rigorousintuition.ca

Paul Fitzgerald and Elizabeth Gould write in a guest op-ed for Juan Cole's blog wrote:
Fitzgerald & Gould: Afghanistan, a New Beginning

“Rebuilding Afghanistan is the most cynically pro-American thing you could do anywhere in the world in terms of making it a strong ally in the best sense of the word. Not a puppet or a right-wing military dictatorship but a really good Islamic country that has the potential to be democratic and progressive and lead this whole part of the world.” – Rob Schultheis, an American journalist in Kabul, 2002.


As the Obama administration unveils its new and expanded war plan for Afghanistan and Pakistan, word comes that it has downgraded the so called democracy-building efforts of the Bush administration, that it will negotiate with the so called “moderate” elements of the extremist Taliban and that it may take a more direct role in running the government of Afghanistan.

President Obama’s special representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan, Richard Holbrooke denies that the U.S. seeks to sideline Afghanistan’s elected president, Hamid Karzai. But the handwriting is on the wall. After floundering around for 7 years, the U.S. and the west appear to be falling back on a failed Clinton-era plan to embrace the Taliban’s legitimacy. But if fixing Afghanistan – a country so recently believed to be open to a western democratic embrace – has proven too taxing for the west’s leadership – what can the Obama administration do to right the situation before the same old misinformed policy habits issue in a new wave of Islamic extremism?

The first major mistake, according to one well placed Afghan/American was Washington’s total deference to American companies whose control of the reconstruction process assured that the financial benefits accrued exclusively to foreign developers, contractors, and suppliers while leaving the local population and their leadership out of the development loop.

Over the last 7 years much of the aid that reached Afghanistan never got to the local level where it mattered and where it did, it was snatched up by warlords, put in power by Bush administration overseers. As free market ideologues, the Bush administration allowed international contractors free reign over reconstruction and did virtually nothing to coordinate western aid or distribute it fairly throughout Afghanistan. Instead, the virtuous cycle that reconstruction could have generated for the rural population with jobs and revenue quickly turned vicious, alienated the population, spurred corruption and undermined the new government’s legitimacy.

Aside from squandering its military advantage by turning away from Afghanistan to Iraq, the situation was turned from bad to worse when the Bush administration insisted on putting the “hated” warlords back into the new centralized government to compensate for its under-manned mission.

Now the Obama administration seeks to redress Bush era mistakes. But while Washington might dream that returning to a pre-9/11 strategy of splitting its “moderate” Taliban enemy from its “hard-core ideological” Taliban enemy might turn the tide, the chilling impact of a Taliban return will shut down any further local cooperation with the west.

Appearing on the scene as if by miracle in 1992, the Taliban’s purported mission of clearing the countryside of warlords and drug dealers was received warmly by Washington’s K street lobbyists. Painted by Pakistan’s Inter Services Intelligence Directorate (ISI) as an indigenous Afghan tribal force, the Taliban were actually a thinly disguised ISI strike-force paid for by a consortium of business interests.

The CIA’s former chief of the Near-East South-Asia Division in the Directorate of Operations, Charles Cogan today refers to them as “a wholly owned subsidiary of the ISI.” But former ISI Director General Hamid Gul claims his ISI also received help from Britain’s former High Commissioner to Pakistan, Sir Nicholas Barrington who “inducted both former royalists and erstwhile communists into the Taliban movement.”

For 8 years, the Clinton administration bought the idea of a “moderate” Taliban. But the very idea was a chimera, played skillfully by the ISI in a double game that saw Washington unwittingly support ISI’s interests while undermining its own.

Today, the Obama administration resumes where the Clinton administration left off, but if it really wants a fair and lasting solution for Afghanistan, it must begin by helping the Afghan people fulfill their democratic and progressive potential, and in doing so, it will help them lead this whole part of the Islamic world.

http://channel6newsonline.com/2011/03/k ... ghanistan/

Karzai says NATO and US should stop their operations in Afghanistan

12 March 2011 484 views No Comment BY: BNO News


ASADABAD, AFGHANISTAN (BNO NEWS) -- Afghan President Hamid Karzai said on Saturday he wants an end to U.S. and ISAF forces operations in Afghanistan, Pajhwok Afghan News reported.

"If the war is against terrorists, then militant hideouts across the border be destroyed. There are no terrorists in our villages," the president said.

Accompanied by a number of advisers and the deputy NATO commander, Karzai arrived in Asadabad, the capital of Kunar province, to condole with families of airstrike victims in Ghaziabad district. More than 70 people, including women and children were killed during raids in Ghaziabad and Nanglam Valley last month.

Karzai met with relatives of the individuals killed and wounded during the February 18 coalition airstrike in which, according to provincial officials, coalition forces killed as many as 64 civilians. The NATO-led International Security Assistance Force (ISAF), however, said it didn't have any reports of civilian deaths. ISAF said 36 insurgents were killed.

Before addressing a huge gathering of tribal elders, Karzai offered prayers for the dead. In his speech, the president said they were thankful to foreign countries for assistance, but they were extremely shocked over the killing of civilians at the hands of international troops in Afghanistan.

"Afghan suffered a lot in the nearly decade-long war. No other nation in the world has suffered as much as Afghans. The war has been imposed on us and we want an end to this. There should be no bombings and no unnecessary arrests," the president stressed, as cited by Pajhwok Afghan News.

He said when the February 18 incident happened, NATO leaders apologized to him, but he remained silent and did not answer their apologies.

"We know how to live. We have a history … and respect guests. My silence does not mean we will always respect the guests," he warned.

Karzai gave the NATO deputy commander photos of the children killed in the February 28 bombardment and told him to show it to his government and people. The children aged between 10 and 15, who were collecting firewood, were killed during a U.S. air strike. Initially, ISAF claimed that nine insurgents were killed.

Conflicted-related civilian deaths in Afghanistan increased 15 percent to 2,777 in 2010 compared to the previous year, according to an annual report conducted by the United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan (UNAMA) and the Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission.

According to the report, anti-government elements were linked to 2,080 civilian deaths (75 percent of all civilian deaths), up 28 percent from 2009, while pro-government forces were linked to 440 civilian deaths (16 percent), down 26 percent from 2009. Aerial attacks by ISAF remained the most harmful pro-government tactic in 2010, killing 171 civilians, which is 39 percent of total civilian deaths linked to pro-government forces.

(Copyright 2011 by BNO News B.V. All rights reserved. Info: sales@bnonews.com.)

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/kar ... story.html

Karzai again condemns NATO operations

By Ernesto Londono, Saturday, March 12, 5:22 PM


KABUL — Afghan President Hamid Karzai demanded Saturday that NATO have its troops “stop their operations on our soil” — the bluntest language he has yet used to criticize the way the international force is waging the war.

“If this war is a war against terrorism, then the war against terrorism is not in our villages or on our soil,” Karzai said in an emotional speech to the relatives of nine children killed in a recent NATO airstrike while they gathered firewood in eastern Afghanistan.

A spokesman for Karzai later sought to temper the remarks, saying the president meant to demand that NATO cease operations that harm civilians and that it halt its operations completely.

Karzai held one of the children wounded in the March 1 airstrike as he addressed a gathering that included the No. 2 commander of NATO forces in Afghanistan, Lt. Gen. David Rodriguez.

The airstrike, which resulted in one of the worst cases of civilian casualties in Afghanistan, was carried out in response to a rocket attack on a NATO base in Konar province, NATO officials have said.


londonoe@washpost.com

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/e ... fghan.html

End the Afghan war, bring our troops home

The American public and the top U.S. general in Afghanistan agree our troops should start coming home. Heed the advice, Mr. President.

LEAVE Afghanistan sooner than later. Heed the advice, Mr. President, from two important sources of counsel: the U.S. public and a top military adviser.

America's pessimism about the war in Afghanistan and Gen. David Petraeus' optimistic assessment of military and civilian conditions end up in the same place, headed toward the exit.

Petraeus' appearance before the Senate Armed Service Committee Tuesday was his first public review of the war since he assumed command in June 2010. He told a receptive panel that U.S. forces could begin to leave this summer.

His testimony coincided with release of a Washington Post-ABC News poll that found 64 percent of Americans saying the war is not worth fighting. Nearly 80 percent said the U.S. should withdraw a substantial number of troops this July, a benchmark set by the president. The same poll found only 39 percent think he will actually do it.

The U.S. has been in Afghanistan since 2001, and it has been fighting itself out of a hole since 2005. American and NATO forces were losing ground to resurgent Taliban forces, a lack of civilian support and confidence, and a corrupt central government.

Military gains have come with renewed focus on training Afghan forces and patient work to build civilian trust and improve local security and economic conditions. The time is ripe to leave, and put those Afghan forces in charge.

Afghan President Hamid Karzai is the exasperating symbol of all that has stayed the same. He sits atop a shell of a government. Last fall he disrupted the work of Afghanistan's Major Crimes Task Force and Sensitive Investigative Unit when they sniffed too close to the top.

Karzai was recently calling for international troops to end their operations after NATO bombing killed nine children. Lethal mistakes undermine the bravest efforts by outside forces to give Afghans a secure future.

The time is long overdue for the U.S. to depart. Obama sent 30,000 troops to Afghanistan after taking office. Bring them and the other 70,000 home as well. The U.S. can declare the war over.

http://www.monstersandcritics.com/news/ ... i-comments

Afghan presidential spokesman clarifies Karzai comments

Mar 14, 2011, 14:15 GMT


Kabul - Afghan President Hamid Karzai asked NATO and US merely to stop operations that result in civilian casualties - and not all the operations, an official clarified on Monday.

'The president of Afghanistan asked to stop those operations that caused civilians causalities,' said Waheed Omar, the principal spokesman for Karzai.

'He suggested to stop any such operations and this is just a continuation of the plea of president, the government and the people of Afghanistan who have been asking to stop such operations for many years,' Omar told journalists in the capital Kabul.

Karzai had appeared to say on Saturday that NATO and US should stop their operations in the war-torn country.

'I ask NATO and US, with honour and humbleness and not with arrogance, to stop its operations in our soil,' Karzai was quoted as saying in the eastern province of Kunar during his visit to express condolence to the families of nine children who were killed by US airstrike earlier this month.

Omar said the president's speech was focused on operations conducted in Kunar province.

According to reports, Afghan president made the comment after he was shown a one-year old child who had his leg amputated because of the airstrike.

Civilian casualty has been a major contention between Afghan government and international forces, mainly the US forces. The New York Times had reported that US military officials were angered by Karzai's comment.

The presidential spokesman said despite disagreements, there is nothing personal in his comments.

'This is not an issue of personal interest. General David Petraeus represents the NATO and the coalition forces and the president represents the people of Afghanistan,' Omar told reporters.

'I don't think any of this is anything personal or of personal disagreement.'

'We do have our disagreements. But we do agree on issues of policy,' Omar said, adding the president meets with General Petraeus and other ISAF commanders regularly.

http://news.antiwar.com/2011/03/14/spok ... nd-to-war/

Spokesman: Karzai Didn’t Mean to Call for End to War
Karzai Meant to Ask NATO to Stop Killing Civilians
by Jason Ditz, March 14, 2011


Afghan President Hamid Karzai’s Saturday call for NATO and the US to stop all operations within Afghanistan didn’t actually mean that he wanted an end to the NATO occupation, his spokesman insisted today.

Rather, the spokesman, Waheed Omar, insisted that Karzai had only meant that the US should “stop those operations that caused civilian casualties,” and this is just a continuation of long-standing calls to stop killing civilians.

What Karzai actually said was “I ask NATO and US, with honor and humbleness and not with arrogance, to stop operations in our soil.” The comments came during a visit to Kunar Province after a NATO helicopter killed nine children in the province.

The comment, it seems, is the latest in a long line of statements made by the Afghan President that he quickly backs off of. A previous notable example was in April when he threatened to join the insurgency during a visit to Kandahar Province.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/18/world ... nted=print

March 17, 2011

C.I.A. Drones Kill Civilians in Pakistan

By SALMAN MASOOD and PIR ZUBAIR SHAH


ISLAMABAD, Pakistan — Several missiles fired from American drone aircraft on Thursday struck a meeting of local people in northwest Pakistan who had gathered with Taliban mediators to settle a dispute over a chromite mine. The attack, a Pakistani intelligence official said, killed 26 of 32 people present, some of them Taliban fighters, but the majority elders and local people not attached to the militants.

The civilian death toll appeared to be among the worst in the scores of strikes carried out recently in Pakistan’s tribal areas by the C.I.A., which runs the drones. Local residents and media reports said as many as 40 people had been killed in all, though the intelligence official disputed that.

The Pakistani military chief, Gen. Ashfaq Parvez Kayani, issued an unusual and unusually strong condemnation of the attack. “It is highly regrettable that a jirga of peaceful citizens, including elders of the area, was carelessly and callously targeted with complete disregard to human life,” the statement said.

But American officials on Thursday sharply disputed Pakistan’s account of the strikes and the civilian deaths, contending that all the people killed were insurgents. “These people weren’t gathering for a bake sale,” an American official said. “They were terrorists.”

About four missiles fired from one or more drones hit the meeting, known as a jirga, of two tribes and Taliban mediators who had gathered on open ground at a market in Datta Khel, in North Waziristan, according to two residents who live nearby in Miram Shah.

The intelligence official said that of the 32 people at the meeting, 13 were Taliban fighters, 11 of whom were killed. The rest of the dead were elders and tribesmen.

“The Taliban will never gather in such a large number in broad daylight to be targeted by the drones,” according to a resident who did not want to be identified for fear of running afoul of the militants. “It has been a big mistake to target the jirga, as it will have severe consequences.”

Recently discovered chromite mines are common in the area. To keep the mines running profitably, the Taliban — as the reigning authorities in the area — often settle disputes between tribes with competing claims and levy taxes on exports and the mine operators.

The drone strikes on Thursday were the second such barrage in two days in Datta Khel, and the sixth in the tribal areas in the past week, according to The Long War Journal, a Web site that monitors the wars in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

After a pause in drone attacks from Jan. 23 to Feb. 20, the pace of attacks has picked up again this month.

Some analysts attributed the lull to the C.I.A.’s not wanting to upset negotiations to free Raymond A. Davis, the C.I.A. security officer who was released on Wednesday. But American intelligence officials denied that and attributed the pause in part to poor weather.

The region is under the sway of a local warlord and Taliban commander, Hafiz Gul Bahadur, who made a truce with the government as the Pakistani military pushed into South Waziristan in 2009.

But Mr. Bahadur has accepted many Taliban fighters who fled the campaign into his area, and he continues to have close ties to the Haqqani network, a militant group allied with the government and the Taliban that uses North Waziristan as its main base to launch attacks against American forces in Afghanistan.

Attacks by the American drones are immensely unpopular in Pakistan and have been a rallying point for anti-American sentiment, though in recent years they have provoked less outrage in the tribal areas, as the strikes have focused increasingly on foreign fighters loyal to Al Qaeda who have infiltrated the area, and as fewer civilians have been killed by them.

The attack on Thursday, however, threatened to turn opinion in the region against the attacks once again.

One resident said that given the large Taliban presence, average people and the militants were difficult to distinguish in the area, but that to target a jirga would lead to a backlash. “It will create resentment among the locals,” he said, “and everyone might turn into suicide bombers.”


Salman Masood reported from Islamabad, and Pir Zubair Shah from New York. Eric Schmitt contributed reporting from Washington.

Afghan women’s rights icon denied US visa

Because of her harsh criticism of warlords and fundamentalists in Afghanistan, she has been the target of at least five assassination attempts

March 18, 2011


The US government has denied an entry visa to Malalai Joya for her upcoming book tour for "A Woman Among Warlords.”

According to a press statement released Joya, she was denied entry into the US because, “She was ‘unemployed’ and ‘lives underground’… Because of her harsh criticism of warlords and fundamentalists in Afghanistan, she has been the target of at least five assassination attempts.”

“The reason Joya lives underground is because she faces the constant threat of death for having had the courage to speak up for women's rights – it's obscene that the U.S. government would deny her entry," explained Sonali Kolhatkar of the Afghan Women's Mission.

Joya has been a prominent critic of the war in Afghanistan, leaving many to argue the visa denial may be a case of “ideological exclusion” and in turn a violation of Americans’ First Amendment right to free speech.

In 2012 Jaya was named one of TIME magazine’s 100 most influential people in the world and in 2005 at the age of 27 she was elected to Afghanistan's parliament.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/12/world ... nted=print
Archived here with original link as strictly non-commercial fair use in context of educational debate.

April 11, 2011

Pakistan Tells U.S. It Must Sharply Cut C.I.A. Activities

By JANE PERLEZ and ISMAIL KHAN

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan — Pakistan has demanded that the United States steeply reduce the number of Central Intelligence Agency operatives and Special Operations forces working in Pakistan, and that it put on hold C.I.A. drone strikes aimed at militants in northwest Pakistan, a sign of the near collapse of cooperation between the two testy allies.

The demand that the United States scale back its presence is the immediate fallout of the arrest in Pakistan of Raymond A. Davis, a C.I.A. security officer who killed two men in broad daylight during a mugging in January, Pakistani and American officials said in interviews.

In all, about 335 American personnel — C.I.A. officers and contractors and Special Operations forces — were being asked to leave the country, said a Pakistani official closely involved in the decision. The cuts threatened to badly hamper American efforts — either through drone strikes or Pakistani military training — to combat militants who use Pakistan as a base to fight American forces in Afghanistan and plot terrorist attacks abroad.

The reductions were personally demanded by the chief of the Pakistan army, Gen. Ashfaq Parvez Kayani, said Pakistani and American officials, who requested anonymity while discussing the sensitive issue.

The scale of the Pakistani demands emerged as Lt. Gen. Ahmad Shuja Pasha, the head of Pakistan’s chief spy agency, the Inter Services Intelligence, or ISI, met in Washington on Monday with the director of the C.I.A., Leon Panetta.

Afterward, a C.I.A. spokesman, George Little, said that the two spy chiefs had held “productive” meetings and that the relationship between the two services “remains on solid footing.”

“The United States and Pakistan share a wide range of mutual interests,” Mr. Little said, “and today’s exchange emphasized the need to continue to work closely together, including on our common fight against terrorist networks that threaten both countries.”

The meetings were part of an effort to repair the already tentative and distrustful relations between the spy agencies that plunged to a new low as a result of the Davis episode, which further exposed where Pakistani and American interests diverge as the endgame in Afghanistan draws closer.

The Pakistani army firmly believes that Washington’s real aim in Pakistan is to neutralize the nation’s prized nuclear arsenal, which is now on a path to becoming the world’s fifth largest, said the Pakistani official closely involved in the decision on reducing the American presence.

On the American side, frustration has built over the Pakistani army’s seeming inability to defeat a host of militant groups, including the Taliban and Al Qaeda, which have thrived in Pakistan’s tribal areas despite more than $1 billion in American assistance a year to the Pakistani military.

In a rare public rebuke, a White House report to Congress last week described the Pakistani efforts against the militants as disappointing.

At the time of his arrest, Mr. Davis was involved in a covert C.I.A. effort to penetrate one militant group, Lashkar-e-Taiba, which has long ties to Pakistan’s military and intelligence establishment, has made deepening inroads in Afghanistan, and is perceived as a global threat.

The C.I.A. had demanded that Mr. Davis be freed immediately, on the grounds that he had diplomatic immunity. Instead, he was held for 47 days of detention and, the officials said, questioned for 14 days by ISI agents during his imprisonment in Lahore, infuriating American officials. He was finally freed after his victims’ families agreed to take some $2.3 million in compensation.

Another apparent price, however, is the list of reductions in American personnel demanded by General Kayani, according to the Pakistan and American officials. These include a 25 to 40 percent cutback in the number of United States Special Operations soldiers, most of them involved in training the paramilitary Frontier Corps in northwest Pakistan.

American officials said last year that the Pakistanis had allowed a maximum of 120 Special Forces soldiers to operate in Pakistan. The Americans had reached that quota, the Pakistani official said.

Pakistan is also demanding the removal of all American contractors used by the C.I.A. in Pakistan and C.I.A. operatives who were involved in “unilateral” assignments — like that of Mr. Davis — that the Pakistani intelligence agency did not know about, the Pakistani official said.

An American official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said without elaborating that the Pakistanis had asked “for more visibility into some things” — presumably the nature of C.I.A. covert operations in the country — “and that request is being talked about.”

In addition to reducing American personnel on the ground, General Kayani has also told the Obama administration that its expanded drone campaign had gotten out of control, a Pakistani official said. Given the reluctance or inability of the Pakistani military to root out Qaeda and Taliban militants from the tribal areas, American officials have turned more and more to drone strikes, drastically increasing the number of strikes last year.

The drone campaign, which is immensely unpopular among the Pakistani public, had morphed into the sole preserve of the United States, the Pakistani official said, since the Americans were no longer sharing intelligence on how they were choosing their targets. The Americans had also extended the strikes to new parts of the tribal region, like the Khyber area near the city of Peshawar.

“Kayani would like the drones stopped,” said another Pakistani official who met with the military chief recently. “He believes they are used too frequently as a weapon of choice, rather than as a strategic weapon.” Short of that, General Kayani was demanding that the campaign return to its original, more limited scope and remain focused narrowly on North Waziristan, the prime militant stronghold.

A drone attack last month, one day after Mr. Davis was released, hit Taliban fighters in North Waziristan, but also killed tribal leaders allied to the Pakistani military, an apparent mishap that infuriated General Kayani, who issued an unusually strong statement of condemnation afterward.

American officials defended the drone attack, saying that it had achieved its goal of killing militants. But there have been no drone attacks since then.

The request by General Kayani to cut back the number of Special Operations forces by up to 40 percent would result in the closure of the training program begun last year at Warsak, close to Peshawar, , an American official said.

The United States spent $23 million on a building at Warsak, and $30 million on equipment and training there.

Informed by American officials that the Special Operations training would end even with the partial reduction of 40 percent, General Kayani remained unmoved, the American official said.

The program to upgrade the paramilitary Frontier Corps and get them to focus on counterinsurgency warfare began in earnest last year; American officials believed it was essential to improve the capacity of the nearly 150,000 Pakistani soldiers deployed to fight the Taliban in the tribal region.

But the Pakistanis were always leery of the training, in part because the United States is regarded with suspicion by many of the Frontier Corps soldiers, and because Pakistani officials said they were never sure if training, rather than spying, was the real purpose of the Special Operations soldiers.

The C.I.A. quietly withdrew all contractors after Mr. Davis’s arrest, the Pakistani official said. Armed American men in civilian clothes believed to be C.I.A. contractors were often seen around the United States consulate in Peshawar, where Mr. Davis worked at the beginning of his stint in Pakistan, but are no longer in evidence.

Another category of American intelligence agents, declared operatives whose purpose was not clear, were also being asked to leave, the Pakistani official said.

In an illustration of the severity of the breach between the C.I.A. and the ISI, two intelligence agencies that were supposed to have been cooperating since the Sept. 11 attack in the United States but that have rarely trusted each other, the Pakistani official said: “We’re telling the Americans: ‘You have to trust the ISI or you don’t. There is nothing in between.’ “

http://counterpunch.org/qadir04062011.html

April 6, 2011

Cowardly Officers, Brutal Rabble
Why the US is Doomed in Afghanistan

By SHAUKAT QADIR

Let me begin by stating that Kabul, never was and never will be representative of the real Afghanistan. While I am fully conscious that many foreign and some Pakistani journalists venture to the interior of Afghanistan, brave dangers, to emerge with what is, from their perspective, a more accurate description of the ground realities; regretably, there is a far larger number of journalists, Pakistani and foreign who, having established their credentials through earlier, authentic and accurate efforts, now rely on cosmetics to spout wisdom. And, since their credentials are established, they are believed.

In 2002, when the US decided it was time for an interim government to be formed, Hamid Karzai might possibly have been the best choice. Had Abdul Qadir not been killed a few months earlier, he would, in my view, have been a far better choice, but might not have been acceptable to the US since he was not as pliable as Karzai; in any case, he was already dead.

Karzai had a lot going for him, actually. He belonged to the Popalzai Durrani tribe, descendants of Ahmed Shah Durrani and therefore of kingly lineage. His father was a highly respected tribal elder, He had led his tribe during the anti-Soviet struggle for freedom, and he carried himself well, in the traditional Afghan garb; a very significant consideration for the ‘wanting-to-regain-their-pride’ Afghans.

Whether he could have succeeded or not, we will never know, since the US insisted, and he accepted, their preconditions, which shackled him hand and foot and, by doing so, ensured that his failure as an effective representative of the Afghan people was a foregone conclusion. Not only was a disproportionately large representation of non-Pashtun representation of the Northern Alliance foisted on him, his every decision, right from the outset appeared to have been made to suit the US rather than the Afghan people. What followed was equally inevitable, losing the confidence of his people, not only did Karzai begin to rely on American bodyguards for his personal protection; which, obviously made him appear even more of an American flunkey, the realization that he was not going to be able to play his role in guiding the destiny of the Afghan peoples, could lead to only one end: self-perpetuation and, therefore, corruption.

When the Gitmo and Abu Ghraib scandals hit the press along with rumors of similar prisons in Herat (Afghanistan); in the Pashtun belt across the Durand Line, their grapevine knew of these facilities while they were still under construction.

In August 2008, the NYT carried a report in which a UN investigation established that American troops had killed 90 civilians, including 60 children during an attack on one single village!

In ‘The Kill Team’, carried by ‘Rolling Stone’ on March 27 this year, Mark Boal revealed the exploits of ‘Bravo Company’, in which Staff Sergeant David Bram and Corporal Jeremy Morlock on one fine morning, early last year, decided to chalk up kills of innocent Afghans. They picked them at random during their patrols or ‘cordon and search’ operations, took them to a ditch and shot them, collecting tips of little fingers as souvenirs and taking hundreds of photographs. Everyone was in on the kills, many others joined in. the whole company was jubilant, taking photographs of each other with the dead body; one smiling, the other rakishly smoking a cigarette.

No effort was made to stop or discipline the men; in fact, all officers of Bravo Company helped cover for them, even as they continued their killing spree. Finally, when one of their colleagues ratted on them, they threatened to kill him on their next outing. Even that was covered up, but fortunately for the Rat, the story broke before his elimination.

According to Boal, Gen McChrystal and Hamid Karzai learnt of this scandal May last year. Both joined in the cover up, destroying whatever documents, disks, hardware, software, photographs, and any other incriminatory evidence that could be found, while the killing continued.

Early this month, Morlock was finally sentenced to twenty four years, though no action is being initiated against any officer at any level. Boal concludes his expose with, “Toward the end of Morlock's interview, the conversation turned to the mindset that had allowed the killings to occur. "None of us in the platoon – the platoon leader, the platoon sergeant – no one gives a fuck about these people," Morlock said.

Then he leaned back in his chair and yawned, summing up the way his superiors viewed the people of Afghanistan. "Some shit goes down," he said, "you're gonna get a pat on the back from your platoon sergeant: Good job. Fuck 'em."

I wrote in an earlier CounterPunch article of American helicopter borne snipers killing nine children gathering wood outside a village close to Kandahar last year. An ex-Marine immediately described the act as deliberate murder. According to him, with the technology available, there was no possible way for trained snipers to mistake 9 to 13 year olds, gathering wood for armed militants!

Herat is a non-Pashtun, predominantly Darri speaking province. It has always been considered amongst the most peaceful areas in Afghanistan; no turbulence of any kind. Gul Khan has a small land holding, not in a far flung village, but only a dozen miles out of town. He has a harrowing tale to tell. He had heard of atrocities committed by US troops, but always thought these were exaggerated. Early 2009, he saw a convoy headed towards Herat and some five vehicles broke away to approach him while he was tilling his lands. He is not certain, but thinks that the troops were American.

He greeted them warily and was addressed by a soldier with stripes on his shoulders, in Pushto. He responded in rather broken Pushto, since he spoke Darri. Immediately, he was thrown to the ground, handcuffed and the soldiers began to beat him up, shouting ‘Pakistani xxxx’. His wife and sons, aged 8 and 6 at that time, ran out screaming. They too were greeted with expletives and slapped, when he tried to help his family, someone broke both his arms. Fortunately, a neighbor who was fluent in Pushto came up and begged that Gul and family be released.

A large crowd of local neighbors, hearing the hue and cry began to approach when one of the soldiers let loose a full magazine from his automatic weapon; after which, the soldiers hurriedly left. Gul was still in handcuffs and in agony. When the handcuffs were taken off and he finally got to see a doctor, he remained in splints for over four months. Today his right arm is almost fully functional but the left one, below the elbow is withering.

He is now a Taliban supporter. Gul explains, “We now grow poppy; when government troops approach, Taliban fight them and defend us. Taliban buy the poppy from us at the same price that I could get (in Pakistan), without any deduction. I have requested them that each time they kill an American, I will pay whatever they want, for his balls, but they laughed and told me that they kill the Kafir (infidel) in battle and we will force him to leave our country. But they promised me that if they capture an American alive, they will give him to me as a gift; I live only for that day. May Allah bless them”! Asked why he had not gone to the Afghan government, he spat before commenting in contempt, “Karzai? He is not Pashtun. He lends his ass not only to any American, but also to any Tajik or Uzbek who wants it! I will let the Americans rape each member of my family before going to him. Even (Burhannuddin) Rabbani is better”.

Such references to Karzai can be heard through the length and breadth of Afghanistan; across the ethnic divide. Even non-Pashtuns holding office under him, speak of him derogatively.

In a mid-sized town in the Pashtun region, a middle aged, middle class, bald, short, clean-shaven, rotund, unctuous shopkeeper, who has a modest landholding as well, looks nothing like an Afghan warrior, and speaks fluent English; he has a son studying in the States and a daughter in a Pakistani university, had this to say last year: “When the Taliban came, we welcomed them as liberators, then they began to show their true colors and we had no choice but to suffer in silence. When Americans came, we welcomed them expecting that we would be freed from oppression; but they are far worse and they are infidels. They treat us like animals. I can speak their language but they deliberately abuse me in my hearing. They killed my father last year (2008) in a ‘chance’ encounter, because he opposed them vocally and abused them in Pushto in retaliation. Karzai is worse than the Americans. He is If I have to choose between the US and Karzai on one hand and the Taliban; I will choose our home-grown evil; the lesser of the two. Long live Taliban”.

My last story is the crowning one. Zoe Gul is a Hazarvi, now living in Quetta. He belongs to a village near Kandahar. Anyone who knows about the Hazarvis is aware that, throughout history, they have suffered at the hands of the Pashtun, Afghan and Pakistani. Early winter 2009, some American troops surrounded his house when it was approaching dusk; Zoe’s brother and newly married wife were visiting. Hazarvis are not very good looking, but occasionally some of them grow up to be very attractive (usually sired by the illicit union of an Afghan and Hazarvi woman). Zoe’s sister-in-law was one such.

The soldiers searched the house and, finding nothing incriminating, spoke to each other smilingly, eying Zoe’s sister-in-law. They asked Zoe’s brother and wife to accompany them. On inquiry, the soldiers politely told him that since his brother was a visitor, they were taking him and his wife for some routine questions.

Zoe’s brother was never found but his wife returned the next morning, disheveled and in torn clothes, witnessed by many villagers. Zoe knew what had happened but never asked her. With generations of suffering, they dared not even initiate an inquiry, and suffered in silence with the villager’s sympathy. When Zoe saw his sister-in-law getting big with child, he decided to migrate to Quetta where he had relatives. His sister-in-law gave birth to a dark complexioned, curly haired child in July 2010. She committed suicide the same night.

I can go on and on and on, narrating countless stories, all true, from all corners of Afghanistan. But I selected a few; a cross section of stories by Americans, UN, and my personal knowledge, which should suffice.

We are also now aware that a serving officer of the American Army, Lt Col Paul Yingling, writing for the Armed Forces Journal of March 2011, has criticized American generalship, calling into question their ‘moral courage’ while attesting to their ‘physical courage’. It seems that, while conscious of the fact that defeat is staring them in the face, the senior American military leadership cannot (or dare not?) tell the political leadership the truth.

That is where we stand today in Afghanistan. Afghans, across the ethnic divide, despise Hamid Karzai and hate the Americans. Afghan security forces are hated even more than the Americans and, when US troops pull out, those employed as Afghan security forces will migrate or suffer the consequences.

After the Taliban turned oppressors, Afghans began to hate Pakistan, the Pakistan Army, and the ISI who were all considered Taliban supporters, with considerable justification. However, since an ever increasing number of Afghans are beginning to look at the Taliban hopefully, or at least, the lesser evil, the anti-Pakistan feeling is also abating. Pakistan’s efforts to help the Afghans find an indigenous solution for their future, which I described in an article explaining why Joe Biden rushed to Pakistan at short notice, have also helped. And then, of course, the Afghans are fully aware that, being land-locked, they needs Pakistan, as much as Pakistan needs a secure, friendly Afghanistan.

An increasing number of the Afghan are beginning to appreciate that perhaps, the only country in a position to assist them in charting their own course, is Pakistan.I do not find too many acknowledged authorities on Afghanistan paying attention to these changed dynamics. Without a conscious acknowledgement of these, no resolution of the Afghan conundrum will be found.


Shaukat Qadir is a retired brigadier and a former president of the Islamabad Policy Research Institute. He can be reached at shaukatq@gmail.com

JackRiddler wrote:

He is now a Taliban supporter. Gul explains, “We now grow poppy; when government troops approach, Taliban fight them and defend us. Taliban buy the poppy from us at the same price that I could get (in Pakistan), without any deduction. I have requested them that each time they kill an American, I will pay whatever they want, for his balls, but they laughed and told me that they kill the Kafir (infidel) in battle and we will force him to leave our country. But they promised me that if they capture an American alive, they will give him to me as a gift; I live only for that day. May Allah bless them”!

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... lenews_wsj

MAY 12, 2011

Taliban Leaders Aid Hunt for al Qaeda, Afghans Say

By MARIA ABI-HABIB, HABIB KHAN TOTAKHIL and MATTHEW ROSENBERG

KABUL—Senior Afghan officials say some Taliban leaders are offering intelligence about al Qaeda to prove they are serious about peace talks with the Afghan government.

The Afghan claims represent another sign of the new state of play in the region following the killing of al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden by U.S. forces. Amid suspicions of Pakistani complicity in providing a haven for bin Laden, the claims of Taliban outreach serve to assert Afghan authority in peace efforts and play down the notion that only Pakistan can bring Taliban leaders to the table.

The Afghan officials who described the outreach said intelligence provided by Taliban leaders aided in the capture of Umar Patek, the suspected mastermind of the 2002 Bali bombings. Mr. Patek, an Indonesian, was arrested earlier this year by Pakistan's intelligence service in Abbottabad, the same town where bin Laden was killed last week.

The Afghan assertions were ridiculed by an official with Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence spy agency, who dismissed them as an Afghan attempt to "impress" America. A Taliban spokesman denied the claims.

A U.S. defense official voiced skepticism that Mr. Patek's arrest was facilitated by Afghan intelligence. The U.S. Embassy in Kabul declined to comment.

But a U.S. official with knowledge of the outreach to the Taliban said some "relatively senior" Taliban leaders have been providing useful information on al Qaeda, although he couldn't confirm the claim regarding Mr. Patek.

"We don't know if it's part of a reconciliation deal or a splinter group worried about Special Forces coming after them," the U.S. official said. Reconciling with the Taliban has been a priority of Afghan President Hamid Karzai. Since bin Laden's death, Afghan and American officials have made public appeals to the Taliban to join peace talks or face an end similar to his.

A major U.S. precondition for those talks is for the Taliban to sever its ties to al Qaeda.

Bin Laden's death is a "golden opportunity" for the Taliban to cut that connection, said Afghan deputy national security adviser Shaida Mohammad Abdali.

"There are important people that are coming and joining the process," said Mohammed Masoom Stanekzai, who advises Mr. Karzai on the outreach to the insurgency.

Afghan officials have complained that the Pakistani intelligence service, with an interest in maintaining Pakistani control over the peace process through its links to the Taliban, has repeatedly interfered to derail Kabul's attempts to talk with insurgent leaders. But suspicion that elements of Pakistan's military gave bin Laden refuge in Abbottabad has provided Afghan officials with new leverage.

One of the Taliban members speaking to Kabul, Afghan officials say, is Mawlawi Mohammed Abdul Kabir, a deputy prime minister during the Taliban regime who is now considered to be a senior member of the Quetta Shura, the insurgency's leadership council.

Senior members of the Afghan government said Mr. Kabir has been helping tip off Afghan officials about al Qaeda members since being released from Pakistani custody last year. Pakistan's government never confirmed that they detained him.

Taliban spokesman Zabiullah Mujahid denied that Taliban leaders have been providing information on al Qaeda. He said Mr. Kabir remains an active member of the insurgency and maintains no contacts with Kabul. The Taliban say they won't join any peace talks until all foreign forces leave.

The Taliban have announced a spring offensive and stepped up deadly attacks in recent days. Mr. Stanekzai said the violence was a tactic for the insurgency to position themselves as peace negotiations unfold to get more of their demands met.

The Taliban, while condemning bin Laden's killing, insist that the Afghan insurgency is a homegrown movement fully independent of al Qaeda, and say the death of al Qaeda's founder will have no effect on their struggle.

Some former Taliban who have already reconciled with Kabul also cast doubt on the Afghan government's claims, describing them as a deliberate attempt to sow discord within the insurgency.

"This is the rule of spy agencies to divide and rule," said Abdul Hakim Mujahid, the former Taliban representative to the U.N. who is now part of the government's High Peace Council.

Write to Matthew Rosenberg at matthew.rosenberg@wsj.com

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/ ... rawal.html

Defence
US alarmed by David Cameron's push for early Afghanistan withdrawal

David Cameron’s push for an early British withdrawal from Afghanistan has caused alarm in the US, raising fears for the Special Relationship.

Both Mr Cameron and US President Barack Obama are both pushing for an early end to the Afghan mission Photo: PA


By Ben Farmer, and James Kirkup 10:45PM BST 16 May 2011


Senior American military figures have warned Britain that a hasty exit from Afghanistan could strain relations between the two countries.

The Daily Telegraph last week revealed that David Cameron has ordered British commanders to draw up plans to start pulling hundreds of British troops out of Afghanistan within weeks.

The Prime Minister is expected to discuss a co-ordinated Afghan withdrawal in London next week.

The prospect of an imminent British withdrawal is understood to have alarmed American generals, who are trying to resist political pressure for a major reduction in US troop numbers.

Well-placed sources said that US generals have delivered a blunt warning to their British counterparts about the impact of an early UK withdrawal.

One senior American general is said to have told British commanders that the US would not “bail out” British troops in Afghanistan if Mr Cameron reduces their numbers too quickly.

The American general is understood to fear that a quick reduction in UK numbers could leave British forces unable to fulfil their mission in Afghanistan.

He is said to have likened the Afghan situation to Britain’s role in Basra in 2008, where American commanders believe they were forced to relieve an understrength UK force struggling against Iraqi insurgents.

Both Mr Cameron and US President Barack Obama are both pushing for an early end to the Afghan mission, which began in 2001 and has taken the lives of 365 British personnel and almost 1,500 Americans.

Defence chiefs on both sides of the Atlantic are wary of political pressure for a rapid reduction in Afghan numbers, arguing that the military mission needs at least another year to make progress against the Taliban and build up Afghan security forces.

The president has already announced he wants to reduce US troop numbers in July. US military chiefs are trying to limit the scale of the withdrawal demanded by Mr Obama and his advisers.

A senior American defence source confirmed that two countries will co-ordinate their drawdown plans.

The source said: “British troops have fought with great valour in Helmand and we expect this to continue. Clearly, the President has announced that a US troop drawdown from Afghanistan will begin in July and we expect that our Nato allies will also be adjusting their force structures.”

Mr Cameron’s defence policy has caused concern in the US on previous occasions. Last year saw several high-level protests from the US over cuts in British defence spending in the Coalition’s Strategic Defence and Security Review.

US defence chiefs have told Britain that military co-operation depends on the UK having “full spectrum” capabilities, able to mount all types of operation.

At a Commons committee last week, the heads of the three Armed Forces were asked whether they could deliver “full spectrum” capabilities over the next four years. All three replied: “No.”

http://counterpunch.org/zlutnick05202011.html

Weekend Edition
May 20 - 22, 2011

An Interview with Malalai Joya
Hope in Afghanistan?

By DAVID ZLUTNICK


Malalai Joya is an Afghan activist, author, and former politician. She served as an elected member of the 2003 Loya Jirga and was a parliamentary member of the National Assembly of Afghanistan, until she was expelled for denouncing other members as warlords and war criminals.

She has been a vocal critic of both the US/NATO occupation and the Karzai government, as well as the Taliban and Islamic fundamentalists. After surviving four assassination attempts she currently lives underground in Afghanistan, continuing her work from safe houses. After the release of her memoir, A Woman Among Warlords, she recently concluded a US speaking tour.

The following is an edited transcript of a filmed interview with I did with Joya from April 9th in San Francisco. She speaks about the US occupation, the inspiration found in the Arab uprisings, and the Afghan social movements. You can view an 11 minute edited selection of the video here.

San Francisco, CA. April 9, 2011--

DZ: Could you please start by giving your name and a bit of background about yourself?

MJ: My name is Malalai Joya. I was an elected member of the parliament, but because our parliament was quite non-democratic these warlords, drug lords who were in the parliament, they wanted to make me silent. As they couldn't, they expelled me from parliament, which was a quite illegal act, and despite international condemnation did not allow me to go back there. But now I'm an underground activist for women's rights, human rights and the struggle against occupation, for democracy and peace in my country.

DZ: You've talked a lot about the hope that Afghans had when the Taliban was overthrown, that a brighter future may have lied ahead for the people of Afghanistan. What was your position on the invasion in 2001, what hopes did you have for a post-Taliban Afghanistan, and how have those hopes stood up against the past near-decade of US/NATO occupation?

MJ: You know, as an activist, as part of the war-generation, we have a powerful history that we have never accepted occupation—three times the British wanted to occupy [Afghanistan], then Russia the superpower wanted to occupy our country, and faced the resistance of our people. So we had no good memory about foreign countries—I mean, rule by foreign governments. That's why I had suspicions after 9/11 of the US government and NATO. But as an activist I had close contact with my people, I looked at how there was a ray of hope alive in their hearts, because they thought maybe because of the 9/11 tragedy, that blood of innocent people had been shed—innocent people of the US—maybe this time foreigners will be honest with the Afghan people.

But after 9/11 and the [December 2001 Bonn Agreement] they re-saw that the US and NATO pushed us from the frying pan into the fire, replaced Taliban with fundamentalist warlords who are mentally the same as Taliban but only physically different. That's why today the roots of all these miseries, problems in Afghanistan are these warlords, and now [NATO and the Karzai government] are negotiating with the Taliban as well. After ten years of occupation and this brutal war they have only proved for the people around the world that their minds are carbon-copies of each other.

And the third part of your question?

DZ: The hopes that you had for a post-Taliban Afghanistan, and how your mind has changed since the 2001 invasion?

MJ: After occupation? Yes, because day by day [NATO] is bombing from the sky and killing innocent civilians—most of them are women and children—even bombing our wedding parties, what they did in Nangarhar and Nuristan. In my own province last year these occupation forces—American troops—they bombed 150 civilians in one day, even used white phosphorous. And also most of them were women and children. In Kunar province recently, 65 innocent civilians have been killed by these occupation forces. Again in the same province, in another village, nine children have been killed when they were collecting wood, and they were bombed and brutally killed. This list can be prolonged, a list of these massacres.

And that's why day by day our people believe that maybe they want to take revenge for those innocent American people that were killed [on 9/11] on the innocent people of Afghanistan—not the Taliban, not the warlords. And also day by day they prove to our people—and not only our people, people around the world—this is not only a so-called war on terror, this is a war on innocent civilians—occupation. Because these ten years they wasted the blood of their soldiers, their tax-payer money, billions of dollars, and now they invite these terrorist Taliban also to join this puppet corrupt mafia regime. I think justice loving people from the US, from around the world, they agree with my people—democracy never comes by military invasion, by war, by occupation, by bombing our wedding parties, killing innocent civilians, by supporting the sworn enemies of their values.

And we wish that it was not a military invasion; that it was an invasion of schools, clinics, hospitals. But they occupied my country, keeping the situation lawless, unsafe, and dangerous like this for their own interests—regional, economic, and political interests.

DZ: So is it your wish to see NATO's immediate withdrawal from Afghanistan? What do you see as happening in the near- and long-term following a NATO withdrawal?

MJ: Now my people they're squashed between three powerful enemies: warlords, Taliban, occupation forces. With the withdrawal of these external enemies, my people will fight two internal enemies. They will fight steadfastly till the end because of the hatred that they have for the Taliban and also the warlords. In this presence of these occupation forces in Afghanistan, they double our miseries, and make these warlords and Taliban more powerful. They make our struggle for justice, for democracy, and women's rights much harder, as it now seems like Taliban-times...

The mainstream media mainly and the politicians say civil war will happen if the troops leave. But nobody is talking about today's civil war. Today itself is a civil war. And those were involved in the civil war in Afghanistan from '92-'96, these warlords, alone in Kabul they killed 65,000 innocent people and destroyed our national unity, many other crimes they committed, similar to the Taliban. But with bloody hands, suit and tie, [they were] imposed on my people. And the second civil war—if they are worried if the troops leave—I think will not be more dangerous, more difficult, more risky than this civil war. At least one enemy gets lost—the backbone of the warlords and Taliban will break. And there's no question if we want the withdrawal of the [NATO] troops. So I am asking for solidarity from justice-seeking organizations, peace-loving organizations, human rights organizations and intellectuals, the anti-war movement, democratic-minded politicians internationally—they are the ones who should join their hands with our people.

DZ: You and many others have called the present situation in Afghanistan an extension of the "Great Game" that has been played between imperial powers for centuries to control this region. How do you see the Great Game in effect today?

MJ: For ten years they've been playing this chess game, and they are still playing it. And they are just shifting these warlords after the crimes they have committed in the past. They are killers and its an open secret for people around the world. And [NATO] occupies my country because of the geopolitical location of Afghanistan. We are so proud that we are in the heart of Asia, but sometimes we think maybe it's our curse that we are in the heart of Asia. Because if Afghanistan is under their control, very easily they can control other Asian powers—Russia, China, Iran, etc.—then very easily they have access to the gas and oil of the central Asian republics.

Also, today 93% of [the world's] opium is produced in Afghanistan. And even the New York Times gave a report—the brother of Hamid Karzai, Ahmed Wali Karzai, is a famous drug trafficker and also on the payroll of the CIA. My people call him "small Bush" in Kandahar Province. Since 2001, there's been a 4,400% increase in opium production in Afghanistan. During this ten year occupation they've changed Afghanistan. Now Afghanistan is the second most corrupt country in the world, while Karzai's regime has received more than $30 billion. Most of this money went into the pockets of these warlords, drug lords, and these criminals. Even one document of Wikileaks exposed that the Vice President of Karzai, Zhia Mehsud, carried $52 million from Dubai—from Kabul airport to the Dubai airport. But nobody stopped him and asked him, "How did you get this money? From where?"...

Millions—Billions of dollars. Today Afghanistan could be like heaven if they gave a chance to democratic-minded people, the activists of my country, high-educated professors—we have a lot. But they've wasted billions of dollars on this bunch of killers—warlords and Taliban. You can see on the Human Rights Watch website, Amnesty International website. Many books have been written about them—Ghost Wars [by Steve Coll]; Bleeding Afghanistan [by Sonali Kohatkar and James Ingalls] ; Devil's Game, a book Robert Dreyfuss wrote, it will help you better know the CIA's role not only in Afghanistan, but in countless Muslim countries. They created fundamentalists, supported them, through them eliminated democratic-minded movements, parties, intellectuals, and people. Suppress the people—same in Afghanistan, these ten years of occupation they've played a game of Tom and Jerry with the Taliban. And now they invite them formally to join the government...

And also, they brutally kill Afghan people and make fun of their dead bodies. Maybe you heard the Der Spiegel magazine report [about the US Army "kill teams"]. But to deceive people of the West, put dust in their eyes, and try to bring these few cruel soldiers to the court—it's not enough. It is better they should have brought to the court, [Secretary of Defense] Robert Gates and General David Patraeus, who order these troops who kill innocent people. These troops themselves are the victims of the wrong policy of the warmongers. Barack Obama should be questioned for this wrong policy that he has. Maybe he did something positive for the American people, but for my people during this two years he's been in power, in fact he proved himself as a second and even more dangerous Bush.

Just a few examples why his policy is more dangerous than [that of] Bush: He invites the terrorist Taliban to join the [Karzai] regime. [Afghan warlord and occasional Talbian ally] Gulbuddin Hekmatyar—the Bush administration at least put a price on the head of this terrorist, if anybody finds the live or dead body of this terrorist. But the Obama administration invites him [to join the government]. And the surge of troops—the outcome of the surge of troops was more massacres, more miseries, more tragedies and sorrows for my people. And he's expanding war in Afghanistan, in Yemen, in Pakistan—drone attacks have taken the lives of too many people.

DZ: In recent writings you've stated there has been an emergence of a resistance to the Karzai government completely independent of the Taliban armed resistance, including student movements, women-led movements, movements of the poor, etc. taking to the streets. Can you talk more about these bottom-up demonstrations and how it's come about?

MJ: Yes, right now there are two kinds of resistance going on in my country: one is the reactionary resistance of the Taliban. But another resistance, a second resistance, is the resistance of ordinary Afghan people. Men and women, innocent people, victims' families, students of the university, democratic-minded parties, the few we have. They come on the streets and have demonstrations. This is hope. This resistance is the resistance of ordinary Afghan people. And it shows the hatred of our people against occupation...

And Karzai's puppet regime was talking about permanent US military bases in Afghanistan and wanted to expand their military bases there, military bases of the US. When people heard this news, [the Afghan Solidarity Party] this democratic-minded party organized demonstrations in Herat and Kabul and Farah and Mazar-i-Sharif and Jalalabad. And they even invited me as well to join their demonstration. For security reasons I couldn't go. Hundreds of people joined their demonstration...

And this massacre that killed 150 civilians [mentioned above]—One student of the university got news that nineteen members of his family in one day died in this massacre. The students of the university heard this news, they called together a camp in the streets, most of them with a banners against the occupation. And there are many other examples of the resistance of the people that mainstream media never covers. Day by day it grows. But in my country it takes time.

DZ: Do you see this being at all related to the mass uprisings throughout the Arab world? How do you view this growing movement in the Middle East and how do you see this affecting Afghanistan?

MJ: I believe it's a good example of the big power of the people. Always I believe—I strongly believe that no nation can donate liberation to another nation. History shows that only the nation can liberate itself. And when you see these countries, dictators in power—everywhere there are dictators—they cannot be in power forever. Day by day people stand up against these dictators. And the positive point is that this glorious uprising happened [in the Arab world]. The dictators' regimes are being removed, but unfortunately the system is still there. And I cannot see a united leadership in these countries. And this is the constant point.

But of course this glorious uprising gives strength and hope to my people as well. Of course it's had a huge positive impact in neighboring countries like Iran, earlier, and now again people they are standing up, men and women, the young generation, even their blood has been shed. And still in the jails of Iran they are hanging this young generation, brave activists, freedom-loving fighters. Because they raised their voice against these dictators and this fascist regime that they have. And the same happened in these other Middle East countries, the North African countries. It's a source of hope and inspiration for millions, not only for my people.

But of course in my country it takes time. Most people are unemployed, they don't have jobs, they are poor, they don't have food to eat. They are working very hard just to feed their families. Most people are not educated. This half of the population [that are] women, more than 80% are illiterate. That's why I believe education is the key.

In my country we don't have a very powerful party, [nor a] united leadership. So it takes time in our country. That's why in this cause we are working, because people are fed up from the occupation, fed up from warlords and Taliban, they hate them. We are working in this cause—democracy, for peace, against the occupation. Hopefully one day in the future, the same glorious uprising that happened in [the Arab] countries will also happen in my country.

DZ: Part of the justification for the 2001 US invasion of Afghanistan was to liberate the women of Afghanistan and to prevent the continued abuse and oppression of women. Can you discuss this topic and what the situation is like now, even in government-controlled parts of the country?

MJ: You know, today fortunately we all know about the Taliban and these terrorists—misogynist terrorists. At that time there was no school and education at all for the girls and women. But now after 9/11, [the US] built a few schools and universities, especially in some big cities, just to justify their occupation. There's even official reports that hundreds of those schools have been closed and millions of girls and women cannot go to school for security reasons. For example, now the girls that go to school in Kandahar, twice these terrorists threw acid on their faces…

And also even the girls going to school in Kabul, in Afghan-Turkish schools, recently tens of girls became poisoned. And in a few other provinces girls became poisoned, as the media reported. How can their families send them back to school tomorrow? Young girls when they go to school, 12 years old, 14 years old, they get brutally raped… For example a ten year old girl, her name's Bashira, when she was going to school in Sar-e-Pul province, one member of the parliament, his son, with a few other warlords kidnapped this young girl and brutally raped her. Then this brave girl stood up against them and this so-called lawmaker, his name is Haji Payinda, changed the age of his son—listed him as under 18 so that he would not be punished. After that twelve more rape cases in the same province, in Sar-e-Pul province, happened. Same like Taliban times, we have a jungle condition. Two women were accused of prostitution and publicly beaten with lashes in Ghazni province. Then—one of them was even pregnant—they shot them in the head and killed them brutally. Same like Taliban times. This list can be prolonged.

And also there's even a misuse of the miseries of the woman. The story of Time Magazine, Bibi Aisha—the headline says "What happens to women if we leave?" But they never write what's happening to women while they are there. They never bring those women disfigured by cluster-bombs, white phosphorous for treatment to the western countries because their crimes would be exposed.

My life story—When you compare, as an activist, the dark period of the Taliban with now, it was risky under the burqa, but now despite [hiding under a] burqa and having body guards it's not safe. This disgusting burqa which is a symbol of oppression now gives safety and life to many women of Afghanistan—especially activists. I received—they did many assassination attempts and alone my life story is enough to know about the mockery of democracy, and mockery of the War on Terror in Afghanistan.

DZ: An article by Afghan academic Nushin Arbabzadah was recently published in the Guardian in response to an article of yours where she criticized your stance on the NATO occupation of Afghanistan, saying "her categorical rejection of the US intervention in Afghanistan is unfair. After all, without US intervention, Joya would not have been able to own a passport, let alone travel abroad. Equally, without the international community's interference, there would not have been the 2003 Loya Jerga where she first gained international fame." What would you say in response to her comments?

MJ: This woman—they can never understand, these Western women, these Afghan women living in the West who support—who are pro-occupation, pro-war—they never understand the sorrows and pain of the women of my country, those families of the victims who get raped. [Joya shows a photo of a young girl.] Here you can see this seven year old girl who was brutally raped by these warlords. I met her. If she was the daughter of Nushin, would she still support this war and these warlords, this occupation? These children, you can see [Joya flips through a book of photos showing dead and wounded Afghan children], they are children that they kill. These few beautiful children—they are bombing, killing them. Many, many other photos. They are not terrorists. They kill innocent people, shamelessly decrease the number of civilian deaths to the mainstream media, call them insurgents, terrorists. They are terrorists? No.

Those who got fame and wealth from this occupation, they also write against me. Day by day I see my distance between these warmongers. And I'm happy for this. Because day by day I get closer to my people. And it will be proof for them how much distance I have from [the warlords]. If [the people] will support me is a big question... All governmental women, men, and these warlord Taliban and their foreign masters, as much as they want they can stay against me. But my people—My message to them is that ordinary people of my country, activists, others, always I'm saying to the great people around the world: As much as you want you can not support me, don't support me. But if you don't go with the warlord, you expose them, you stand against the occupation, against the brutalities, against the brutalities of these Islamic fundamentalists, Taliban and warlords; I love you, I respect you. I'm just a person, I do my responsibility.


David Zlutnick is a documentary filmmaker living and working in San Francisco. His latest film is Occupation Has No Future: Militarism + Resistance in Israel/Palestine (2010), a feature documentary that studies Israeli militarism, examines the occupation of the Palestinian West Bank, and explores the work of Israelis and Palestinians organizing against militarism and occupation. You can view his work at www.UpheavalProductions.com.

MJ: You know, as an activist, as part of the war-generation, we have a powerful history that we have never accepted occupation—three times the British wanted to occupy [Afghanistan], then Russia the superpower wanted to occupy our country, and faced the resistance of our people. So we had no good memory about foreign countries—I mean, rule by foreign governments. That's why I had suspicions after 9/11 of the US government and NATO. But as an activist I had close contact with my people, I looked at how there was a ray of hope alive in their hearts, because they thought maybe because of the 9/11 tragedy, that blood of innocent people had been shed—innocent people of the US—maybe this time foreigners will be honest with the Afghan people.

But after 9/11 and the [December 2001 Bonn Agreement] they re-saw that the US and NATO pushed us from the frying pan into the fire, replaced Taliban with fundamentalist warlords who are mentally the same as Taliban but only physically different. That's why today the roots of all these miseries, problems in Afghanistan are these warlords, and now [NATO and the Karzai government] are negotiating with the Taliban as well. After ten years of occupation and this brutal war they have only proved for the people around the world that their minds are carbon-copies of each other.

And the third part of your question?

DZ: The hopes that you had for a post-Taliban Afghanistan, and how your mind has changed since the 2001 invasion?

MJ: After occupation? Yes, because day by day [NATO] is bombing from the sky and killing innocent civilians—most of them are women and children—even bombing our wedding parties, what they did in Nangarhar and Nuristan. In my own province last year these occupation forces—American troops—they bombed 150 civilians in one day, even used white phosphorous. And also most of them were women and children. In Kunar province recently, 65 innocent civilians have been killed by these occupation forces. Again in the same province, in another village, nine children have been killed when they were collecting wood, and they were bombed and brutally killed. This list can be prolonged, a list of these massacres.

semper occultus wrote:$1bn fraud at Kabul Bank puts UK's Afghan pull-out in peril

IMF and Britain's foreign aid department both withhold money for reconstruction

By Jonathan Owen and Brian Brady
www.independent.co.uk

Sunday, 22 May 2011

Coalition plans to pull out of Afghanistan are being hampered by theft and fraud totalling nearly $1bn, The Independent on Sunday can reveal. Hopes of a timely withdrawal of British troops from the region have been dealt a critical blow by revelations about massive bank frauds which have forced donors to suspend vital international aid.

JackRiddler wrote:At no point does this article relate in what way the bank fraud relates to the headlined delay of military withdrawal.