Showing posts with label Afghanistan. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Afghanistan. Show all posts

Saturday, March 1, 2014

Obama makes it official: U.S. planning for full Afghan withdrawal





After giving him the silent treatment for eight months, President Barack Obama on Tuesday called Afghan President Hamid Karzai. The message? A blunt warning that all U.S. troops will leave his war-torn country by 2015 unless Karzai or his successor sign a bilateral security agreement (BSA) with the United States.

The president had not spoken to Karzai since a June 25, 2013, video conference, and the two had had no contact since a Nov. 21, 2013, letter from Washington to Kabul.

Obama has said repeatedly that he hopes to leave a residual force of some 8,000-12,000 U.S. and NATO troops in Afghanistan to train local security forces and target extremists after most combat forces depart in 2014. But U.S. officials had warned that Obama would pull all American troops absent a BSA that gives American and allied forces immunity from local prosecution.

Karzai refused, saying his successor should be the one to make that commitment. He continued to say no even after Afghanistan’s “loya jirga” assembly of elders approved the agreement.

On Tuesday, Obama bluntly delivered that warning to Karzai himself, according to a White House statement on the call.

Obama told Karzai that he has “asked the Pentagon to ensure that it has adequate plans in place to accomplish an orderly withdrawal by the end of the year should the United States not keep any troops in Afghanistan after 2014.”

“Going after the remnants of core Al Qaeda could be in the interests of the United States and Afghanistan,” the White House readout continued. “Therefore, we will leave open the possibility of concluding a BSA with Afghanistan later this year.”

But “the longer we go without a BSA, the more challenging it will be to plan and execute any U.S. mission” and “the more likely it will be that any post-2014 U.S. mission will be smaller in scale and ambition,” the White House statement said.

Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel hammered home the message in a statement of his own released after the Obama/Karzai call, calling plans for a total pullout “a prudent step.”

"At President Obama's direction, and with my strong support, the Department of Defense will move ahead with additional contingency planning to ensure adequate plans are in place to accomplish an orderly withdrawal by the end of the year should the United States not keep any troops in Afghanistan after 2014,” Hagel announced.

Hagel also underlined why Obama’s Afghan policy is at a crossroads: Defense ministers from NATO and other countries with a presence in Afghanistan are due to meet in Brussels this week to discuss the future of the alliance’s policy. The White House and its allies face increasing pressure to make decisions about the withdrawal, a complex undertaking requiring significant military resources that can’t all be mobilized instantly.
White House aides have increasingly sounded as frustrated with Karzai as their predecessors in George W. Bush’s administration were. At one point, a senior Bush foreign policy aide joked to reporters that Karzai’s first name should permanently be changed from Hamid to something unprintable here.

Faced with his refusal to sign despite an all-out pressure campaign, the United States is now looking ahead to April elections that will pick Karzai’s successor.

While some prominent Republicans have sharply criticized Obama's handling of Afghanistan, the war-weary U.S. public has largely turned against the conflict, now America's longest war.

While it’s likely too late to repair the Obama/Karzai relationship, it’s not like things were going swimmingly under Bush, either.

At a December 2008 press conference with Bush, the Afghan leader drew nervous laughter when he offered up this description of the relationship between Washington and Kabul:

"Afghanistan will not allow the international community [to] leave it before we are fully on our feet, before we are strong enough to defend our country, before we are powerful enough to have a good economy, and before we have taken from President Bush and the next administration billions and billions of more dollars — no way that they can let you go."

Tuesday, September 27, 2011

Pakistani commanders meet after US criticism

September 25, 2011 — ISLAMABAD (AP) — Pakistan's army chief convened a special meeting of senior commanders Sunday following U.S. allegations that the military's spy agency helped militants attack American targets in Afghanistan, the army said.

The government also summoned home the country's foreign minister early from a trip to the United States to attend a meeting of all major political parties to discuss the American allegations of support for the militant Haqqani network.

Senior Pakistani officials have lashed out against the allegations, accusing the U.S. of trying to make Pakistan a scapegoat for its troubled war in Afghanistan. The public confrontation has plunged the already troubled U.S.-Pakistan alliance to new lows.

Pakistan's leaders have shown no indication they plan to act on renewed American demands to attack the Haqqani network in its main base in Pakistan, even at the risk of further conflict with Washington, which has given the country billions in aid.

U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham, a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, said Sunday that the U.S. should consider military action to defend U.S. troops if Pakistan's spy agency continues supporting militants who are attacking American forces.

Unilateral U.S. raids into Pakistan could have explosive implications in a country where anti-American sentiment is widespread. Pakistanis were outraged by the covert U.S. commando raid that killed al-Qaida chief Osama bin Laden in a garrison town not far from Islamabad in May. The U.S. did not tell the Pakistani government about the operation beforehand for fear bin Laden would be tipped off.

Pakistani Interior Minister Rehman Malik warned the U.S. on Sunday against sending troops into Pakistan. "Any aggression will not be tolerated," Malik told reporters in Islamabad. "The nation is standing united behind the armed forces, which is the front line of Pakistan's defense."

The top U.S. military officer, Adm. Mike Mullen, last week accused Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence agency of supporting Haqqani insurgents in planning and executing a 22-hour assault on the U.S. Embassy in Afghanistan on Sept. 13 as well as a truck bomb that wounded 77 American soldiers days earlier.

Pakistan's army chief, Gen. Ashfaq Pervez Kayani, widely considered the most powerful man in Pakistan, has dismissed the allegations, saying they were baseless and part of a public "blame game" detrimental to peace in Afghanistan.

Pakistan army spokesman Maj. Gen. Athar Abbas said Kayani presided over Sunday's commanders meeting but would not provide detail on the discussions. Later in the day, Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani's office issued a statement saying Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar was summoned back to attend a meeting of all major political parties on "threats emanating from outside the country."

Pakistan claimed to have severed its ties with Afghan militants after the 9/11 attacks and supported America's campaign in Afghanistan, but U.S. officials have long suspected it maintained links. The comments by Mullen, who is chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, were the most serious yet accusing Pakistan of militant ties, although he didn't cite any specific evidence.

Despite the seriousness of the U.S. claims, which appear to accuse Pakistan of state-sponsored terrorism, Mullen and other U.S. officials have said Washington needs to keep engaging with Islamabad, a reflection of its limited options in dealing with the country.

Around half of the U.S. war supplies to Afghanistan are trucked over Pakistani soil, and even as it accuses Islamabad of complicity with Afghan insurgents, Washington knows that it will likely need Islamabad's cooperation in bringing them to the negotiating table. Washington is also concerned about the danger of further instability in the nuclear-armed state.

The head of U.S. Central Command, Gen. James Mattis, called for continued cooperation after a meeting with Kayani in Islamabad. In a statement issued Sunday by the U.S. Embassy, Mattis emphasized "the need for persistent engagement among the militaries of the U.S., Pakistan and other states in the region."

Afghan officials have also accused Pakistan of stoking instability in Afghanistan. The Afghan Defense Ministry accused the Pakistani arm Sunday of firing more than 300 artillery and rockets into the country's northeast during the past five days.

The provinces of Kunar and Nuristan are a haven for hardcore insurgent groups fighting in both Pakistan and Afghanistan and have relatively few Afghan or foreign forces. Pakistan has complained that militants from the area have staged repeated cross-border attacks that have killed Pakistani security forces and civilians.

Pakistan army spokesman Maj. Gen. Athar Abbas said he had asked security officials in the northwest about the Afghan allegations and was waiting for a reply. He said those officials were surprised by the accusations since no activity had been reported in the area.

"I assume this is not correct news," said Abbas, referring to the Afghan allegations.

Source:www.mail.com

Saturday, April 16, 2011

No compromise on Nato troops withdrawal: Taliban

The News International

April 14, 2011

PESHAWAR: The Taliban on Wednesday said the basic solution to the Afghan issue lies in the immediate withdrawal of foreign forces from Afghanistan and not in setting up Taliban offices in other countries.

Talking to the Afghan Islamic Press (AIP) by telephone, Taliban spokesman Qari Muhammad Yousaf Ahmadi said the current issue of Afghanistan was triggered by the military invasion and interference of foreign forces and this issue couldn’t be resolved unless the foreign forces pull out of the country.

About the claims of High Peace Council’s officials that Turkey and several other countries of the region had offered to allow Taliban to open offices in these countries, he said: "As we said in the past, Taliban are not ready to any kind of negotiation in presence of foreign forces in Afghanistan. So it is meaningless to offer Taliban to open political offices. We know well that these are all useless efforts. We have never budged from our stand of unconditional withdrawal of foreign forces from Afghanistan as real issue is the presence of foreign forces in Afghanistan."

Ahmadi said: "We demand all those individuals and parties, who want solution to the Afghan problem, to use their abilities in the withdrawal of foreign forces. They should convince the foreigners to leave Afghanistan as the problem started due to their occupation and the Afghan issue can never be resolved unless and until the occupation is practically ended," he added.

The purported Taliban spokesman also demanded of Afghans, who were sincere in seeking solution to the ongoing problem, to use their abilities for the ouster of foreign forces so that peace could be restored to the war-ravaged country. He added that they did not need to open office in Turkey or any other country, as they were not ready to held talks in the current circumstances.

Afghanistan’s High Council for Peace Deputy Chief Abdul Hakim Mujahid told the AIP that Turkey had offered to allow Taliban to open political office in their country so that Taliban could be engaged in talks. He continued that Saudi Arabia, UAE and Turkmenistan had also offered to allow Taliban to open offices on their soil, if Taliban extended them a formal request.

Thursday, March 17, 2011

Kucinich Challenges Claims of Progress in Afghanistan

March 16, 2011

http://dandelionsalad.wordpress.com/

by Congressman Dennis J. Kucinich
Washington, Mar 15, 2011

Congressman Dennis Kucinich (D-OH), author of H. Con. Res. 28, a bipartisan, privileged resolution to direct the President to end the war in Afghanistan by the end of the year, today sent fellow Members of Congress a letter challenging official claims of “progress” in Afghanistan.

See a signed copy here. See Kucinich address the floor here. [see video below] The full text of the letter follows:

Dear Colleague:

Today, many of us are hearing from General Petraeus that “significant” progress is being made in Afghanistan. We have heard it before. Military and civilian leaders have, for years, told lawmakers and the public that they were making “progress” in Afghanistan. For instance:

In a speech to a joint session of Congress in 2004, President Karzai said, “You [Americans] came to Afghanistan to defeat terrorism, and we Afghans welcomed and embraced you for the liberation of our country. … This road, this journey is one of success and victory.”

In a joint press conference with President Karzai after that speech, President Bush said, “Today we witness the rebirth of a vibrant Afghan culture. Music fills the marketplaces and people are free to come together to celebrate in open. … Years of war and tyranny have eroded Afghanistan’s economy and infrastructure, yet a revival is under way.”

At another joint press conference with President Karzai in March of 2006, President Bush said, “We are impressed by the progress that your country is making, Mr. President [Karzai], a lot of it has to do with your leadership.”

In February of 2007, Lt. Gen. Karl Eikenberry told National Public Radio that Afghanistan was “on the steady path, right now … to, I believe, success.”

In April 2008, President Bush told news reporters, “I think we’re making good progress in Afghanistan.

October 2008, General McKiernan, Commander of NATO forces in Afghanistan, told the press “We are not losing in Afghanistan.” In May 2009, he was replaced by General McChrystal.

October 2008, President Bush said Afghanistan is “a situation where there’s been progress and there are difficulties.”

November 2009, President Obama, visiting troops in Afghanistan, reportedly said, “Because of the progress we’re making, we look forward to a new phase next year, the beginning of the transition to Afghan responsibility.”

December 2009, General Stanley McChrystal, the top commander, predicted that the US troop buildup in Afghanistan will make “significant progress” in turning back the Taliban and securing the country by the coming summer. “By next summer I expect there to be significant progress that is evident to us,” McChrystal said in congressional testimony.

In January 2010, General McChrystal was asked by Diane Sawyer, “Have you turned the tide?” McChrystal answered, “I believe we are doing that now.”

In May 2010, General McChrystal told Congress that he saw “progress” in Afghanistan.

In May 2010, President Obama told the press that “we’ve begun to reverse the momentum” in Afghanistan.

In June 2010, Secretary Gates told a Congressional committee that we are “making headway” in Afghanistan. In June 2010, General McChrystal was replaced by General Petraeus.

In August 2010, General Petraeus said, “there’s progress being made” in Afghanistan.

In February 2011, General Petraeus said, “We have achieved what we set out to achieve in 2010” which was to reverse the insurgency momentum, solidify our accomplishments, and build on successes. “We took away safe havens and the infrastructure that goes with it.”

The President has requested another $113.4 billion to continue the war in Afghanistan in FY12. That sum will be on top of $454.7 billion already spent (and borrowed) on the war to date. On Thursday, March 17, 2011, Congress will have the opportunity to consider whether all of this “progress” has been worth the money. It is time for Congress to exercise fiscal responsibility and to assume its Constitutional responsibilities and end the war in Afghanistan. Vote YES on H. Con. Res 28 and direct the President to end this war by the end of the year.

Sincerely,

/s

Dennis J. Kucinich

Member of Congress

Thursday, March 10, 2011

Kucinich, Jones, Ron Paul, 7 other Members Introduce Bipartisan Resolution to End Afghan War

Posted on March 10, 2011 by dandelionsalad

http://dandelionsalad.wordpress.com/

by Congressman Dennis J. Kucinich
Washington, Mar 9, 2011

Representatives Dennis Kucinich (D-OH), Walter Jones (R-NC) and eight others today introduced a bipartisan, privileged resolution, House Concurrent Resolution 28, which, if enacted, would require the President to withdraw all U.S. Armed Forces from Afghanistan by the end of 2011.

The bill is cosponsored by Representatives Dennis Kucinich (D-OH), Walter Jones (R-NC), Pete Stark (D-CA), Ron Paul (R-TX), Bob Filner (D-CA), Barbara Lee (D-CA), Michael Honda (D-CA), Lynn Woolsey (D-CA), Keith Ellison (DFL-MN) and John Conyers, Jr. (D-MI).

Read Kucinich’s prepared remarks from a press conference announcing the resolution here. [see below.]

Following the press conference, Kucinich immediately took to the House floor to call upon his colleagues to support the resolution. See video of his address here. [see video below.] His statement from the floor follows:

“Today a bipartisan coalition of Members of Congress has introduced a privileged resolution calling for a vote in this congress to end the war in Afghanistan.

“More than 60% of the American people want us out of there. This war is already approaching a cost of a half a trillion dollars. We have Americans who are losing their jobs; their wages are being knocked down. We have Americans losing their homes, losing their retirement security; they can’t send their kids to colleges they want. And we are spending all this money on a war that is a waste of time, money, blood, and treasure to try to prop up a corrupt regime in Afghanistan.

“Now, our occupation over there is fueled an insurgency. It’s time for this Congress to take the Constitutional responsibility under Article 1, Section 8. We haven’t done that with respect to Afghanistan. It’s time for us to do that. Let’s have an up or down vote. That’s what this resolution is about. I urge all Members of Congress to consider supporting the privileged resolution that ends the war in Afghanistan.”

***

Statement Upon the Introduction of War Powers Resolution on Afghanistan

by Congressman Dennis J. Kucinich
Washington, Mar 9, 2011

Statement of Congressman Dennis J. Kucinich
Introduction of War Powers Resolution on Afghanistan

Press Conference
March 9, 2011

Last week, nine Afghan children between the ages of nine and fifteen were killed by a NATO strike after being mistaken for insurgents. General Petraeus issued an apology and promised to investigate the killings. According to The New York Times, news of their deaths sparked anti-U.S. protests. They were killed in the Pech Valley, an area of Afghanistan once considered vital to U.S. military strategy. But now the U.S. military will soon be withdrawing from after realizing that our presence was destabilizing the area. Today we intend to introduce legislation that invokes the War Powers Resolution of 1973, which, if enacted, would require the President to withdraw U.S. Armed Forces out of Afghanistan by December 31, 2011.

We can no longer ignore such incidents as just a part of the reality of war. It is also clear that our country can no longer afford the human, financial or economic cost of the wars we have been engaged in for the last decade.

As we approach the one-year anniversary of the commitment of an additional 30,000 troops and over $36 billion to the surge in Afghanistan, the Administration is assuring us of progress at the same time that it continues to push the withdrawal date further back.

We have been asked this Congress to support cuts to vital social service programs our constituents depend on, such as the Community Development Block Grants, the WIC program which provides low-income expecting mothers and infants with proper nutrition, and vital job training programs at time when there are nearly 5 eligible workers for every job opening in this country. The Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation estimates that the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan cost the average American family of four almost $13,000 last year. Yet completely absent from the debate on fiscal responsibility is the cost of the wars our nation is waging abroad.

According to the Congressional Research Service, the war in Afghanistan has cost us over $455 billion to date. This cost does not include the billions in long-term funding that will be needed to provide returning veterans with the benefits and care they will require. On Monday, Defense Secretary Robert Gates stated, without specifics, that the U.S. is “well positioned” to begin withdrawing troops in July but committed the country to at least another 3 years in Afghanistan.

Desperately needed unemployment benefits were filibustered last year because the costs to provide them were not offset with spending cuts or revenue increases. But we are not required to offset the costs of war, even when the war is completely funded by borrowed money – money we have to pay back with interest.

We are told we should cut funding for assistance to low-income families with one hand, while with the other hand tens of billions of dollars are approved for a war that does nothing to further our national security. U.S. aid is being spent to prop up a corrupt central government, while the Afghan people experience high rates of poverty and displacement. We cannot claim to be negotiating with the Taliban, while at the same time conducting air strikes and night raids to take out Taliban strongholds across the country. This is not about the deficit or austerity. This is about priorities.

If we were to withdraw 50,000 troops from Afghanistan by July, we would save $25 billion by the end of the year, $75 billion by the end of 2012 and $175 million by the end of 2014.

The events transpiring across the Middle East have demonstrated that U.S. backing of antidemocratic and authoritarian regimes – some of them our allies in the supposed “Global War on Terror” – brings less stability to the region, not more. It also demonstrates that democratic movements can flourish in the region without our interference and without our help. These significant events demand of us a new direction in our foreign policy.

The American people are being asked to shoulder the costs for wars that undermine our national, moral and economic security and opposition is growing. We must ask ourselves whose nation we are building when we ask people here at home to give up benefits they have earned in order to nation-build abroad.

If we accept the premise that we need to stay in Afghanistan until the Taliban is eradicated, we will be there forever. The realization that our presence in the Pech Valley was destabilizing is one that applies to our presence across the country. Pech Valley is becoming less like the exception and more like the rule. The Taliban is only a threat to us as long as we are occupying Afghanistan. It is time to end this war.
***

Kucinich Announces Privileged Resolution to End the War in Afghanistan

DJKucinich on Mar 9, 2011

Wednesday, December 1, 2010

Karzai's brother corrupt drugs baron, WikiLeaks cables say

By RFI

November 29, 2010

US diplomats dubbed Afghan President Hamid Karzai’s half-brother a corrupt drugs baron who uses his position for personal enrichment, according to cables made public by whistleblower WikiLeaks. And they described the president "extremely weak" and prone to conspiracy.

Hamid Karzai’s office on Monday declared that WikiLeaks' latest revelations "won't have any impact on the strategic relations between the US and Afghanistan". The president's spokesperson Waheed Omer described the leaked reports as "not surprising".

Ahmed Wali Karzai – referred to as AWK in the cables - is the controversial governor of Kandahar province, who has been accused of working with the CIA as well as corruption and drug-trafficking.

But US diplomats seem to have been less than keen on dealing with him.

"While we must deal with AWK as the head of the provincial council, he is widely understood to be corrupt and a narcotics trafficker," said one note after a meeting between the president's brother and US envoy Frank Ruggiero in September 2009.

Officials will "continue to urge AWK to improve his own credibility gap", it said.

At the meeting, also attended by Canadian officials, Ahmed Wali Karzai lobbied for funding for megaprojects, rather than the small-scale operations that foreign forces prefer.

"Given AWK's reputation for shady dealings, his recommendations for large, costly infrastructure projects should be viewed with a healthy dose of scepticism," the report said.

He also pushed for the many private security firms working in the province to be brought under a single person’s control. Given that he runs his own militia, that too aroused suspicion.


"AWK is understood to have a stake in private security contracting, and has aggressively lobbied the Canadians to have his security services retained," the cable said.

And it said that Karzai, who said he was ready to be tested by a lie-detector over charges that he is involved in the opium trade, "appears not to understand the level of our knowledge of his activities, and that the coalition views many of his activities as malign".

The diplomats concede that Ahmed Wali Karzai is not an isolated case and that corruption is widespread and harmful to US strategy in Afghanistan.

"The meeting with AWK highlights one of our major challenges in Afghanistan," it says. "How to fight corruption and connect the people to their government, when the key government officials are themselves corrupt."

Other leaks on Afghanistan include:

* Suspicions of high-level corruption - one cable alleges that Vice-President Zia Massoud was carrying 52 million dollars (40 million euros) in cashed when stopped during a visit to the United Arab Emirates - Massoud denies taking money out of the country, the cable claims he was allowed to keep it without explaining its provenance;
* President Hamid Karzai is said to be "driven by paranoia", while officials in the key Helmand province are sharply criticised;
* Criticism of British military operations, especially an alleged failure to impose security around Sangin, a town in Helmand where British has lost more soldiers than anywhere else in the country.




:: Article nr. 72336 sent on 30-nov-2010 15:14 ECT

www.uruknet.info?p=72336

Link: www.english.rfi.fr/asia-pacific/20101129-karzais-brother-corrupt-drugs-baron-wik
ileaks-cables-say

Monday, November 15, 2010

Does America Want Peace in Afghanistan?

Rabi ul Sani 13, 1431 A.H, Tuesday March 30, 2010

In the name of Allah, the Merciful, the Compassionate

This is a main question every one asks. Does America want peace in Afghanistan? However, the following data can help us reach a rationale conclusion: At the beginning of 2009, American had 30,000 troops in Afghanistan which they increased to 68,000 soldiers until the end of the year. This shows 110 percent boost of military man power. In December 2009, US president Obama announced 30,000 more troops for Afghanistan, showing further 30% increase.

In January this year in London Conference on Afghanistan, US supported Hamid Karzai program of reintegration and reconciliation with Taliban i.e. the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan. Two weeks later, on 13 February, Pentagon launched a massive military operations against Marjah township in Nad Ali district, Helmand province, violating their own commitment to work for peace in the country. Now they are talking of taking the offensive to Kandahar.

So far, America has built 700 bases in the country, the major of them being in Kandahar and Bagram. They allocate hundreds of millions of dollars each year for construction of more bases in Afghanistan. In view of these facts, no one can say America wants peace in Afghanistan. They have hidden and long-term colonialist objectives, not only in Afghanistan but in the whole region.

By using Afghanistan as outpost, Washington wants to follows its policy of expansionism, regime change and disintegration in the neighboring countries. No doubt, America has been flaring up racial discord and religious differences among the people in Afghanistan and the neighboring countries. CIA agents and black water operatives have been given task to destabilize the region as per the long-term American strategy. Those who express common cause with America, should know that Washington would never become their strategic friend. Rather it is a tactical ally which wants to use them against their own people for its colonialist objectives and then discard them as it has done this in the past.

In Afghanistan, the White House rulers and the Pentagon generals do not want peace but only want to weaken the momentum of the war. They never intend to end the war. That is why on the one hand, Robert Gates, says Taliban leadership is irreconcilable or now it is not the right time to talk with Taliban but on the other hand, they offer cash, jobs and retirement bonuses for Taliban's ranks and files. The reason is that Pentagon is not interested in ending the war but they only want to reduce the scope of attacks on their soldiers.

The Afghan Mujahideen are aware of this war stratagem of the enemy. They have shown that Americans can't deceive them by phony overtures of peace. If America really wants peace in Afghanistan, they should draw up a national strategy of reconciliation; stop blind bombardment and night raids; release innocent prisoners and remove the blacks list, send black water and CIA agents back home from Afghanistan and close down all secret prisons in American military bases in Afghanistan which are run by intelligence teams of the Special Force.

There, innocent prisoners are tortured, killed by the Special Force and drowned in Helmand River and other rivers in Afghanistan during the night, with their hands being tied up, without any legal verdict of court. The Americans are committing gross violation of human rights in Afghanistan. However, no one, including the human rights advocacy entities all over the world, raise their fingers because all these are done under the name of promoting democracy and fighting terrorism. The world still has to know that the war started under the name of terrorism is, in fact, an illegitimate war of neo-colonialism, being waged for subjugation of the Afghans and all free people.

We call on all those with wake and free conscience to raise their voice against the American brutalities and violation of humane values in Afghanistan. All should know that Americans kill children, women and old men with impunity and cross all limits in their brutalities.

The Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan


Theunjustmedia.com

Friday, November 13, 2009

A Morally Bankrupt Military: When Soldiers and Their Families Become Expendable

Global Research, November 12, 2009

Truthout - 2009-11-11

The military operates through indoctrination. Soldiers are programmed to develop a mindset that resists any acknowledgment of injury and sickness, be it physical or psychological. As a consequence, tens of thousands of soldiers continue to serve, even being deployed to combat zones like Iraq and/or Afghanistan, despite persistent injuries. According to military records, over 43,000 troops classified as "nondeployable for medical reasons" have been deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan nevertheless.

The recent atrocity at Fort Hood is an example of this. Maj. Nidal Hasan had worked as a counselor at Walter Reed, hearing countless stories of bloodshed, horror and death from dismembered veterans from the occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan. While he had not yet served in Iraq or Afghanistan, the major was overloaded with secondary trauma, coupled with ongoing harassment about his being a Muslim. This, along with other factors, contributed towards Hasan falling into a desperation so deep he was willing to slaughter fellow soldiers, and is indicative of fissures running deep into the crumbling edifice upon which the US military stands.

The case of Pvt. Timothy Rich also demonstrates the disastrous implications of the apathetic attitude of the military toward its own. Not dissimilar from Major Hasan, who clearly would have benefited from treatment for the secondary trauma he was experiencing from his work with psychologically wounded veterans, one of the main factors that forced Private Rich to go absent without leave (AWOL) was the failure of the military to treat his mental issues.

Rich told Truthout, "In my unit, to go to sick call for mental health was looked down upon. Our acting 1st Sergeant believed that we shouldn't have mental issues because we were too 'high speed.' So I was afraid to go because I didn't want to be labeled as a weak soldier."

What followed was more harrowing.

"The other problems arose when I brought my girlfriend down to marry her. My unit believed her to be a problem starter so I was ordered not to marry her, taken to a small finance company by an NCO and forced to draw a loan in order to buy her a plane ticket to return home. They escorted her to the airport and through security to ensure that she left. Once the NCO left she turned around and hitchhiked back to Fort Bragg. Before the unit could discover us, we went to the courthouse and got married. We were then summoned by my Commander, Captain Jones, to his office and reprimanded. He called me a dumb ass soldier and a shit bag for marrying her and told my wife that she was a fool to marry someone as stupid as me. Members of my unit started referring to me as Pvt. Bitch instead of Pvt. Rich. The entire episode caused a lot of strain in our relationship. Unable to cope with all this, I bought two plane tickets and went AWOL with my wife."

Rich was later apprehended when a federal warrant was issued against him. After 11 days in a country jail, he was transported back to Fort Bragg in North Carolina. On August 17, 2008, he was wrongly assigned to Echo Platoon that was part of the 82nd Airborne, whereas his unit was part of the 18th Airborne.

Rich recollects, "I was confused when they assigned me to the 82nd. I was dismissed as a liar when I brought this up with my NCO Sgt Joseph Fulgence and my commander, Captain Thaxton. I ended up spending a year at Echo before being informed that I was never supposed to have been in the 82nd."

At Fort Bragg, he was permitted to seek mental health treatment and was diagnosed with schizophrenia, psychosis, insomnia and a mood disorder. This, however, did not stop his commander from harassing him. His permanent profile from the doctor restricted him from being on duty before 0800 (8 AM) hours, but his commander, Sergeant Fulgence, dismissed the profile as merely a guideline and not a mandatory directive. The soldier was accused of using mental health as a pretext to avoid duty. So, Rich was up every morning for first formation at 0545 (5:45 AM). It wasn't until he refused to take his medication because it made him groggy in the morning that his doctor called his commander and settled the matter. By then, Rich had already been forced to violate his profile for six months.

During this period, his mental health deteriorated rapidly. The combined effect of heavy medication and restrictions on his home visits resulted in his experiencing blackouts that led him to take destructive actions in the barracks. When he was discovered talking about killing the chain of command, he was put on a 24-hour suicide watch that seemed to have served little purpose, because on August 17 he was able to elude his guards and make his way to the roof of his barracks.

"I climbed onto the roof of the building and sat up there thinking about my family and my situation and decided to go ahead and end my suffering by taking a nose dive off the building," Rich explained to Truthout.

His body plummeted through the air, bounced off a tree, and he landed on his back with a cracked spine. The military gave him a back brace, psychotropic drugs and a renewed 24-hour suicide watch, measures as effective in alleviating his pain as his failed suicide attempt.

When Truthout contacted him just days after his failed suicide attempt, a fatigued Rich detailed his hellish year-long plight of awaiting a discharge that never came. "I want to leave here very bad. For four months they have been telling me that I'll get out next week. It got to the point that the NCOs would tell me just to calm me down that I'd be going home the next day. They went as far as to call my wife and requesting her to lie that she was coming to get me the next day. I eventually stopped believing them. I didn't see an end to it, so I figured I'd try and end it myself."

The noncommissioned officers in his barracks thought it was hilarious that Rich had jumped, and he was offered money for an encore that could be videotaped.

At the time he was in a "holdover" unit, comprised mostly of AWOL soldiers who had turned themselves in or had been arrested. Others in his unit had untreated mental health problems like him or were suffering from severe PTSD (post-traumatic stress disorder) from deployments in Iraq and or Afghanistan.

According to Rich, every soldier in his platoon was subjected to abusive treatment of some kind or the other. "It even got to the point when our 1st Sergeant Cisneros told us that if it were up to him we all would all be taken out back and shot, and that we needed to pray to our gods because we were going to pay (for our actions)."

Tim's wife Megan had to bear his never-ending ordeal in equal measure. She witnessed the military's callousness up close. She informed Truthout, "Since February of this year, Tim's unit had been telling him he would be out in two weeks. After two weeks when he asked, they would repeat the same thing. At times he would get excited and start packing his belongings and I would try to figure out how to get him home to Ohio. He would call me crying in relief because he thought we were going to be together again real soon. The military forced me to lie to him too. When he realized they did not mean to release him he grew very destructive during his black out spells. Eventually he simply gave up on coming home."

Megan first realized there was a problem with the way the military was treating her husband when she noticed him doing and saying things that were out of character for him, like apologizing for not being a good husband and father and being openly suicidal. He had also begun to self-medicate with alcohol, an increasing trend among soldiers not receiving adequate mental-health treatment from the military.

She revealed to Truthout, "He had quit for the girls and me but it seems like he could not handle the stress and needed an escape. This caused a huge problem between us and we began to argue about it. He became severely depressed, pulled away from me, and started to do things he normally doesn't do, such as giving away his money and belongings, and telling the recipients that he wouldn't need those things in hell."

She sensed that her husband would be in trouble if he were to stand up for himself, so she began to advocate on his behalf. Her attempts to do so met with fresh abuse from his commanders. The chain of command banned her from the company barracks and had her escorted off post. The couple was commandeered into Sergeant Fulgence's office where they were chastised. The sergeant referred to Megan as "a bad mother" and "a bitch." When Megan attempted to leave the office in protest, the sergeant ordered her to stay and listen to what he had to say.

This was followed by an encounter with the commander of the platoon, Commander Thaxton. The commander in this case ordered Tim to shut up, and threatened him with confinement. He demanded that Megan explain what kind of mother would bring her child to a new location without a place to live. She tried telling him that the AER loan was for her to come to Fort Bragg since they had lost their house after Tim's arrest and loss of job. Although the paperwork for the loan clearly stated that it was for her travel, food and lodging at Fort Bragg, the commander insisted it was for an apartment. When Tim intervened to say that the $785 would not be sufficient to pay rent and bills, especially since he wasn't being paid his wages and his wife couldn't work because of the baby, and according to Tim, both Sergeant Fulgence and Captain Thaxton "had a nice laugh over that" and dismissed the duo, referring to them as "juvenile dumb-asses."

After Tim returned from being AWOL and was brought up on charges, he went through 706 (a psychology board) that declared him mentally incompetent at the time of his being AWOL. It took a painfully long amount of time for the charges to be dismissed without prejudice. The soldier believes that his superiors deliberately refused to do the requisite paperwork for his clearance and subsequent resumption of his pay.

He told Truthout, "Every time I came on base I got arrested even though I was on active duty again. Then my wife and I got an AER loan for her to come down to Fort Bragg. When she got there and my pay continued to be withheld, the AER money ran out and my wife and child had to sleep in the van we owned. When my unit found out they called the Military Police and ordered me to give custody of my daughter to my father."

When Tim refused to do that, they punished him by confining him to the barracks and barring his wife from entering the base. To add insult, the chain of command took away his van keys and said that neither he nor Megan was allowed use it.

The nightmare ended when the military finally released Pvt. Timothy Rich, and by default, Megan. He was discharged and "allowed" to enter the ranks of US citizens searching for jobs and health care. Their traumatic journey to that starting point is what distinguishes them from their civilian counterparts.

Rich's advice to anyone thinking of joining the military today: "Don't join. Everything they advertise and tell you about how it's a family friendly army is a lie."

Sgt. Heath Carter suffered a similar fate at the hands of an indifferent military command. Upon return from the invasion of Iraq, he discovered that his daughter Sierra was living in an unsafe environment in Arkansas under the care of his first wife, who had full custody of the child. Heath and his new wife, Teresa, started consulting attorneys in order to secure custody of Sierra, who also suffered from a life-threatening medical condition. Precisely during this time, the military chose to keep changing Carter's duty station from Fort Polk, Louisiana, to Fort Huachuca, Arizona, then to Fort Stewart, Georgia. Not only did these constant transfers make it difficult for Carter to see his daughter, they also reduced his chances of gaining custody of Sierra. Convinced that this was a matter of life and death for his daughter, he requested compassionate reassignment to Fort Leavenworth, Missouri, about two hours from his first wife's home in Arkansas.

His appeals to the military command, the legal department, chaplain and even to his congressman failed, and the military insisted that he remain at Fort Stewart, Georgia. Having run out of all available avenues, in May 2007 he went AWOL from Fort Stewart and headed home to Arkansas where he fought for and won custody of Sierra, and was able to literally save her life by obtaining needed medical care for her.

However, on January 25 of this year, Carter was arrested at his home by the military police, who flew him back to Fort Stewart where he has been awaiting charges for the past eight months. Being a sergeant, he is in a regular unit and not in a holdover, but that does not help his cause. Initially, his commander told him it would take a month and a half for him to be sent home. Several months later, it was decided he would receive a court-martial.

Carter feels frustrated, "Now I have to wait for the court martial. It's taken this long for them to decide. If we had known it would take this long, my family could have moved down here. Every time I ask when I'll have a trial, they say it is only going to be another two weeks. I get the feeling they are lying. They have messed with my pay. They're trying to push me to do something wrong."

His ordeal has forced Carter to reflect on the wars. He admits that, although his original reason for going AWOL was personal and he had otherwise been proud of his missions, he sees things in Iraq differently today. "I don't think there is any reason for us to be there except for oil."

Yet, both Private Rich and Sergeant Carter were offered deployments to Afghanistan amid their struggles. It is soldiers like these that the military will use to fill the ranks of the next "surge" of troops into Afghanistan, which at the time of this writing, appears to be as many as 34,000 troops.

The stage is set for more tragic incidents like the recent massacre at Fort Hood.

Sarah Lazare contributed to this report.

Dahr Jamail, an independent journalist, is the author of "The Will to Resist: Soldiers Who Refuse to Fight in Iraq and Afghanistan," (Haymarket Books, 2009), and "Beyond the Green Zone: Dispatches From an Unembedded Journalist in Occupied Iraq," (Haymarket Books, 2007). Jamail reported from occupied Iraq for nine months as well as from Lebanon, Syria, Jordan and Turkey over the last five years.

Dahr Jamail is a frequent contributor to Global Research. Global Research Articles by Dahr Jamail

Saturday, November 7, 2009

Afghan Resistance Statement Why the UN is so disturbed at the Murder of the Western Nationals?

Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan

November 5, 2009

A few days ago, a strong reaction came from the United Nations Security Council following the killings of Western nationals whom the United Nations calls its staff members but Mujahideen say, they were organizers of the runoff election. The UN Secretary General said that he would join efforts with other members of the Security Council to find those behind this incident and give them punishment. On the other hand, we have hundreds of examples in which we find the United Nations behaving with the Islamic Ummah unfairly, improperly and pitilessly as far as global and regional issues are concerned.

When it comes to the protection of the rights of the Ummah, this World Body, particularly, the Security Council becomes silent at once. They have chosen the way of suppressing and oppressing the Ummah and supporting the arrogant, the invaders and the brutals.

If we have a glimpse at events in Palestine, Iraq and other issues and the bloodbath now going on at the level of the Ummah, we will readily know that how callously and brutally the invading colonialists kill common Muslims collectively and invade Islamic lands flagrantly. If we look at the horrendous events in our country , Afghanistan during the past eight years, we will see clearly that the Security Council with its full strength is siding with America and the coalition forces. They have their share in the mass murders of the Afghan people and are the cause of the tragedies and sufferings of the Afghans. During the past eight years, never a day has passed without the Americans and Western brutal forces not committing crimes, murder, or torture against our people or not encroaching on our national and religious values. The blind bombardment on civilian targets, night raids on people houses, murders, tortures, bombardments on funeral and wedding ceremonies are some of the crimes, the invaders have perpetrated during the past eight years. But the United Nations has turned a blind eye to these crimes and not acted as per its responsibilities and caliber as a universal body. Throughout this period, they only ratified and approved resolutions allowing prolongation of occupation of Afghanistan and reinforcement there.

Ironically, they have called for more brutality under the leadership of USA. We have not seen any resolution by the Security Council, which speaks of grace, tolerance and altruism. Contrarily, when American and Western targets are attacked, or their interests are targeted or Western nationals are assassinated and similarly, when the interests of the Christian world come under danger, then the Security Council holds emergency meetings and issues serious response and reaction.

The strong reaction shown by the Security Council following the murder of a few Western staff members, portray that this organization has taken upon itself as its only duty to exclusively protect Western nationals and their interests. If hundreds of people other than the Western nationals are killed in the world in a single day, they do not take any notice because in their eyes they are less than human beings and the United Nations does not feel to be morally bound to protect their rights.





:: Article nr. 59757 sent on 05-nov-2009 13:56 ECT

www.uruknet.info?p=59757

Link: www.alemarah.info/english/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=438:why-t
he-un-is-so-disturbed-at-the-murder-of-the-western-nationals&cati
d=1:afghanistan&Itemid=2

Tuesday, November 3, 2009

Afghan Resistance Statement Who are Behind the Chaos in Afghanistan?

Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan

Monday, 02 November 2009


The Americans follow contradicting programs in Afghanistan. These contradictions have greatly contributed to the chaos and corruption now rampant in the country. After invasion in 2001, Americans announced the Disarmament, Demobilization and Reconstruction (DDR) program which was aimed at encouraging former warlords and gunmen to surrender their arms for cash incentives, employment opportunities and vocational training. After a time, they left the program uncompleted, and opted to raise their own militias under the name of Campaign and Security Guards. These so-called security guards escort American and other NATO member countries military and logistical convoys from one province to another, particularly to Urozgan, Helmand, Farah and other provinces in the south. Some militias are used to detain suspected Afghans. Recently, New York Times disclosed that following the American invasion of Afghanistan, Wali Karzai created the Kandahar Task Force which is involved in various human rights violations. According to the Times Weekly, Wali Karzai frequently used the Kandahar Task Force against his opponents and on one occasion, they killed police chief of Kandahar province. Similarly, Americans pay tens of millions of dollars to private militia annually for escorting their convoys.

The private militias extort money from common people and levy agricultural tax on farmers named Ushar. They are involved in burglary, kidnapping and other unscrupulous activities. All these are overlooked by the invaders as the militia support them in their fight against so-called terrorism.

Applying The Sons of Iraq replica to Afghanistan, the invading Americans have created militia from among the Afghan minorities in the north of the country. Recently, they created such militia in Qazal Qila and appointed a Turkmen as commander. The Turkmen and Uzbek are ethnical minorities and their militias are notoriously known for human rights violations during the Russian invasion of Afghanistan.

To many observers who closely monitor developments in Afghanistan, these moves by the invading Americans can be part of plan dubbed as Chaostan, which was unveiled by Mc Crystal, American top commander in Afghanistan during his recent speech in London. According to this plan, the Americans want to create chaos in Afghanistan by plunging the country into geographical, racial and religious fighting once again.

Mullah Brader Akhund, Deputy-Amir of the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan in one of his interviews said that Mujahideen had captured several groups of armed men who were involved in destroying schools and bridges. They admitted that they were paid by foreign intelligence agencies to do so. In this year Eid ul Fitre message, the Amir ul Momineen, Mullah Omar Mujahid instructed all Mujahideen of the Islamic Emirate to disarm armed groups who are involved in encroachment on people’s life, property and honor on the provocation of the enemy.

Similarly, the bomb blasts in congested places, which have killed hundreds of innocent civilians, is of great concern to the Mujahideen and the Afghan people. This year in the holy month of Ramadan, a bomb went off in Kandahar just at the time when people were to break their fast. More than 50 people were killed in the explosion. The Islamic Emirate denied having hand in the explosion and condemned it as a horrendous and despicable event. Later Dawa Khan Mina pal, a Radio Liberty reporter was detained by police of the Kabul puppet regime when he was trying to investigate the blast to find out who were behind this gruesome event.

Many observers agree that foreign intelligence agencies are involved in anti-human activities to malign the good name of the armed Mujahideen who are fighting Americans and other forces of the NATO member countries. Recently, the Afghan surrogate president Karzai complained in a press conference that unknown helicopters were airdropping armed men in the north. According to him, these armed men disturb peace and security there. But Mujahideen in the area say, the foreign invaders airdrop the militia there to target Mujahideen hide-outs during the night and they also attack ethnically sensitive areas in order to provoke racial fighting.

The Americans think, by doing so, they can justify the presence of their troops and enlist supporters from among Afghan minorities against Taliban. These hidden agendas are driving our country into an unknown direction. Unequivocally, the foreign military presence in Afghanistan is part of the Afghan problem. The more they stay in our country, the more, they will plunge our country into chaos and uncertainly. The only solution is that the invaders leave Afghanistan and let the Afghans to form an Islamic government where people from all ethnicities can participate in the government making on the basis of their talent and services to the people. This will vault out the country from the current vortex of conspiracies and ensure peace and stability in Afghanistan and the whole region.





:: Article nr. 59639 sent on 02-nov-2009 17:29 ECT

www.uruknet.info?p=59639

Link: www.alemarah.info/english/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=393:who-a
re-behind-the-chaos-in-afghanistan&catid=2:articles&Itemid=3

Wednesday, September 30, 2009

Military Resistance: 7I13:

Interviews With 6 Afghan Resistance Fighters:

“A Rare Chance To Understand How The Insurgents See This War, From The Collapse Of The Taliban, Through Their Revival And, Now, Their Budding Ascendancy”

“Oral History, Told Through The Words Of The Taliban Themselves”

Sep 26, 2009 By Sami Yousafzai and Ron Moreau, NEWSWEEK [Excerpts]

During wars and after them, the real voice of the enemy is rarely heard.

Propaganda is plentiful, as are prideful boasts — and the Taliban have certainly been quick studies at the modern art of information warfare.

But the fears and ambitions of ordinary fighters are too often buried under statistics and theories propounded from thousands of miles away.

To put together this remarkable oral history, told through the words of the Taliban themselves, NEWSWEEK turned to contributing correspondent Sami Yousafzai, who has been covering the conflict for the magazine since 2001.

Over that time he has developed and maintained contact with dozens of Afghan insurgents, including the six whose stories are told here.

Working with NEWSWEEK’s Ron Moreau, Yousafzai spent more than a month crisscrossing Afghanistan and Pakistan to meet these sources.

He has known them all for some time, and in the past their information has generally proved reliable.

While it’s impossible to confirm the credibility of everything they say, their stories offer a rare chance to understand how the insurgents see this war, from the collapse of the Taliban, through their revival and, now, their budding ascendancy.

*****************************************

Chapter One: The Fall

‘The bombs cut down our men like a reaper harvesting wheat. It felt like judgment day.’

Maulvi Abdul Rehman Akhundzada

HAQQANI: Two days before the September 11 attacks on America, we were all celebrating the death of (Northern Alliance commander Ahmed Shah) Masood. His forces were already on the verge of defeat, so his death all but assured us of total victory in Afghanistan.

But the September 11 attacks turned our cheer into deep concern. We gave those camels (a derogatory Afghan term for Arabs) free run of our country, and they brought us face to face with disaster.



We knew the Americans would attack us in revenge.

Realizing the danger, I immediately sent my wife and children to Pakistan. The entire government started to fall apart. I never thought the Taliban would collapse so quickly and cruelly under U.S. bombs.

Everyone began trying to save themselves and their families. When the bombing began, I changed out of my usual white mullah’s garb, put on an old brown shalwar kameez, and headed for Pakistan. I crossed the mountains on foot, and at the top I turned around and said: "God bless you, Afghanistan. I’ll never come back to you under our Islamic regime."

AKHUNDZADA: When the bombing started, I was commanding some 400 fighters on the front lines near Mazar-e Sharif. The bombs cut down our men like a reaper harvesting wheat. Bodies were dismembered. Dazed fighters were bleeding from the ears and nose from the bombs’ concussions. We couldn’t bury the dead. Our reinforcements died in their trenches.

I couldn’t bring myself to surrender, so I retreated with a few of my men in the confusion. Everything was against us. The highway south to Kabul through the Salang Tunnel was blocked. We walked four days in the deep snow without food or water. Kids started shooting at us from the hilltops, hunting us like wild animals.

By the fifth day I could barely walk.

I hid my weapon and walked to a village, saying I was a lost traveler and asking for food. The villagers fed me, but I had lost touch with my comrades. I walked on until a minibus came along; I aimed my gun at the driver and forced him to stop. The van was full of Taliban. They said they had no room for me, but I threatened to shoot out their tires unless they took me. I had to lie on the floor with their feet on my body. It was uncomfortable, but I was warm for the first time in days.

A group of local militiamen captured us the next morning at a checkpoint on the Kabul-Kandahar highway. We were nearly dead. Our mouths were dry and cracked, our lips bleeding. It felt like Judgment Day.

I lay in their filthy jail for a month before they let me go free, just after the Eid holidays. With the strength I had left, I made it to Peshawar. Our Islamic Emirate had collapsed with less than 40 days of resistance — I couldn’t accept that. Allah would let us rise again, I thought, because of all the blood we had spilled for Islam.

KHAN: After the mujahedin began retreating, Arabs, Chechens, and Taliban raced by our house and mosque in Ghazni in convoys of cars, pickups, and trucks, headed to Pakistan.

Almost immediately they started getting bombed. So they abandoned their vehicles and started walking, even the wounded. Some injured Taliban, and Arabs with their families, came to seek shelter at my father’s mosque. Other villagers wouldn’t help them. Only my father and I brought them food.

YOUNAS: When I was a child, my father was a mujahedin commander in the jihad against the Russians, and he sent our family for safety to an Afghan refugee camp in Wana, South Waziristan. After the Taliban’s victory (in 1996), he became an official in a ministry in Kabul. I used to visit him on holidays from Wana. The Islamic Emirate’s collapse was like a nightmare.

I watched as wounded, disabled, and defeated Taliban fighters straggled into Wana and the surrounding villages, along with Arabs, Chechens, and Uzbeks. Every morning as I went to school I could see them wandering around town, almost like homeless beggars. Little by little, the tribal people started helping them, giving them food. Some people even took them into their houses; at first these once proud jihadis survived, thanks to the people’s charity.

The Arabs were disappointed the Taliban hadn’t stood and fought. They told me they had wanted to fight to the death. They were clearly not as distressed as the Afghans. That was understandable.

The Arabs felt they had lost a battle.



But the Afghans were much more devastated — they had lost their country.

MASIHUDDIN: When the Taliban fell, I was a madrassa student in Nuristan. Since all the Taliban officials and militiamen had fled, I decided to continue my studies in Pakistan.

(Then-Pakistani president Pervez) Musharraf imposed new rules on the Pakistani madrassas (in 2002), including a ban on foreign students. So I went to a mosque in an outlying village (near Peshawar) to study and wait for the situation to improve. We were 10 students studying and sleeping in one small room. The people couldn’t afford to bring us food, so we often went without dinner. We rarely had electricity. Without a fan it was hard to study, even to sleep.

To make matters worse, the Peshawar police were harassing and arresting us. They didn’t hold us for long, though — I think they just wanted to frighten us. We began praying for the survival of the Taliban who had fled. There was no reason to pray for victory, since such a return seemed inconceivable.

HAQQANI: My father, brother, and family were at Mansehra (a town in northwestern Pakistan that is home to several Afghan refugee camps). But I realized it wouldn’t be wise to move in with them. Too many people knew who I was, and some had no love for the Taliban.

Instead I found a place to stay at a mosque nearby. I had to sneak over at midnight just to see my kids, like a thief. When I was visiting my daughter one night, she asked me about our Kabul home, why we didn’t have a car anymore. She complained that it was too hot in the refugee camp, and that she wanted to move back to the cool climate of Kabul. I couldn’t answer her.

But she could tell from my eyes how sad I was. I was a wreck — nervous, worried, and almost panic-stricken.

AKHUNDZADA: Once proud Taliban mullahs and fighters changed the way they dressed so they wouldn’t be recognized. No one wanted to be identified as a Talib.

Friends and relatives who had respected me while I was a commander now turned away. I had no money or job. I moved my family to a village in Punjab, far from Afghanistan, to become a day laborer, but I was a failure at it. I couldn’t speak the local language, and no one would hire me.

So I returned to Peshawar and started selling vegetables from a basket in the market. I began making money.

But I couldn’t get over the Taliban’s collapse, the death of my men.

My wife said I was crying in my sleep. I went to a doctor, who gave me some medicine. I was so distracted that when a customer would ask me for potatoes, I’d give him tomatoes.

Chapter Two: The Rebirth

‘The end of the Taliban was the start of my Jihadi career.’

Mullah Aga Mohammad

KHAN: Mullahs like my father became depressed. Under the Taliban they had been very influential, but after the collapse people paid less attention to them.

My father was so upset, he had a stroke that left him partially paralyzed.

At the end of 2002 the Afghan police raided our mosque. They grabbed my father and hauled him in front of the villagers, accusing him of being with the Taliban. They demanded to know where the Taliban’s weapons were stored. They personally insulted him and then threw him in jail. He was 70.

The faithful at our mosque went to the police and complained.

People who a few months before seemed to have turned against my father now supported him.



They said it was a disgrace for the police to have entered the mosque wearing their shoes, and to have arrested an old, crippled imam.

In early 2003 he died.

I was a just a kid, but the police arrested me too, twice — once from my house, once from the mosque.

They interrogated me, asking stupid questions like: "Where are the Taliban?" "Where are the weapons hidden?"

My family sold our motorbike to raise the money to free me. The police also arrested my brother, who was a schoolteacher. The police even arrested, insulted, and manhandled a 90-year-old mullah in our district.



People’s attitudes were changing; they were becoming angry at the police and the local officials for the disrespect they were showing toward mosques and mullahs.

YOUNAS: At first I didn’t hear the Afghans talking about going back to fight. But the Arabs did, and they encouraged the Afghans and the local tribal people not to give up. Nothing much happened for the first year or so, but then the Arabs started organizing some training camps. The first one I heard about was at Shin Warsak village, near Wana. When I had some time off from school, I decided to visit. I was really impressed. There was more than one camp. One was run by Arabs, and another by Chechens and Uzbeks.

Thanks to my madrassa studies I could speak Arabic; I made friends with Egyptians, Saudis, Libyans, and Yemenis. Nek Mohammad Wazir (a pro-Taliban Pakistani tribal leader who was killed by a June 2004 Predator strike) gave the Arabs places to train and access to weapons and other supplies. They moved openly on the main roads and in the towns and villages, showing no concern about security. I decided to leave my studies and join their resistance.

MOHAMMAD: The end of the Taliban was the start of my jihadi career. My father died in 1994, leaving me to take care of my mother, brothers, and sisters. So I’d had no time to join Mullah Omar’s movement. For years I had a very heavy conscience for having missed the jihad. After the collapse of the Taliban in late 2001, many injured and traumatized mujahedin began coming to the mosque in Peshawar where I was the imam. Some of the worshipers asked me outright why I hadn’t fought in the jihad like these men.

I needed to make up for not joining the fight. I started asking around if the mujahedin were still active, but no one could give me a real answer. Then one day I heard about a young Afghan named Azizullah who had been in the resistance — he’s in jail now in Afghanistan.

I went to his house, and told him I wanted to help the resistance against the Americans if it was forming. He lied, saying he was only a poor man and had nothing to do with jihad. Then one day I saw him walking to the mosque. I joined him. He was still hesitant, but finally he said he could help. He gave me directions to a militant camp in Waziristan and a letter of introduction.

HAQQANI: In early 2003 my family and I moved to a rented house near Peshawar. It was the first time I was living in my own house since 2001. I put my white clerical outfit back on. And suddenly the Taliban’s defense minister, Mullah Obaidullah, came to see me — the first senior Taliban leader I had seen since our collapse. He was traveling around Pakistan to rally our dispersed forces.

Half the Taliban leadership was back in touch with each other, he said, and they were determined to start a resistance movement to expel the Americans.

I didn’t think it was possible, but he assured me I could help.

He said to meet him again in two weeks, and gave me an address. I was surprised at the number and rank of the people I found at the meeting. There were former senior ministers and military commanders, all sitting together, all eager to resist the Americans.

Obaidullah told me: "We don’t need you as a deputy minister or bureaucrat. We want you to bring as many fighters as you can into the field."

AKHUNDZADA: One day a man came to buy vegetables — a mullah who had worked with our jihad in northern Afghanistan for years. We recognized each other.

He asked me what I wanted to do: keep selling potatoes or go back to the jihad.

I was making about 2,000 rupees ($33) a day, which was good, but I wanted to rejoin the struggle.

We went to a meeting at night near Peshawar, and I couldn’t believe what I saw: my top commander (from the northern front), Mullah Dadullah! He was my ideal; his name meant victory for us.

My interest in the vegetable business disappeared. After six or seven months I was called to Miran Shah (in North Waziristan). Dadullah (who would be killed in May 2007) was there; so were Akhtar Mohammad Osmani (who would be killed in December 2006) and our defense minister, Mullah Obaidullah (who would be captured by Pakistani forces in March 2007).

It was decided that each commander should go find his former soldiers and prepare to return to Afghanistan to fight.

I was sent to Quetta, where survivors from my unit had settled. There had been 400 fighters under my command. In Quetta I found 15 of them.

They embraced me and the idea of returning to free our land of the American invaders.

In North Waziristan we trained, re-equipped, recruited more men, and got ready to return to Afghanistan.



Chapter Three: The Taliban Surge

‘After these first few attacks, God seems to have opened channels of money for us.’

Qari Younas

YOUNAS: One night in April (2003), we crossed the border in five pickups and one larger truck.

Once we were safely across, we sent the vehicles back to wait for us on the Pakistan side.

Our target was a U.S. base just across the border at Machda in Paktika province. We attacked at dawn. I think we really surprised them. We shelled them with 122mm rockets and mortars for about 30 minutes. But we didn’t get close enough to fire our Kalashnikovs; before we could move in, American helicopters came, raining rockets and bullets on us. Terrified, I crawled and ran to escape death. Amid the noise and explosions, dust and smoke, I remember seeing six of us cut down and killed: two Arabs, three tribals, and an Afghan.

Still, I was strangely exhilarated.

We showed our resolve by fighting, by taking a stand.

We knew we’d be back.

We carried the stiff and bloodied bodies of our martyrs back to Wana. Thousands of locals attended their funerals, saying it was an honor to witness the burial of these martyrs. People brought flowers, ribbons, colored cloth, and flags to decorate their graves.

As the news traveled, a lot of former Taliban began returning to Wana to join us.

KHAN: By the middle of 2004, we were hearing rumors that the Taliban were operating once again in Ghazni. Friends and relatives in other rural districts were saying that armed men were beginning to show up in villages at night on motorbikes.

Within a few months, signs of them began appearing everywhere.

At first we saw shabnama ("night letters") that the Taliban were leaving in shops, mosques, and other public places warning people not to cooperate with Karzai and the Americans. By the beginning of 2005 the Taliban began targeted killings of police officers, government officials, spies, and elders who were working with the Americans.

One night around midnight someone knocked on the door of our house. We were terrified, fearing that the police had come back to arrest me or my brother once again.

But when we opened the door, it was one of my father’s former students. He had a Kalashnikov on his shoulder and was a Taliban subcommander already.

The two other Taliban he was with also carried AKs and had several hand grenades attached to their belts.

This was my first encounter with the Taliban since the defeat. We invited them to spend the night. Early the next morning I accompanied them to the mosque. My father’s former student read out the names of those he accused of having betrayed Islam by following Karzai and the infidels. He warned them to cease all contact and to quit any job they may have had with the government or the Americans. He ended by saying he would return in one week.

MOHAMMAD: Those first groups crossing the border were almost totally sponsored, organized, and led by Arab mujahedin. The Afghan Taliban were weak and disorganized.

But slowly the situation began to change.

American operations that harassed villagers, bombings that killed civilians, and Karzai’s corrupt police and officials were alienating villagers and turning them in our favor.



Soon we didn’t have to hide so much on our raids. We came openly.



When they saw us, villagers started preparing green tea and food for us.



The tables were turning. Karzai’s police and officials mostly hid in their district compounds like prisoners.

YOUNAS: Our real jihad was beginning by the start of 2005.

Jalaluddin Haqqani’s tribal fighters came actively back to our side because the Americans and the Pakistanis had arrested his brother and other relatives. He appointed his son Sirajuddin to lead the resistance.

That was a real turning point.

Until then villagers in Paktia, Paktika, and Khost thought the Taliban was defeated and finished. They had started joining the militias formed by the Americans and local warlords, and were informing on us and working against us. But with the support of Haqqani’s men we began capturing, judging, and beheading some of those Afghans who worked with the Americans and Karzai. Terrorized, their families and relatives left the villages and moved to the towns, even to Kabul. Our control was slowly being restored.

KHAN: My father’s former student returned as promised a week later. I decided to join him. I helped assassinate those people who had continued their contacts with the government and the Americans. I didn’t want to kill, but I was determined to bring back our Islamic regime and get rid of the Americans and the traitors allied with them.

By the end of 2005 the Taliban’s ranks in Ghazni were increasing.

There were new recruits like me and more former Taliban returning home from Pakistan.

At the same time, we started receiving shipments of RPGs, rockets, mines, and bombs, most of which were old and rusty. My group only had three RPG launchers and only one mortar tube, and a few rounds for each. We had a few rusty Russian mines that only worked about 30 percent of the time. So we could only carry out very quick and limited attacks on convoys, construction crews, and district compounds.

At first we didn’t have much success. But we were learning.

Just firing a mortar, even if it didn’t hit the target, was a big deal: it proved to everyone we were there and were a force to be respected.

The Americans and their Afghan allies made mistakes after mistake, killing and arresting innocent people.



There was one village in Dayak district near Ghazni City where the people had communist backgrounds, from the days of the Russians, and had never supported us.



But the police raided the village, beat the elders at a mosque and arrested them, accusing them of being Taliban.



They were freed after heavy bribes were paid.



After that incident the whole village sent us a message asking forgiveness for the abuses of the communist era.

AKHUNDZADA: There are famous Taliban poems about how mujahedin come to free villages from occupiers at the point of a bayonet.

I began living that poem.

My body and mind got stronger and my mental problems disappeared.

As word of our success traveled, I was able to organize another group of new, young recruits.

They were smarter, more spirited, and better motivated than my former Taliban fighters.

Still, we lacked weapons and money. So I visited Mullah Dadullah. He had gone into Helmand province in early 2006 with 30 people. When he returned months later, he had organized 300 sub-commanders who each had dozens of troops. His return was like the arrival of rain after five years of drought.

I gave him a list of our needs. Even before he read the list, he smiled and said: "Whether I am alive or dead, remember this: the resistance will become greater than your greatest expectations. We will return to control Afghanistan." The next day he called me, took a page out of a notebook, wrote something on it, and gave it to me. The note said to go and see this guy and he will help you. Back in Pakistan, I found the man. He kissed Dadullah’s letter.

After two weeks this man had provided me with all the guns, weapons, and supplies I had requested. Dadullah gave such letters to many people.

MOHAMMAD: Once we sent a shipment for the making of IEDs to our forces in Zabul province. For some reason we forgot to include the remote-control devices. I got an urgent call from the commander asking me to quickly send the missing items. So I hid the remotes among some books and clothes in several travel bags. At Torkham (the Khyber Pass crossing), the police asked me to open the bags. At first I thought I should flee. But where could I run? I started searching for the key to open the bags. There was a long customs queue. The impatient policeman finally said: "You’re taking too long. Get out of here."

Another night I was in a hotel in Kabul on a mission to smuggle remote devices and explosives. Afghan police and intelligence were checking all the travelers staying in the hotel. My fellow mujahedin and I hid the bags containing the remotes in the bathroom. The police checked our luggage and pockets. But God blinded their eyes to the bathroom. If they had found the devices I would have ended up in jail for life. All these close calls strengthened my faith and my commitment to the jihad.

HAQQANI: In 2007 I returned to Afghanistan for the first time. I visited the south and spoke to Taliban units, to elders and villagers, and raised new recruits. Mullah Omar has entrusted me with the job of touring towns and villages on both sides of the border to encourage people to support, contribute to, and join the jihad.

Between 2006 and 2009 I have personally raised hundreds of new recruits to join the resistance. (In August) I traveled to eight Afghan provinces in 20 days.

The unpopularity of the Karzai regime helps us immensely. In 2005 some Afghans thought Karzai would bring positive change. But now most Afghans believe the Taliban are the future.

The resistance is getting stronger day by day.

Chapter Four: We Get Stronger Every Day

‘We were born here. We will die here. We aren’t going anywhere.’

Mullah Aga Mohammad

MASIHUDDIN: That base on top of the mountain (in Barge Matal) had to go. The Americans there were monitoring our phone calls and walkie-talkies, and they ran intelligence operations with Afghan spies from there.

So (last June) we began carefully planning an attack. One of our men said that the mission would be hard even if the Americans only threw stones at us, as we’d be attacking up a steep mountain. Everyone laughed at him, but we knew there was some truth in what he said.

I asked for volunteers, and everyone signed up.

As usual we prepared a medical team, including donkeys and stretchers to evacuate our wounded.

But as I divided up weapons, ammunition, explosives, and communications gear, it started to rain heavily. The Americans have heavy boots and other mountain equipment that allows them to move up and down the steep rocks. But our men mostly wear leather sandals that don’t give us any grip. So we postponed the attack for two weeks.

KHAN: Fighting the Americans is not easy. One night in the summer of 2007, my commander, Mullah Nurla, was killed in an American raid on his house. Other Americans killed 12 of our commanders. All the raids came between midnight and dawn.

We found out that the Americans were finding us by tracing our cell-phone calls, and by calls from spies giving away our locations. So we forced the cell companies to stop all transmissions from 6 p.m. to 7 a.m.



We still worry about helicopters and bombers, but we are suffering fewer American night raids. I think they just don’t have the intelligence they used to have.



Fewer people are willing to cooperate with them and betray us.

Our men, on the other hand, are watching American bases 24 hours a day.

They inform us of American movements.

We used to hit the Americans with roadside bombs and then disappear. Now when we explode an IED, we follow that with AK and RPG fire.

We now have more destructive IEDs, mostly ammonium-nitrate bombs that we mix with aluminum shards.

We get regular deliveries of these fertilizers, explosives, fuses, detonators, and remote controls. One heavy shipment is on its way right now. I think we are better at making IEDs now than the Arabs who first taught us.

HAQQANI: I admit Taliban commanders are being captured and killed, but that hasn’t stopped us, and it won’t.

Our jihad is more solid and deep than individual commanders and fighters — and we are not dependent on foreigners, on the ISI (Pakistan’s intelligence agency), or Al Qaeda.



Personally I think all this talk about Al Qaeda being strong is U.S. propaganda.



As far as I know, Al Qaeda is weak, and they are few in numbers.



Now that we control large amounts of territory, we should have a strict code of conduct for any foreigners working with us. We can no longer allow these camels to roam freely without bridles and control.

MASIHUDDIN: Late Friday afternoon, after prayers, we began to move.

We slowly sent our people up the mountain as the shadows lengthened. The mujahedin climbed slowly, steadily. We waited quietly on the ridgeline overnight without fires for warmth or to cook food. We’ve learned that the Americans are always listening for the smallest sound.

I gave the signal to attack just before sunrise. We started with our mortar and rocket teams shelling the base from the surrounding hilltops.

By dawn our mujahedin were almost hugging the base’s outer walls. We killed a number of Afghan Army soldiers, and one U.S. soldier who may have been hit in a guard tower.

As we fought, our video team filmed our advance. Our mortars, rockets, and RPGs destroyed most of one outer defensive wall.

We yelled to those inside to come out and surrender. No one came out. So we set fire to one side of the post and moved around to wait on the opposite side. The smoke forced some, if not all, of the soldiers to abandon the post. During the attack we didn’t lose any fighters.

Then American helicopters arrived, firing rockets and machine guns. We fought until sunset. We lost 12 Taliban to martyrdom, largely to the helicopter fire that comes down like heavy rain.

We cannot compare our military strength to that of the Americans.



But we have learned how to stay protected behind rocks and mountains.



Even with all their advanced technology, we forced them to withdraw and captured that base. (Coalition forces retook the post three days later and later abandoned it; a U.S. chronology of the battle differs in some details.)

YOUNAS: Not long ago, when one of my younger brothers got married, my mother asked me: "Boy, when will you marry?" I told her that the day I help to bring the Taliban back to Kabul and restore the Islamic Emirate is the day I will marry. That day may be far away, but I know it will come.

KHAN: The Americans talk about getting Taliban to leave the jihad for their dollars. That’s ridiculous. I was engaged to be married a year ago, but I don’t have the $1,500 bride price to give to the girl’s father or the $500 for the wedding. If I had money, I would not delay my marriage. Who would marry me? You’d be surprised.

The people here are not worried about giving their daughter or sister to Taliban, who can get killed within one week of the wedding. They are happy to be part of the jihad.



It’s not easy being in the Taliban.



It’s like wearing a jacket of fire.



You have to leave your family and live with the knowledge that you can be killed at any time.



The Americans can capture you and put you in dog cages in Bagram and Guantánamo. You can’t expect any quick medical treatment if you’re wounded. You don’t have any money.



Yet when I tell new recruits what they are facing they still freely put on this jacket of fire.



All this builds my confidence that we will never lose this war.

MOHAMMAD: We never worry about time. We will fight until victory no matter how long it takes. The U.S. has the weapons, but we are prepared for a long and tireless jihad.

We were born here. We will die here. We aren’t going anywhere.

MASIHUDDIN: In the south the mujahedin have adjusted to Obama’s new crusade by making some small strategic withdrawals and fighting back mostly with IEDs.

But we mujahedin in Kunar and Nuristan are lucky. These mountains and forests are our protectors. Trees and rocks shelter us everywhere.

The Americans can’t match us here.



Two or three years ago, U.S. soldiers in the region acted as if they were on holiday.



They were taking videos and photos of themselves and walking in the mountains for fun. They were playing games in the open.



Those days are over.



Now they are forced to keep their fingers on their triggers 24 hours a day.

AKHUNDZADA: Sometimes I think what’s happened is like a dream.

I thought my beard would be white by the time I saw what I am seeing now, but my beard is still black, and we get stronger every day.

Saturday, September 26, 2009

U.S., NATO Poised For Most Massive War In Afghanistan's History

by Rick Rozoff

URL of this article: www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=15364

Global Research, September 24, 2009
Stop NATO

Over the past week U.S. newspapers and television networks have been abuzz with reports that Washington and its NATO allies are planning an unprecedented increase of troops for the war in Afghanistan, even in addition to the 17,000 new American and several thousand NATO forces that have been committed to the war so far this year.

The number, based on as yet unsubstantiated reports of what U.S. and NATO commander Stanley McChrystal and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Michael Mullen have demanded of the White House, range from 10,000 to 45,000.

Fox News has cited figures as high as 45,000 more American soldiers and ABC News as many as 40,000. On September 15 the Christian Science Monitor wrote of "perhaps as many as 45,000."

The similarity of the estimates indicate that a number has been agreed upon and America's obedient media is preparing domestic audiences for the possibility of the largest escalation of foreign armed forces in Afghanistan's history. Only seven years ago the United States had 5,000 troops in the country, but was scheduled to have 68,000 by December even before the reports of new deployments surfaced.

An additional 45,000 troops would bring the U.S. total to 113,000. There are also 35,000 troops from some 50 other nations serving under NATO's International Security Assistance Force in the nation, which would raise combined troop strength under McChrystal's command to 148,000 if the larger number of rumored increases materializes.

As the former Soviet Union withdrew its soldiers from Afghanistan twenty years ago the New York Times reported "At the height of the Soviet commitment, according to Western intelligence estimates, there were 115,000 troops deployed." [1]

Nearly 150,000 U.S. and NATO forces in Afghanistan would represent the largest foreign military presence ever in the land.

Rather than addressing this historic watershed, the American media is full of innuendos and "privileged" speculation on who has leaked the information and why, as to commercial news operations the tawdry world of Byzantine intrigues among and between American politicians, generals and the Fourth Estate is of more importance that the lengthiest and largest war in the world.

One that has been estimated by the chief of the British armed forces and other leading Western officials to last decades and that has already been extended into Pakistan, a nation with a population almost six times that of Afghanistan and in possession of nuclear weapons.

Two weeks ago the Dutch media reported that during a visit to the Netherlands "General Stanley McChrystal [said] he is considering the possibility of merging...Operation Enduring Freedom with NATO's ISAF force." [2] That is, not only would he continue to command all U.S. and NATO troops, but the two commands would be melded into one.

The call for up to 45,000 more American troops was first adumbrated in mid-September by U.S. armed forces chief Michael Mullen, with the Associated Press stating "The top U.S. military officer says that winning in Afghanistan will probably mean sending more troops." [3]

Four days later, September 19, Reuters reported that "The commander of U.S. and NATO forces in Afghanistan has drawn up a long-awaited and detailed request for additional troops but has not yet sent it to Washington, a spokesman said on Saturday.

"He said General Stanley McChrystal completed the document this week, setting out exactly how many U.S. and NATO troops, Afghan security force members and civilians he thinks he needs." [4]

The Pentagon spokesman mentioned above, Lieutenant-Colonel Tadd Sholtis, said, "We're working with Washington as well as the other NATO participants about how it's best to submit this," refusing to divulge any details. [5]

Two days later the Washington Post published a 66-page "redacted" version of General McChrystal's Commander's Initial Assessment which began with this background information:

"On 26 June, 2009, the United States Secretary of Defense directed Commander, United States Central Command (CDRUSCENTCOM), to provide a multidisciplinary assessment of the situation in Afghanistan. On 02 July, 2009, Commander, NATO International Security Assistance Force (COMISAF) / U.S. Forces-Afghanistan (USFOR-A), received direction from CDRUSCENTCOM to complete the overall review.

"On 01 July, 2009, the Supreme Allied Commander Europe and NATO Secretary General also issued a similar directive.

"COMISAF [Commander, NATO International Security Assistance Force] subsequently issued an order to the ISAF staff and component commands to conduct a comprehensive review to assess the overall situation, review plans and ongoing efforts, and identify revisions to operational, tactical and strategic guidance."

The main focus of the report, not surprising given McChrystal's previous role as head of the Joint Special Operations Command, the Pentagon's preeminent special operations unit, in Iraq, is concentrated and intensified counterinsurgency war.

It includes the demand that "NATO's International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) requires a new strategy....This new strategy must also be properly resourced and executed through an integrated civilian-military counterinsurgency campaign....This is a different kind of fight. We must conduct classic counterinsurgency operations in an environment that is uniquely complex....Success demands a comprehensive counterinsurgency (COIN) campaign."

McChrystal's evaluation also indicates that the war will not only escalate within Afghanistan but will also be stepped up inside Pakistan and may even target Iran.

"Afghanistan's insurgency is clearly supported from Pakistan. Senior leaders of the major Afghan insurgent groups are based in Pakistan, are linked with al Qaeda and other violent extremist groups, and are reportedly aided by some elements of Pakistan's ISI [Inter-Services Intelligence].

"Iranian Qods Force [part of the nation's army] is reportedly training fighters for certain Taliban groups and providing other forms of military assistance to insurgents. Iran's current policies and actions do not pose a short-term threat to the mission, but Iran has the capability to threaten the mission in the future."

That the ISI has had links to armed extremists is no revelation. The Pentagon and the CIA worked hand-in-glove with it from 1979 onward to subvert successive governments in Afghanistan. That Iran is "training fighters for certain Taliban groups" is a provocational fabrication.

As to who is responsible for the thirty-year disaster that is Afghanistan, McChrystal's assessment contains a sentence that may get past most readers. It is this:

"The major insurgent groups in order of their threat to the mission are: the Quetta Shura Taliban (05T), the Haqqani Network (HQN), and the Hezb-e Islami Gulbuddin (HiG)."

The last-named is the guerrilla force of Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, the largest recipient of hundreds of millions (perhaps billions) of U.S. dollars provided by the CIA to the Peshawar Seven Mujahideen bloc fighting the Soviet-backed government of Afghanistan from 1978-1992.

While hosting Hekmatyar and his allies at the White House in 1985 then President Ronald Reagan referred to his guests as "the moral equivalents of America's founding fathers.”

Throughout the 1980s the CIA official in large part tasked to assist the Mujahideen with funds, arms and training was Robert Gates, now U.S. Secretary of Defense.

Last December BBC News reported:

"In his book, From the Shadows, published in 1996, Mr Gates defended the role of the CIA in undertaking covert action which, he argued, helped to win the Cold War.

"In a speech in 1999, Mr Gates said that its most important role was in Afghanistan.

"'CIA had important successes in covert action. Perhaps the most consequential of all was Afghanistan where CIA, with its management, funnelled billions of dollars in supplies and weapons to the mujahideen, and the resistance was thus able to fight the vaunted Soviet army to a standoff and eventually force a political decision to withdraw,' he said." [6]

Now according to McChrystal the same Gulbuddin Hekmatyar who was cultivated and sponsored by McChrystal's current boss, Gates, is in charge of one of the three groups the Pentagon and NATO are waging ever-escalating counterinsurgency operations in South Asia against.

To make matters even more intriguing, former British foreign secretary Robin Cook - as loyal a pro-American Atlanticist as exists - conceded in the Guardian on July 8, 2005 that "Bin Laden was...a product of a monumental miscalculation by western security agencies. Throughout the 80s he was armed by the CIA and funded by the Saudis to wage jihad against the Russian occupation of Afghanistan. Al-Qaida, literally 'the database', was originally the computer file of the thousands of mujahideen who were recruited and trained with help from the CIA to defeat the Russians."

Russian analyst and vice president of the Center for Political Technologies Sergey Mikheev was quoted in early September as contending that "Afghanistan is a stage in the division of the world after the bipolar system failed. They [U.S. and NATO] wanted to consolidate their grip on Eurasia...and deployed a lot of troops there. The Taliban card was played, although nobody had been interested in the Taliban before." [7]

Pentagon chief Gates' 27 years in the CIA, including his tenure as director of the agency from 1991-1993, is being brought to bear on the Afghan war according to the Los Angeles Times of September 19, 2009, which revealed that "The CIA is deploying teams of spies, analysts and paramilitary operatives to Afghanistan, part of a broad intelligence 'surge' that will make its station there among the largest in the agency's history, U.S. officials say.

"When complete, the CIA's presence in the country is expected to rival the size of its massive stations in Iraq and Vietnam at the height of those wars. Precise numbers are classified, but one U.S. official said the agency already has nearly 700 employees in Afghanistan.

"The intelligence expansion goes beyond the CIA to involve every major spy service, officials said, including the National Security Agency, which intercepts calls and e-mails, as well as the Defense Intelligence Agency, which tracks military threats."

U.S. and NATO Commander McChrystal will put the CIA to immediate use in his plans for an all-out counterinsurgency campaign. The Los Angeles Times article added:

"McChrystal is expected to expand the use of teams that combine CIA operatives with special operations soldiers. In Iraq, where he oversaw the special operations forces from 2003 to 2008, McChrystal used such teams to speed up the cycle of gathering intelligence and carrying out raids aimed at killing or capturing insurgents.

"The CIA is also carrying out an escalating campaign of unmanned Predator missile strikes on Al Qaeda and insurgent strongholds in Pakistan. The number of strikes so far this year, 37, already exceeds the 2008 total, according to data compiled by the Long War Journal website, which tracks Predator strikes in Pakistan."

Indeed, on September 13 it was reported that "Two NATO fighter jets reportedly flew inside Pakistan's airspace for nearly two hours on Saturday.

"The airspace violation took place in different parts of the Khyber Agency bordering the Afghan border." [8]

Two days later "NATO fighter jets in Afghanistan...violated Pakistani airspace and dropped bombs on the country's northwest region.

"NATO warplanes bombed the South Waziristan tribal region....Moreover, CIA operated spy drone planes continued low-altitude flights in several towns of the Waziristan region." [9]

The dramatic upsurge in CIA deployments in South Asia won't be limited to Afghanistan. Neighboring Pakistan will be further overrun by U.S. intelligence operatives also.

On September 12 a petition was filed in the Supreme Court of Pakistan contesting the announced expansion of the U.S. embassy in the nation's capital.

"Pakistani media have been reporting that the United States plans to deploy a large number of marines with the plan to expand its embassy in Islamabad." [10]

The challenge was organized by Barrister Zafarullah Khan, who "said that Saudi Arabia was also trying to get 700,000 acres (283,400 hectares) of land in the country."

He was quoted on the day of the presentation of the petition as warning "Giving away Pakistani land to U.S. and Arab countries in this fashion is a threat for the stability and sovereignty of the country" and "further added that the purpose of giving the land to U.S. embassy was to establish an American military base...there.

"He maintained that such a big land was enough even to construct a military airport." [11]

Intelligence personnel and special forces are being matched by military equipment in the intensification of the West's war in South Asia.

On September 10 Reuters revealed in an article titled "U.S. eyes military equipment in Iraq for Pakistan" that "The Pentagon has proposed transferring U.S. military equipment from Iraq to Pakistani security forces to help Islamabad step up its offensive against the Taliban...."

A U.S. armed forces publication a few days afterward wrote that "U.S. hardware is moving out of Iraq by the ton, much of it going straight to the overstretched forces in increasingly volatile Afghanistan" and "The U.S. military has already started moving an estimated 1.5 million pieces of equipment - everything from batteries to tanks - by ground, rail and air either to Afghanistan for immediate use...." [12]

In the middle of this month "U.S. military leaders infused Gen. Stanley McChrystal's ideas of how to win the war in Afghanistan" by conducting a large-scale counterinsurgency exercise in Grafenwoehr, Germany.

"Dozens of Pashtun speakers joined more than 6,500 U.S. troops and civilians in an exercise for the Afghanistan-bound 173rd Airborne Brigade and Iraq-bound 12th Combat Aviation Brigade. It was the largest such exercise ever held by the U.S. military outside of the United States...." [13]

The Pentagon and NATO have their work cut out for them.

"A security map by the London-based International Council on Security and Development (ICOS) showed a deepening security crisis with substantial Taliban activity in at least 97 percent of the war-ravaged country.

"The Council added that the militants now have a permanent presence in 80 percent of the country." [14]

The United States is not alone in sinking deeper into the Afghan morass.

On September 14 U.S. ambassador to NATO Ivo Daalder, in celebrating the "resilience and deep-seated support from our allies for what is happening in Afghanistan," was equally enthusiastic in proclaiming "Over 40 percent of the body bags that leave Afghanistan do not go to the U.S. They go to other countries...." [15]

Daalder also gave the lie to earlier claims that NATO troop increases leading up to last month's presidential election were temporary in nature by acknowledging that "Many of the extra troops that NATO countries sent to Afghanistan for the August presidential elections would stay on." [16]

Leading up to the Washington Post's publication of the McChrystal assessment, NATO's Military Committee held a two-day conference in Lisbon, Portugal which was attended by McChrystal and NATO's two Strategic Commanders, Admiral Stavridis (Supreme Allied Commander, Operations) and General Abrial (Supreme Allied Commander, Transformation) which "focused mainly on the operation in Afghanistan and on the New Strategic Concept." [17]

The 28 NATO defense chiefs present laid a wreath to the Alliance's first war dead, those killed in Afghanistan.

Earlier this month the Washington Post reported that "The U.S. military and NATO are launching a major overhaul of the way they recruit, train and equip Afghanistan's security forces," an announcement that came "in advance of expected recommendations by Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal." [18]

The article quoted Senator Carl Levin, chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee:

"We're going to need many more trainers, hopefully including a much larger number of NATO trainers. We're going to need a surge of equipment that is coming out of Iraq and, instead of coming home, a great deal of it should be going to Afghanistan instead." [19]

According to the same report, this month NATO will "will establish a new command led by a three-star military officer to oversee recruiting and generating Afghan forces.

"The goal is to 'bring more coherence' to uncoordinated efforts by NATO contingents in Afghanistan while underscoring that the mission 'is not just America's challenge'..." [20]

Contributing to its quota of body bags, NATO has experienced losses in Afghanistan that have reached record levels. "According to the icasualties website, 363 foreign soldiers have died in Afghanistan so far this year, compared to 294 for all of 2008." [21]

This month Britain lost its 216th soldier in the nearly eight-year war. Canada lost its 131st. Denmark its 25th. Italy its 20th. Poland, where a recent poll showed 81 percent support for immediate withdrawal from Afghanistan, its 12th.

Russian ambassador to Afghanistan Zamir Kabulov, who had been in the nation in the 1980s, was cited by Associated Press on September 12 as reflecting that in 2002 the U.S. had 5,000 troops in the nation and "Taliban controlled just a small corner of the country's southeast."

"Now we have Taliban fighting in the peaceful Kunduz and Baghlan (provinces) with your (NATO's) 100,000 troops. And if this trend is the rule, if you bring 200,000 soldiers here, all of Afghanistan will be under the Taliban."

Associated Press also cited Kabulov's concern that "the U.S. and its allies are competing with Russia for influence in the energy-rich region....Afghanistan remains a strategic prize because of its location near the gas and oil fields of Iran, the Caspian Sea, Central Asia and the Persian Gulf."

He also said "Russia has questions about NATO's intentions in Afghanistan, which...lies outside of the alliance's 'political domain'" and "Moscow is concerned that NATO is building permanent bases in the region."

The concerns are legitimate in light of this month's latest quadrennial report by the Pentagon on security threats which "put emerging superpower China and former Cold War foe Russia alongside Iran and North Korea on a list of the four main nations challenging American interests." [22]

At the same time a U.S. military newspaper reported on statements by Pentagon chief Robert Gates:

"Gates said the roughly $6.5 billion he has proposed to upgrade the [Air Force] fleet assures U.S. domination of the skies for decades.

"By the time China produces its first - 5th generation - fighter, he said, the U.S. will have more than 1,000 F-22s and F-35s. And while the U.S. conducted 35,000 refueling missions last year, Russia performed about 30.

"The secretary also highlighted new efforts to support robust space and cyber commands, as well as the new Global Strike Command that oversees the nuclear arsenal." [23]

To add to Russian and Chinese apprehensions about NATO's role in South and Central Asia, ten days ago the U.S. ambassador to Kazakhstan, which borders Russia and China, "offered to Kazakhstan to take part in the peacekeeping mission in Afghanistan."

At the opening ceremony of the NATO Steppe Eagle-2009 military exercises in that nation envoy Richard Hoagland said "Kazakhstan may again become part of the international NATO peacekeeping force in Afghanistan." [24]

Radio Free Europe reported on September 16 that NATO was to sign new agreements with Kyrgyzstan, which also borders China, for the use of the Manas Air Base that as many as 200,000 U.S. and NATO troops have passed through since the beginning of the Afghan war.

On the same day NATO' plans for expanding transit routes through the South Caucasus and the Caspian Sea region were described. "[T]he air corridor through Azerbaijan and Turkmenistan is the most feasible.

"This route will be best suited if ISAF transport planes fly directly to Baku from Turkey or any other NATO member....Moreover, it [Azerbaijan] is not a CSTO [Collective Security Treaty Organization] member, which allows Azerbaijan more freedom for maneuver in the region when dealing with NATO." [25]

Just as troops serving under NATO command in the war in Afghanistan and Pakistan now include those from almost fifty countries on five continents, so the broadening scope of the war is absorbing vaster tracts of Eurasia and the Middle East.

America's longest armed conflict since that in Indochina and NATO's first ground war threatens to not only remain the world's most dangerous conflagration but also one that plunges the 21st Century into a war without end.