the 1880s, and to live in the king’s court. As far as I know, this may be the same presidential palace occupied by Hamid Karzai today. Nuristan is a remote region, high in the northeast mountains of Afghanistan; little is known of it, but it was the first region to oust the Russians and the last to convert to Islam within Afghanistan.
My grandfather was able to live under his aunt’s supervision, and did have some access to the palace. That’s how he formed his early friendship with Mohammed Nadir Shah, father to King Mohammed Zahir Shah, the last king of Afghanistan, who reigned from 1933-1973 before he was ousted in a coup. My grandfather would go on to serve as King Shah’s treasurer.
After Abdur Rahman Khan had settled with the British on the Durand Line, the demarcation between India and Afghanistan, my grandfather went to British India for studies and fell in love with a viceroy’s wife, whose face he had tattooed on his arm. When he returned to Nuristan, a group of mullahs saw the tattoo and insisted he was an infidel and could no longer pray in the mosque. In response, he informed them that if he were an infidel for having the face of a woman on his arm, they too, were infidels for trading in cash imprinted with the faces of world leaders. This left them speechless. He was left alone after that. In later years, perhaps due to my grandfather’s deft diplomatic skills, he became the first elected provincial parliament member under Zahir Shah. The following muslin voting record shows the fingerprints of those villagers who nominated him and provides some idea of the fragility of such democratic processes that held these communities together. Lennart Edelberg led a Danish expedition in the
1960s to Afghanistan. He wrote a book on Nuristani architecture that was greatly informed by my grandfather. Later, His Royal Highness Prince Henrik of Denmark, accompanied by the royal family of Afghanistan, visited my grandfather’s simple home — wood-beamed and blackened with cooking smoke. It was common for the aristocracy to go on hunting expeditions in Nuristan. The following photograph shows my grandfather inaugurating the Nuristan Collection at the Moesgaard Museum, in Aarhus, Denmark. Their museum appears to still have holdings on the music of the region, identified as: “Documentation of an eradicated culture.”With these loose associations connecting my family to the royal families in Denmark and Afghanistan, we lived with a certain prestige. In 1965, the Danish aristocracy even knighted my grandfather
However, Nuristan being what it was — a fourteen-day walk to Kabul (legend has it that my grandfather made this walk many times), was probably still a place where one’s political efficacy was not as great as people imagined. Superstitions surrounded my grandfather as though he himself had great power merely through contact with others who possessed it. They imagined him able to eradicate impoverishment, remoteness, and backwardness. My grandfather continued to live humbly among them in the village. Nothing much changed; it was only the expectation of his eventual influence that differentiated him from them.
A Father Who Fought for Afghanistan’s Freedom
On Sept. 11, 1948, my father, Khalilullah Nuristani, was born under the same burden of greatness. In retrospect, he must have believed that he could fulfill what had been his father’s unfulfilled destiny. My father became a tireless fighter for a free Afghanistan. In looking at the documents he left behind, I am also inclined to believe that he was nostalgic for an Afghanistan that at one point was considered a mini-Paris for visiting Pakistanis, Indians, even those few movie crews, academics, and shaggy hippies who went so far, and into such remote corners of the country, that my father had, on a number of occasions, put them up. He was assured of its promise as a location that would attract world travelers, welcome and impress them.
Because of my father’s involvement in Sardar Mohammad Daoud Khan‘s government, he had to flee the Russians. His first exile was in Germany where he was encouraged to seek political asylum in the United States, as the cold war was in full swing and European interest in Afghanistan was specific to those countries under Soviet occupation. The United States’ response to the Russians was broader, ideological. My father was granted asylum in 1979 with the help of Columbia University professor John Monday and his wife, as well as the anthropology professor Charles Lindholm and his wife, Janice Gardener, who hosted him. He immediately went to work on behalf of the Nuristani resistance, lobbying Congress and writing directly to Senator Jacob K. Javits in 1979, and Senator Edward M. Kennedy in 1980
Despite the sympathetic letters he received in response to the escalation of aggression by the Russians in Afghanistan, my father felt it necessary to take his protest to the streets, and specifically to the United Nations.
A lone agitator at that time, my father left behind his protest permits from 1979 (probably impossible to get now after the Occupy Wall Street movement) and a couple of photographs in which it appears he is never surrounded by more than twenty-five sympathizers, including Lithuanians and Latvians, and perhaps some people just attracted to a crowd. It is rumored that Zalmay Khalilzad attended these protests, but I am unable to identify him in these pictures. I only know that Zalmay Khalilzad’s access to the halls of American power would have him eventually working directly under George W. Bush and Dick Cheney. He was instrumental in Iraq and Afghanistan policy, which, 14 years after my father’s early pleas for support, morphed into something much more sinister than my father’s initial idealism would have ever allowed.
Interestingly, before Charlie Wilson’s war, my father finally found a sole supporter, spiritually and economically, in Muhammad Ali. It is still a mystery to me how they met, but I remember my father claiming he had visited him and his daughter, Laila, and that he played with her as an infant. While Wilson was channeling cash to the “refugees” of Afghanistan, my father was warning Muhammad Ali through the Afghan Association of Freedom Fighters U.S.A. to oversee where funds were directed, which he clearly believed to be misappropriated and diverted for the personal interests of American Afghans and the militant fighters whom he later strongly opposed and fought against in the mid-1980s.
My father returned to Nuristan prematurely after receiving news that his entire family had been wiped out in a Russian strafe bombing. This misinformation had been delivered to him by Sam Sloan, also known as Haji Mohammed Ismail Sloan, a candidate to become the 2012 presidential nominee for the Libertarian Party, stock trader, successful litigant in a Supreme Court case involving penny stocks, chess journalist and author of “How To take Over an American Public Company” as well as the author of the introduction of Bobby Fischer’s only book — euphemistically, a man with a long past.
Upon return, my father realized he had lost two daughters. The rest of his family was safe. But he was dejected, broken, having marshaled so much energy toward the struggles of Afghanistan, and in particular, the needs of Nuristan, only to find a Congress insulated by lobbyists, and a group of competing militias attempting to pick the pockets of the United States on behalf of refugees. He had put his faith in people like Mr. Sloan — minor players on the criminal outskirts of power, and iconic, sometimes well-intentioned figures such as Muhammad Ali, whose money was probably the first to support the mujahedeen, but the wrong arm of it. Not only this, but internecine warfare — based on water, land, and old resentments between Nuristani tribes — eventually wiped out the village of Kushtooz; its residents now populate other areas of the province, but our family home is gone. None of the supposed benefits of “freedom” or “resistance” changed the precariousness of life in Nuristan.
My father’s last letter, thanking those academics that supported him, is also a prescient reminder of the situation that dogs Afghan and American relations today. It is not that one party lacks the vision, hope or capacity to change the situation in the country, but the intractable nature of corruption that makes any single man’s contribution, and perhaps any nation’s, inevitably doomed. My father wrote in 1980:
And so now I see the American press and television praising Afghanistan, and laughing at the Russian defeats.
But praising Afghan freedom fighters and marveling at their courage is not helpful. I have been very disappointed in my work here. The press and the public do not seem to understand that the fight in Afghanistan is a fight which vitally effects the welfare of the whole free world. [] I oppose elite interests, and so have been unable to make use of connections in Washington and elsewhere which the elite, with their money and Western educations, have been able to utilize. [] American disinterest, my own lack of funds, my lack of knowledge of English, my isolation from the American power structure; all these difficulties force me, with regret, to leave New York for the time being. [] For my thousands of friends, you have made New York like my own village. I am very unhappy to leave you all.”
And so I write five years after my father’s death to ask that New Yorkers, and Americans who’ve lost so much already, see Afghanistan, and particularly Nuristan, as a place capable of peace, longing for it. I want them to know that, if they eventually must leave due to the same corrupting forces that once forced my father give up his struggle; they will be leaving potentially thousands of friends still here, imagining that access to great power will one day deliver, will not be diverted to dishonest brokers and the crooked of both our countries, and that impoverishment and backwardness will finally be a thing of the past, rather than a past replayed.
Back to Top
Back to Top
Fear in the classrooms: is the Taliban poisoning Afghanistan's schoolgirls?
Hundreds in hospital – but are terror attacks on schools to blame, or mass hysteria?
The Independent By Lianne Gutcher Friday 01 June 2012
Kabul - Hundreds of Afghan schoolchildren have been admitted to hospital in the past six weeks after falling victim to what appears to be six separate major poison attacks. Three alleged attacks have occurred in northern Takhar province in the past week alone, affecting more than 300 girls.
Some government and police officials have blamed the poison attacks on the Taliban, whose hostility to girls' education during its hardline rule in the 1990s is well documented. Others have blamed the "enemies of Afghanistan" and hinted at the involvement of Pakistan and Iran.
Tests by the International Security Assistance Force (Isaf) and government, however, have not found any toxic substances. One international expert has said the scares have all the hallmarks of mass hysteria.
In the most recent attack, on Tuesday, 170 girls in Takhar's provincial capital, Taloqan, were taken to hospital after falling ill and losing consciousness. Pupils blamed poisonous gas, claiming to have sniffed a noxious odour on entering their classroom at Ahan Dara Girls' High School. Students at Bibi Haji school also blamed toxic gas for poisoning them in two separate attacks on 23 May and 27 May. Girls at another school in Takhar became ill in April and said the drinking water in their well had been deliberately contaminated.
More than 200 boys at a school in eastern Khost province also fell sick in mid-May as well as 100 girls in northern Balkh province said on 9 May. Their school said its well had been poisoned.
Symptoms have included vomiting, nausea and fainting. In all cases, most pupils who were admitted to hospital were released on the same day and no long-term damage was done.
On each occasion, the local authorities sent blood samples from poisoned students for tests and launched an investigation into the circumstances.
Gul Agha Ahmadi, a media adviser at the Ministry of Education in Kabul, told The Independent that officials were awaiting test results from the most recent poison scares but that results from tests done after the incidents in April and early May had failed to show the presence of harmful substances.
Isaf tests into the Khost incident also showed no harmful substances present. The "initial laboratory test of multiple air, water and material samples were negative for any organic compounds such as poisons or other toxic material," an Isaf spokesman said. "Further tests continue, but at this point it is unlikely that any foreign substance caused the reported symptoms."
Mr Ahmadi said mass hysteria could not be ruled out, because Afghan people live in constant fear of insurgent attacks and could easily imagine terrorists poisoning their drinking water.
Robert Bartholomew, a prominent sociologist, also told the AFP news agency that the poisoning scare had "the tell-tale signs" of mass hysteria.
He said, "the preponderance of schoolgirls; the absence of a toxic agent; transient, benign symptoms; rapid onset and recovery; plausible rumours; the presence of a strange odour; and anxiety generated from a wartime backdrop" all pointed to mass hysteria. As a result of having been at war for more than 30 years, half the Afghan population suffers from psychological problems, according to Bashir Ahmad Sarwari, the head of the government's mental health department.
Not everyone is buying the mass hysteria theory. Lotfullah Mashal, a National Directorate of Intelligence spokesman, said closing schools was part of the Taliban's spring offensive.
But the Islamic group vehemently denied involvement. "If found in any part of the country, those doing such activities would be given punishment according to sharia," it said.
As many as 550 schools affecting 300,000 pupils have been shut down in 11 provinces where the Taliban has a robust presence, the Ministry of Education said. The insurgents threaten schools partly because they do not support the government curriculum.
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).