Afghanistan 101

A Refugee Profile | Abdul Rahim

2012-02-17T11:46:00.000-08:00

The UN refugee agency has been asking refugees and others all around the world to tell us their stories on camera. They are stories of escape, survival, and triumph after being forced to flee their homes.

Abdul Rahim, 24, was born in Pakistan after his family fled the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. His family lived in Azakhel refugee camp in Pakistan's north-west, until their home was destroyed in the devastating floods of summer 2010. Abdul Rahim almost drowned and lost everything he owned. Luckily, he managed to salvage his refugee card, saying

“It is a very important card, proof that we are the nationals of Afghanistan… We are the citizens of Afghanistan”

Here is the full play list.Storytelling: Through the Eyes of Refugees.

For more posts on refugees click here.
For more posts on Pakistan click here.

Windows and Mirrors in Washington DC for March

2012-02-17T11:03:00.001-08:00

Click on the postcard for the video page.

Opening Reception

Thursday 1 March | 7 PM
First Congregational United Church of Christ
945 G Street, NW

Display locations:

First Congregational United Church of Christ
945 G Street, NW
Open to the public March 1, 8, 15, 22
(Thursdays) from 5–8 p.m.
and Sunday, March 4 from 3–7 p.m.

Methodist Building
100 Maryland Avenue NE
Open to the public March 1–22
from 9 a.m. – 5 p.m.

For more events in Washington, click here.

Co-sponsors: American Friends Service Committee, Church of the Brethren, Friends Committee on National Legislation, Mennonite Central Committee US Washington Office, National Council of Churches, Pax Christi USA, SOJOURNERS, Split This Rock, United Church of Christ, United Methodist General Board of Church and Society

More on Windows and Mirrors here.

CIA Drone Strikes leave 21 dead in North Waziristan

2012-02-16T09:46:00.001-08:00

The BBC is reporting that CIA drone attacks have left 'at least' 21 dead in North Waziristan. The number of dead from the two separate attacks was confirmed by Pakistani security officials.

Pakistan has previously complained that such attacks violate its sovereignty and in fact increase militancy. Last Friday Pakistan's Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar said.

"Drones are not only completely illegal and unlawful and have no authorization to be used within the domains of international law but even more importantly, they are counter-productive to the objective of getting this region rid of militancy, and terrorism and extremism."

On February first the ACLU filed a lawsuit against the US government asking for basic — and accurate — information about the government’s targeted killing program.

“Our government’s deliberate and premeditated killing of American terrorism suspects raises profound questions that ought to be the subject of public debate. Unfortunately the Obama administration has released very little information about the practice — its official position is that the targeted killing program is a state secret — and some of the information it has released has been misleading.

Our suit overlaps with the one recently filed by The New York Times insofar as it seeks the legal memos on which the targeted killing program is based. But our suit is broader. We’re seeking, in addition to the legal memos, the government’s evidentiary basis for strikes that killed three Americans in Yemen in the fall of 2011. We’re also seeking information about the process by which the administration adds Americans to secret government “kill lists.” We think it’s crucial that the administration release the legal memos, but we don’t think the memos alone will allow the public to evaluate the lawfulness and wisdom of the program.”

More on drones here.
More on Pakistan here.

NATO Admits Killing 8 Children in Bombing Attacks | Kapisa

2012-02-15T10:59:00.000-08:00

In a press conference this morning NATO spokesman Mike Wigston took responsibility for the bombing deaths of eight young shepherds in Kapisa province. Here is how Radio Free Europe covered the event.

“The U.S.-led NATO force in Afghanistan says it regrets that eight young Afghan males were killed in a NATO air strike in the northeastern province of Kapisa on February 8.

British Air Commodore Mike Wigston, a NATO spokesman, told a news conference on February 15 that the eight appeared to be carrying arms, according to Afghan and French troops who were operating in the area.”

Kathy Kelly has a more appropriate response in this article published yesterday.

“It’s hard to fathom the vast indifference of Western observers to what their militaries are doing in Afghanistan - to the lives lost, the futures broken, the families and friendships and loves torn apart - all of which will occur in the next country we collectively agree to demolish, and the next. Our apathy surely makes it easier for military and political elites to wage multiple wars. They count on us to look out at a world that we have been told is barbaric and feral, addled (unlike ours) with terrifying fundamentalism driving them (unlike us) to incessant violence.”

Here are some details from the press conference that the Afghan Government investigators held on Monday. Click on the image to read the Daily Star coverage.

Cold, Cold Heart | Kathy Kelly

“It’s Valentine’s Day, and opening the little cartoon on the Google page brings up a sentimental animation with Tony Bennett singing “why can’t I free your doubtful mind and melt your cold, cold heart.”

Here in Dubai, where I’m awaiting a visa to visit Afghanistan, the weather is already warm and humid. But my bags are packed with sweaters because Kabul is still reeling from the coldest winter on record. Two weeks ago, eight children under age five froze to death there in one of the sprawling refugee camps inhabited by so many who have fled from the battles in other provinces. Since January 15, at least 23 children under 5 have frozen to death in the camps.

And just over a week ago, eight young shepherds, all but one under 14 years of age, lit a fire for warmth on the snowy Afghan mountainside in Kapisa Province where they were helping support their families by grazing sheep. French troops saw the fire, and acted on faulty information, and the boys were all killed in two successive NATO airstrikes. The usual denunciations from local authorities, and Western apologies, followed. (Trend News, February 10, 2012).”

Impunity | Private and Military Contractors in Afghanistan

2012-02-14T13:35:00.000-08:00

More civilian contractors working for U.S. companies than U.S. soldiers died in Afghanistan last year for the first time during the war.

While mercenaries and contractors have been used in every US war – including the revolutionary war – the number of private contractors used by the military and increasingly by the State department is higher than ever before. Raising questions of ethics and morality.

Afghanistan

98,933 – Troops Deployed in and around Afghanistan (December 2011)
113,491 – Department of Defense (DoD) Contractors (Jan. 2012)
20,375 – DoD Private Security – does not include USAID and State (Jan. 2012)

Total – 232,799

Contractor numbers from CENTCOM Quarterly Contractor Census Report (DoD)
Number of US Troops from SIGAR

These figures do not include the estimated 11,000 private security contractors that will report directly to the Government of Afghanistan in March following the implementation of Presidential degree 62.

In December 2009, Afghan President Karzai issued Presidential Decree 62 dissolving private security contractors (PSCs), which provide security for the U.S. Department of Defense, U.S. embassy and U.S. government contractors. The U.S. embassy subsequently negotiated an exemption for U.S. government facilities, including the Department of Defense, but failed to include an exemption for USAID development projects or any other U.S. Government contracts performed by U.S. firms in Afghanistan.

Under intense diplomatic pressure, President Karzai approved a “bridging strategy” that extended the use of PSCs to guard foreign-funded development projects to March 20, 2012 while the new APPF was stood up.

These figures also do not account for U.S. Special Forces, the CIA, CIA trained Afghan forces, US armed militias or the Afghan Local Police.

Click troop levels for more posts.

Afghan Deaths Set Record High in 2011 | United Nations

2012-02-10T12:07:00.001-08:00

Civilian deaths from the war have increased for the fifth year in a row. The record loss of the life for men, women and children creates anger, fear and resentment at all parties.

The foreign occupying armies whose very presence and kill/capture policies have escalated fighting, the anti-government forces who are increasingly killing people, and the dramatic increase in deaths attributed to the Afghan National Security Forces.

The vast majority of Afghans want the violence from all parties to end. There is more background information on previous UNAMA reports at the bottom of this message.

Kate Clark writing for the Afghanistan Analysts Network has a good summary. The title of her essay is ‘Talks have not stopped killing of Afghan Civilians.'

“Reading UNAMA’s latest annual report on the protection of civilians is difficult – a bludgeoning of the brain with statistics of death, injury and bereavement. It is an indication that whatever assertions might be made of progress in the war, Afghan civilians are dying in increasing numbers. It reinforces the urgency – as peace talks may now be on the agenda - of the war itself needing to be ended. And as UNAMA itself says: ‘[A]ny such negotiations [should] place the highest priority on protection of civilians in the ongoing armed conflict and in any outcome that leads to its resolution with an emphasis on concrete and effective measures to reduce civilian deaths and injuries.’

‘Anti-government elements’ continue to kill the vast majority of civilians. UNAMA puts this figure at 77 per cent:”

***

“Deaths by ‘pro-Government elements’ which include international and Afghan government forces are down by four per cent, although there has been a marked increase in deaths from aerial attacks and a 196 per cent increase in deaths by Afghan National Security Forces (ANSF). Geographically, the impact of the war has got less, although it is still bad in the south, and it has got a lot worse in the south east and east.”

************************************************************
Background to UNAMA reporting on civilian deaths
************************************************************

Starting in 2009, the United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan (UNAMA) began to document and publish details about the violence against civilians in Afghanistan every six months. Each six month report has shown an increase in violence against civilians. It is important to note that the beginning of the reporting cycle started with levels of violence higher than at any point since 2001. Irrefutable evidence that violence against civilians is increasing.

Here is how they defined general trends in the first mid-year report of June 2009.

"Armed conflict in Afghanistan intensified significantly after 2005, with insurgent/AGE attacks and operations by PGF encroaching into more areas of the country. As the conflict has widened and deepened throughout 2007, 2008 and into 2009, almost a third of the country is now directly affected by insurgent activities with differing intensity."

Annual Report 2009

"The intensification and spread of the armed conflict in Afghanistan continued to take a heavy toll on civilians throughout 2009. At least 5,978 civilians were killed and injured in 2009, the highest number of civilian casualties recorded since the fall of the Taliban regime in 2001."

Mid-Year 2010

"The human cost of the armed conflict in Afghanistan is escalating in 2010. In the first six months of the year civilian casualties – including deaths and injuries of civilians - increased by 31 per cent over the same period in 2009."

Annual report 2010

"The human cost of the armed conflict in Afghanistan grew in 2010. The Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission and UNAMA Human Rights recorded 2,777 civilian deaths in 2010, an increase of 15 per cent compared to 2009. Over the past four years, 8,832 civilians have been killed in the conflict, with civilian deaths increasing each year."

Mid-Year 2011

"UNAMA documented 1,462 civilian deaths in the first six months of 2011, an increase of 15 percent over the same period in 2010. The main trends that led to rising civilian casualties in early 2011 were increased and widespread use of improvised explosive devices, more complex suicide attacks, an intensified campaign of targeted killings, increased ground fighting, and a rise in civilian deaths from air strikes, particularly by Apache helicopters."

Afghanistan: Ten Years On | Photojournalist Guy Smallman

2012-02-08T10:14:00.000-08:00

Photojournalist Guy Smallman has been to Afghanistan four times, working independently of the NATO media system. He is the only western journalist to have visited the scene of the Granai massacre in which 147 people, including 93 children, were killed by NATO bombing.

He returned from his latest trip in January and is touring with a photo exhibit. The work documents the everyday struggles faced by ordinary Afghans from the violence of war as well as poverty, drug abuse, and unemployment. Realities that are often ignored or obscured in mainstream media coverage.

He also has a short film called “Fifteen million Afghans”.

To see the special 6 page supplement Afghanistan: 10 Years On in Peace News click here. To see more of Guy’s photographs click here.

*****

Here are more details about the speaking tour. It is organized by Quaker Peace and Social Witness and Peace News. Tomorrow they are at Friends House in London. He is joined by ex-soldier Benn Griffin.

Profiles of Nonviolent Resistance | Maya Evans

2012-02-08T09:38:00.000-08:00

In December Maya Evans was part of a peace delegation to Afghanistan. Below is a profile she had published in Peace News. Peace News is a grassroots peace and justice movement building magazine in the UK.

Forgiving the Taliban

In the morning we were visited by one of the female members of the Afghan Youth Peace Volunteers, Lena, a young, intelligent, outspoken Afghan woman who has just qualified as a teacher and has already taught in various schools inside Kabul.

Lena was very much anti-NATO intervention and felt that foreign involvement in Afghanistan was only bringing further violence and unrest. She also emphasised the importance of free state education for all, explaining that she could earn a very good wage working for private schools, but she preferred to work in government schools, educating the people of Afghanistan. She felt that providing she had food for lunch and dinner that was good enough for her.

We were then visited by Feda Mohammed, a former official in the ministry of education and now an education consultant. Over lunch, Feda, a slim, tall, middle-aged family man, dressed in a neat suit and tie, put across the opposing view to Lena. He was very much in favour of NATO and foreign intervention, his analysis was very black-and-white: Afghanistan could have either foreign occupation or the Taliban (a horrible prospect to most in Afghanistan, especially those who had experienced their previous reign). He viewed the killing of civilians by NATO as “collateral damage”, a necessary part of eradicating the Taliban, even if those deaths included his three sons.

There was a stony silence in the room.

AYPV Abduli, a 16-year-old Hazara boy from Bamiyan, whose father had been killed by the Taliban, was asked for his opinion. One of the most moving moments of my life then took place.

Abduli was silent for a while and then he quietly said: “If a Talib was in this room now, I know there is only one way forward to resolve the situation… forgiveness”.

The room fell silent.

I looked down and wept quietly. I wept for his pain and I wept for his strength and wisdom. I was astounded that such a young person, who had experienced one of the worst things a child could endure, had chosen the hardest path to walk. Without a doubt that moment will stay with me forever and whenever I weaken in my conviction to walk the path of nonviolence and forgiveness I will think of Abduli.

Click here for more stories about the Afghan Youth Peace Volunteers.

Maya also participated in a recent delegation to India with members of the Afghan Youth Peace Volunteers to India. Visit their inspiring travelogue here.

Death and Deception | A Colonel Speaks Out

2012-02-07T18:35:00.000-08:00

Death and Deception in Afghanistan
Matthew Hoh | Monday 6 February 2012

“Today, the New York Times reports that an active duty Army officer, Lieutenant Colonel Daniel L. Davis, has submitted a classified report to members of Congress that documents the failings of US policy in Afghanistan. More importantly, LTC Davis attests that senior leaders of the Department of Defense, both uniformed and civilian, have intentionally and consistently misled the American people and Congress on the conduct and progress of the Afghan War. The 58-page classified report he prepared, briefed and submitted to senators, representatives and cleared staff members over the last few weeks utilizes nearly 50 historical and current classified sources and draws from 250 interviews he conducted with soldiers throughout Afghanistan during his most recent year-long combat deployment.

In addition to the classified report, LTC Davis has written an 86-page unclassified version, as well as an article, published today by the Armed Forces Journal (below). These reports depict a near institutionalizing of dishonesty and deception by senior DOD leadership towards the American public and Congress. LTC Davis documents, as well, examples from the Iraq war and major weapons procurement programs to illustrate the persistent duplicity of the Pentagon's senior ranks. Victory narratives, career ambitions and institutional protection fuel these deceits. Deceits that have only delivered the loss of thousands of lives, the waste of hundreds of billions of dollars and the failure to achieve American policy objectives.”

Truth, lies and Afghanistan: How military leaders have let us down
BY LT. COL. DANIEL L. DAVIS

“I spent last year in Afghanistan, visiting and talking with U.S. troops and their Afghan partners. My duties with the Army’s Rapid Equipping Force took me into every significant area where our soldiers engage the enemy. Over the course of 12 months, I covered more than 9,000 miles and talked, traveled and patrolled with troops in Kandahar, Kunar, Ghazni, Khost, Paktika, Kunduz, Balkh, Nangarhar and other provinces.

What I saw bore no resemblance to rosy official statements by U.S. military leaders about conditions on the ground."

He ends with an appeal for truth.

"When it comes to deciding what matters are worth plunging our nation into war and which are not, our senior leaders owe it to the nation and to the uniformed members to be candid — graphically, if necessary — in telling them what’s at stake and how expensive potential success is likely to be. U.S. citizens and their elected representatives can decide if the risk to blood and treasure is worth it.

Likewise when having to decide whether to continue a war, alter its aims or to close off a campaign that cannot be won at an acceptable price, our senior leaders have an obligation to tell Congress and American people the unvarnished truth and let the people decide what course of action to choose. That is the very essence of civilian control of the military. The American people deserve better than what they’ve gotten from their senior uniformed leaders over the last number of years. Simply telling the truth would be a good start."

The Forgotten Victims |A Film by Firouz Rahimi

2012-02-03T14:14:00.000-08:00

- Click image for link -

Activists in Afghanistan are using film to open conversations with young people about the countries recent history and concepts of transitional justice and accountability.

“ My aim is to start out a dialogue regarding the implementation and transition of human rights issues in this political climate. So that the audiences will want to discuss it openly and not shove it under the carpet. Many HR institutions have said repeatedly that the war crimes committed in this country are extremely widespread. In the last 30 years - especially up until 2001 – many people lost their lives or were disabled as a result of various wars, they have to live with it every day.”

- Firouz Rahimi, Filmmaker

Additional Resources:

The Afghan Experience With War

Healing the Legacy of Conflict in Afghanistan

Afghanistan Experience With Conflict 1978 – 2009

State of the Taliban 2012 | Leaked NATO Report

2012-02-02T11:06:00.000-08:00

The drawing is from a project with Afghan students who were asked to create images of what their lives are like.

"The BBC and The Times have obtained a classified NATO assessment of the Taleban. The leaked report, which has made headline news, has informed us that NATO thinks Pakistan is supporting the Taleban, that the Taleban are defiant and enjoy widespread support, that Afghans frequently prefer them to their corrupt government and that Afghan government officials have secretly reached out to insurgents locally.

The presence and actions of international forces as a driver of the insurgency apparently did not come up in the detainee interrogations which form the basis for the assessment. That all this should be news only exposes the wishful thinking which lie at the heart of the international mission in Afghanistan, says AAN senior analyst, Kate Clark."

According to The Times, the State of the Taleban report was put together by the US military at Bagram air base in Afghanistan for top NATO officers last month. President Karzai also demanded last month that the prison be turned over to Afghan control.

The Emperor’s New Clothes

“What the report appears to be silent on is the other huge factor driving the war, the ten year foreign occupation – as many Afghans, whether they welcome international forces or not, call it. Night raids, killing civilians, detentions - even when all three of these actions may be legal and/or militarily necessary - upset people. Then there was the torture, mainly by US forces, in the first couple of years and the support the international military gives to abusive Afghan actors. Curiously, there is no mention of this - did the detainees not mention the foreigners?”

***

“One of the major problems of the post-2001 settlement has been the narratives told about and to Afghans and to the voters back home which were never really anchored in reality. There has been a frequent gap between talk and belief and between talk and action. Praise for the Afghan army and police in public, while in private, there is criticism and worry. Promises of democracy and then white-washing of fraudulent ballots. Assurances that human rights will be protected and then an endorsement of impunity for both war criminals and those currently abusing their power.

In Afghanistan, few are fooled and it leads many to wonder (a question I have been asked on many occasions) whether the foreigners are stupid or complicit. Back home, voters have also become increasingly bewildered as news of corruption and abuses have filtered back even as the same story is peddled by their governments: their brave soldiers fighting to defend a democratic, women-friendly state against the black-hearted, terrorist Taleban. Voters are convinced that Afghanistan – in its current incarnation - is not worth fighting or footing the bill for.

There is a chance that the leaking of this report might be an Emperor’s New Clothes moment when the international powers start speaking honestly – or at least not lying – about what they are doing in Afghanistan and what they actually hope to achieve. On the ground, their current narratives of success and progress are fooling very few. When there is such a deep gap between what is thought and what is said and policy is built on what one wishes were true, failure surely awaits.”

Additional analysis with NYT’s

SIGAR Report on Relief and Reconstruction

2012-02-01T10:06:00.000-08:00

On Monday the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction released the final report for 2011. These reports are mandated by law and must be delivered to Congress each quarter. The report covers the time period that marked 10 years since the US assault in October of 2001 and carries the tag line '10 years of reconstruction 2001-2011'.

Of particular interest is the fact that 61% of the money articulated for relief and reconstruction is actually spent on funding, arming and training government forces, private militias, and undercover units that operate along the border with Pakistan.

The report confirms that 98,933 U.S. forces remained in the country at year’s end.

It does not dwell on the Afghan government demands to disband the failed military-led Provisional Reconstruction Teams linking US military strategy with development and reconstruction, or the Afghan government demand that armed private security firms be disbanded.

Nevertheless, these are authoritative figures on what the US is actually spending resources on in Afghanistan. You can see from the chart above that all assistance for humanitarian relief will be eliminated in 2012.

The chart graphically shows the growing dependance on exclusive military priorities over the years.

For this year 88% will be military.

Simply appalling and immoral.

***

I added the percentages in brackets for the text below lifted from the report.

SIGAR – 2011 Final Report - Some Figures

As of December 31, 2011, the United States had appropriated nearly $85.54 billion for relief and reconstruction in Afghanistan since FY 2002. This total has been approximately allocated as follows:

• $52.14 billion for security (61%)
• $20.28 billion for governance and development (24%)
• $5.67 billion for counter-narcotics efforts (7%)
• $2.24 billion for humanitarian aid (3%)
• $5.20 billion for oversight and operations (6%)

US Troop Levels – 31 December 2012

According to U.S. Forces - Afghanistan (USFOR-A), 98,933 U.S. forces were serving in the country as of December 31, 2011.

• 71,742 to ISAF
• 2,780 to NTM-A/CSTC-A
• 14,565 to USFOR-A
• 9,846 to other assignments (CENTCOM)

Additional Resources:

Eisenhower Research Project | War Costs $4 Trillion

3 Cents on the Dollar

Kabul: A City at Work | Who is the Graffiti Artist?

2012-01-31T11:15:00.000-08:00

Check out Kabul: A City At Work page.

Who is the Graffiti Artist?

I was born and raised in Iran and in the last 3 years of school I wanted to chose art as my major subject but I was told that as an Afghan I wasn’t allowed. So I studied accounting which was okay but a million miles away from painting.

When my family came back to Afghanistan I tried again and passed into the Faculty of Fine Arts at Kabul University. Art is such a part of my life that I don’t know what would happen if was not able to continue. It would be like having a piece cut out of me.

At present I work with a team of 10 Afghan artists called Roshd, meaning ‘growth’. I do Modern Art. It is something new and so Afghans are against it on principal. They say it’s a western imposition. I don’t see that it has anything to do with the West if the artist and artistic concept are Afghan. My interpretation of art is founded on the classical techniques and styles I was taught.

In December 2010 there was a graffiti workshop that was organized by Combat Communications. Until then, I didn’t know what graffiti was; I had seen some things on the walls in the city but it was advertising not art.I was used to working with paints on canvasses but when I used a spray can for the first time and worked on a big wall it was exciting and cool and such an achievement.

At first I didn’t know what to graffiti as the wall was so big and the spray cans took time to get used to but Chu was a really good teacher. I wanted to do something about women’s rights in Afghanistan and the burqa, but in an ironic way and take the idea of the burqa away from how we are used to seeing it.

But when I was working I had images of all the problems in Afghanistan and all the problems women have here. It was all in front of me, and I felt I wasn’t doing them justice. I worked on an image of a woman in burqa sitting on the ground and had made up a poem about her life. I did few others like her as I wanted to mix the modern style of my painting with their past life to show what kind of life women have in this age.

When I paint, I often paint fish covered with bubbles over their bodies it’s a conceptual idea I have created about not being free to express yourself.

I mean, if a fish opens its mouth, bubbles come out, right? And if its mouth is closed, there are no bubbles. So the bubbles I paint are the bubbles of things it wants to say but can’t. All the bubbles get stuck in its body like artistic ideas with no avenue for expression.

I haven’t been to many places to graffiti. One was the workshop and the other was at the Goethe Institute which is a secure and means I don’t get hassle on the streets, which as a girl, happens almost daily. Sadly It means I don’t get to practice that much so people are like, ‘How can you call yourself a graffiti artist if you can’t graffiti on buildings?’ But it’s just too dangerous to walk around on the streets. Once I went to the Russian Cultural Centre to graffiti and was so scared. It was dark and damp and I was afraid of stepping on a landmine or something.

I graffiti in my own way at home. I have photographs of old alleyways and the walls of Kabul and I graffiti the photograph. It is a comment on the restrictions of women in its own way.

In any case, I don’t think Afghan society is ready to accept graffiti as a form of art. The country has been in war for so long that most people are still pre-occupied with politics or just trying to stay alive.

But generally I only have one wish. I want to see Afghanistan vying with other countries in the art world. In Iran, if you mentioned Afghanistan people would think negative things. In the West, people say there is no art in Afghanistan but if only they came here, they could see what is developing, albeit very slowly. I personally think that art can be so useful for changing the situation of a society, it is part of the culture and culture has a role in representing a country. Everyone has to try as much as possible to rebuild the country, not just artists.

Assassinations | CIA Drone Strikes | US Policy

2012-01-31T09:16:00.000-08:00

At an open public briefing yesterday, President Obama admitted that the United States has been directing the CIA to carry out targeted killings, or assassinations, in Pakistan.

The drone program, extensively discussed among activists and legal scholars, has been Washington's worst-kept secret. Last night CIA drones killed 12 in Yemen.

Here is the big question. At what point does official acknowledgment of an on-going 'covert' action that is killing thousands of people demand accountability? And, how do you stop it?

Jonathan Master writing with the Council on Foreign Relations lays out the post 9/11 strategy and rationale for CIA and special forces targeted killings.

“The United States adopted targeted killing as an essential tactic to pursue those responsible for the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. The Pentagon and the Central Intelligence Agency have employed the controversial practice with more frequency in recent years, both as part of ongoing combat operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as in counterterrorism efforts in Pakistan, Yemen, and Somalia.”

The domestic rational rest on the expansive language of a statute passed by the US Congress just days after the 9/11 attack.

“As a matter of domestic law, the legal underpinning for U.S. counterterrorism operations and the targeted killing of members of the Taliban, al-Qaeda, and its affiliates across the globe is the 2001 Authorization for the Use of Military Force (AUMF), which the U.S. Congress passed just days after 9/11. The statute empowers the president "to use all necessary and appropriate force" in pursuit of those responsible for the terrorist attacks.”

The New American Foundation estimates that drone strikes in Pakistan alone have killed between 1,700 and 2,700 people in the last eight years. The government of Pakistan has consistently condemned the bombing attacks as a violation of its sovereignty.

Additional Resources: How the CIA Became a Killing Machine

Out of the Loop: The Future of Drones | Shane Harris

2012-01-30T08:47:00.000-08:00

Shane Harris reveals the dangers of relying on robotic/computer technology for modern weapons systems. He does not neglect the threats to international law and morality as well.

“In 1988, the U.S.S. Vincennes, a guided missile cruiser on patrol in the Persian Gulf, shot down an Iranian passenger jet, after the ship’s Aegis targeting system mistook it for a military fighter. The crew of the Vincennes could tell from the plane’s course, speed, and radio signal that it was a civilian aircraft. But Aegis, which had been programmed to identify large Soviet bombers, said otherwise.

“Even though the hard data was telling the crew that the plane wasn’t a fighter jet, they trusted what the computer was telling them more,” Singer writes in Wired for War. “Aegis was on semiautomatic mode, but not one of the eighteen sailors and officers on the command crew was willing to challenge the computer’s wisdom. They authorized it to fire.”

Singer notes that the Navy had such faith in Aegis’s abilities to identify a true enemy that the Vincennes was the only ship in the area allowed to fire on its own volition, without the crew seeking permission from more senior officers in the fleet. All 299 passengers and crew aboard the Iranian jet died, among them sixty-six children.”

Here is the introduction...

"In the game of life and evolution there are three players at the table: human beings, nature, and machines. I am firmly on the side of nature. But nature,I suspect, is on the side of the machines."

—George Dyson in Darwin Among the Machines

"If you want to understand how human beings stack up next to machines in the conduct of modern warfare, consider this:

In World War II, it took a fleet of 1,000 B-17 bombers—flown, navigated, and manned by a crew of 10,000 men—to destroy one Axis ground target. American bombs were so imprecise that, on average, only one in five fell within 1,000 feet of where they were aimed. Aerial bombing was a clumsy affair, utterly dependent on the extraordinary labor of human beings.

Just one generation later, that was no longer true. In the Vietnam War, it took thirty F-4 fighter-bombers, each flown and navigated by only two men, to destroy a target. That was a 99.4 percent reduction in manpower. The precision of attack was also greatly enhanced by the first widespread use of laser-guided munitions.

After Vietnam, humans’ connection to air war became more attenuated, and less relevant. In the Gulf War, one pilot flying one plane could hit two targets. The effectiveness of the human-machine pairing was breathtaking. A single “smart bomb” could do the work of 1,000 planes dropping more than 9,000 bombs in World War II. By the time the United States went to war in Afghanistan and Iraq, one pilot in one plane could destroy six targets. Their weapons were guided by global positioning satellites orbiting thousands of miles above the surface of the earth. And increasingly, the pilots weren’t actually inside their planes anymore.

The historical trend is sobering. As aircraft and weapons have become more precise, human beings have become less essential to the conduct of war. And that may suit the military just fine."

Do Drones Undermine Democracy?
P.W. Singer | 21 January 2012 | New York Times

"I do not condemn these strikes; I support most of them. What troubles me, though, is how a new technology is short-circuiting the decision-making process for what used to be the most important choice a democracy could make. Something that would have previously been viewed as a war is simply not being treated like a war.

THE change is not limited to covert action. Last spring, America launched airstrikes on Libya as part of a NATO operation to prevent Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi’s government from massacring civilians. In late March, the White House announced that the American military was handing over combat operations to its European partners and would thereafter play only a supporting role."

US Drones Patrolling Its Skies Provokes Outrage in Iraq
Eric Schmitt and Michael Schmidt | 30 January 2012 | New York Times

"A senior American official said that negotiations were under way to obtain authorization for the current drone operations, but Ali al-Mosawi, a top adviser to Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki; Iraq’s national security adviser, Falih al-Fayadh; and the acting minister of interior, Adnan al-Asadi, all said in interviews that they had not been consulted by the Americans.

Mr. Asadi said that he opposed the drone program: “Our sky is our sky, not the U.S.A.’s sky.”

Additional articles on Drones.

NATO Purchases Leave Afghans Short of Fuel

2012-01-28T14:08:00.000-08:00

NATO Purchases Leave Afghans Short of Fuel
By Khan Mohammad Danishju - Afghanistan

As fuel becomes scarcer and pricier in the Afghan capital Kabul, many are pointing the finger at NATO for buying up oil products domestically to make up for blocked supplies from Pakistan.

NATO has been unable to bring in fuel across the Pakistan border since late November, when Islamabad imposed a blockade and choked off a major supply artery for the 130,000-strong American-led force.

Relations between Islamabad and Washington have been deteriorating fast, and Pakistan closed the route in protest at a NATO airstrike on its border that killed 24 of its soldiers on November 26.

Since then, the United States has had to pay six times as much to import supplies via alternative routes, according to an Associated Press report on January 20.

While most of NATO’s supplies are now coming in via Uzbekistan along a route known as the Northern Distribution Network, NDN. Even before Pakistan closed down the supply route, NATO was switching over to the NDN because of frequent attacks on convoys on the roads south. US officials say 85 per cent of the fuel for the military now come from the north.

Afghan businessmen say the international force is topping this up with purchases inside the country. This is affecting the market, forcing up prices and making petrol and public transport more expensive for the locals.

Farid Alokozay, head of the government agency responsible for petroleum products, said NATO was increasingly buying in fuel from domestic firms.

Mohammad Qorban Haqjo, chief executive of the Afghan Chamber of Commerce and Industry, confirmed that 20 local firms had signed a lucrative fuel supply deal with NATO.

“The contract was signed recently and is worth one billion dollars,” he said, adding that some of the firms belonged to relatives of senior Afghan officials.

NATO insists it has sufficient supplies of fuel and that the Pakistani blockade will not affect Afghans.

“The people of Afghanistan will not be challenged by NATO buying their fuel and their food. NATO’s stockpiles are more than sufficient,” NATO spokesman Brigadier-General Carsten Jacobsen said on January 2, according to the AFP news agency.

However, Kabul residents insisted they were being affected.

“Since NATO forces started buying on the domestic market, not only have prices increased, but fuel is no longer available consistently,” Hajji Sayed Ahmad, who owns a petrol station in the city’s Deh Mazang district.

The shortage has prompted him to raise his prices, much to the annoyance of his customers.

“We have fights with dozens of people every day,” Ahmad said. “They think it’s our choice to increase fuel prices.... The general public don’t realise that fuel isn’t widely available and that the foreigners are buying it up.”

Kabul taxi drivers have increased their fares, leaving people queuing in the freezing cold for hours as they wait for cheaper but more erratic bus services. Once on the buses, they find that ticket prices have also increased.

“First you can’t find a bus, and then when you do find one, you get charged double the price,” said Mohammad Afzal, a resident of the city’s District 15.

While his bus trip to work previously cost the equivalent of 60 cents, Afzal now pays one dollar.

Taxi driver Mohammad Amin said inflation was driving him out of business. He has regular rows with customers because he has raised his fares, but even then he is taking home virtually nothing, he said. He said that when he asked petrol station owners why fuel prices had gone up, they blamed NATO.

Kabul University economist Hamidullah Faruqi said the capital’s transport system was in danger of collapsing unless the government intervened in the fuel crisis.

Separately from the clampdown on NATO supplies, Afghans say hundreds of their trucks are held up in Pakistan, further affecting the price of goods.

The Afghan Divide | Sarah Chayes

2012-01-26T14:14:00.000-08:00

Is the United States succeeding in Afghanistan?

It may seem like an absurd question, but in policy circles, analyzing that question means a great deal. Sarah Chayes explores the contradictions between the assessments and recommendations of the U.S. intelligence agencies and the U.S. military/political agencies. The article in full is below.

She also brings in the even greater divide that is the Afghan experience.

“Humanitarian groups, by contrast, were tabulating all violence suffered by civilians, no matter who the perpetrator, including kidnappings and shootings at the hands of the militias that the U.S. military has armed to fight the Taliban.

Afghans themselves are attuned to something less tangible: the likelihood of danger. Take last September's attack by a few militants shooting rocket-launched grenades from a tower in central Kabul, which shut down the U.S. Embassy and nearby NATO headquarters for 20 hours.

Foreign officials might record such an incident as a single attack. But to Kabul residents, it sent an overpowering message that their city was unsafe, that the terrorists could do what they wanted.”

She ends with an appeal.

“Though I doubt the nation's intelligence community can be easily cowed, even by three generals and an ambassador, the impulse to interfere is wrong. Writing problems out of documents won't make them go away. Obama deserves a clear exposition of competing assessments of national security issues. Then it's for him to hash out the differences in internal debate.”

The Afghan Divide | Sarah Chayes

How should we measure success in Afghanistan? It's a crucial question, but there isn't much agreement on an answer.

In mid-January, this newspaper ran a story on the latest National Intelligence Estimate on Afghanistan, a classified assessment drafted by analysts at more than a dozen U.S. intelligence agencies. According to The Times, the report "warns that security gains from an increase in troops have been undercut by pervasive corruption, incompetent governance and Taliban fighters operating from neighboring Pakistan."

Those with direct responsibility for the war — top military commanders and the U.S. ambassador to Kabul — reportedly contested the report's findings in a written dissent. The dispute highlights an ongoing struggle to shape U.S. perceptions on Afghanistan.

Analysts like using numbers to bolster their arguments because numbers seem hard and fast. But they don't always agree. Last summer, for example, the NATO command in Kabul announced that for the first time since 2006, insurgent attacks were down compared with the previous year. But United Nations agencies and humanitarian organizations were reporting large upticks in violence and its effect on civilians.

Numbers draw their significance from what they count. In this case, the military tallied attacks that insurgents initiated where international troops were present, including improvised bombs that exploded but not ones that had been defused.

Humanitarian groups, by contrast, were tabulating all violence suffered by civilians, no matter who the perpetrator, including kidnappings and shootings at the hands of the militias that the U.S. military has armed to fight the Taliban.

Afghans themselves are attuned to something less tangible: the likelihood of danger. Take last September's attack by a few militants shooting rocket-launched grenades from a tower in central Kabul, which shut down the U.S. Embassy and nearby NATO headquarters for 20 hours.

Foreign officials might record such an incident as a single attack. But to Kabul residents, it sent an overpowering message that their city was unsafe, that the terrorists could do what they wanted.

Underlying the current dispute over the intelligence estimate is another, deeper divide. The assessment reportedly acknowledges the hard work by Afghan and foreign troops in driving the Taliban out of many of its strongholds. That success is clearly visible in Kandahar, where I have lived for most of the last decade. But its significance is less clear.

"Yes, we've made gains against the Taliban around Kandahar," a minister and former Kandahar governor told me recently. "But it takes 18,000 men for a single district. We can't sustain that."

And there have been other costs. As troops moved into rural districts the Taliban had held, they built dirt roads right through farmers' vineyards and orchards. I saw the results when I went to visit a friend's family land. Debris had been shoved into an irrigation channel that once watered the whole village, razor wire had been looped across a road, and buildings where families dry their grapes to make prized raisins had been destroyed.

There were good tactical reasons for inflicting such damage. Many of the buildings had been booby-trapped by the retreating Taliban, or they obstructed the troops' lines of sight. But the local economy, already one of the most threadbare on Earth, has been badly hurt. Compensation money was paid out, but still, success against the Taliban came at great cost to residents.

They are left with the question: What now? If their grapevines or fruit trees dry out, what should they plant? If insurgents offer poppy seeds, should they accept? And what about the Afghan soldiers who stole the furniture out of the blown-up buildings? Villagers can't take them to court because the judicial system is deeply corrupt. So who can give them recourse? A sense of justice? Maybe the Taliban.

If, on the other hand, the Taliban does move back in, or if it is given power in some deal negotiated by the United States and an Afghan government most of its citizens don't view as legitimate, how will the many Afghans who don't wish to be subjected to Taliban rule react?

The Afghan security forces the United States has been working so hard to build up are largely commanded by viscerally anti-Taliban groups. Is U.S. policy driving Afghanistan back toward civil war?

It is this potential for systemic collapse that the intelligence estimate reportedly highlights, to the dismay of the dissenting officials.

But even if withdrawing on the current schedule brings about Afghanistan's implosion, that might still be the right thing to do. If the U.S. government chooses not to address the two fundamental political and diplomatic challenges its intelligence estimate is said to highlight — corrupt government and Pakistan's support for extremist violence — then why waste more blood and treasure? But President Obama must make that decision in full cognizance of the dangers, so he can plan for them and try to mitigate some of them. He needs more divergent views, not fewer.

The aggressive efforts by some to spin perceptions of Afghanistan have grown unseemly as well as dangerous. I've seen dissent disappear from interagency documents. I've heard officials tell public affairs officers to pressure reporters about their stories.

Though I doubt the nation's intelligence community can be easily cowed, even by three generals and an ambassador, the impulse to interfere is wrong. Writing problems out of documents won't make them go away. Obama deserves a clear exposition of competing assessments of national security issues. Then it's for him to hash out the differences in internal debate.

Sarah Chayes lived and worked in Afghanistan from 2001 to 2010. She advised the NATO command in Kabul and the U.S. Joint Staff, wrote "The Punishment of Virtue: Inside Afghanistan After the Taliban," and is a contributing writer to Opinion.

The Best Way to Peace | Anatol Lieven

2012-01-25T12:52:00.000-08:00

A political/military overview of Afghanistan’s recent history with foreign intervention and war. Using the Soviet experience – and a variety of books – Lieven offers valuable analysis and suggestions. The failure to design and implement inclusive peace processes along the way have led to more violence and increased tension in the region.

The insights into US-Pakistan relations, the impact of a long-term US presence and the need to acknowledged a post-Karzai Afghanistan are all discussed.

The book list is below.

Afghanistan: The Best Way to Peace

“The United States and its allies today find themselves in a position in Afghanistan similar to that of the Soviet Union in the late 1980s, after Mikhail Gorbachev decided on military withdrawal by a fixed deadline. They are in a race against the clock to build up a regime and army that will survive their withdrawal, while either seeking a peace agreement with the leaders of the insurgent forces or splitting off their more moderate, pragmatic, and mercenary elements and making an agreement with them. The Soviets succeeded at least partially in some of these objectives, while failing utterly to achieve a peace settlement.”

Negotiations with the Taliban

“On the basis of my conversations in recent years with former leading figures in the Taliban and Pakistanis close to Mullah Omar and his colleagues, my own judgment is that a peace settlement between the US, the administration in Kabul, and the Afghan Taliban would probably have to be based on some variant of the following elements:

(1) complete withdrawal of all US troops according to a fixed timetable;
(2) exclusion of al-Qaeda and other international terrorist groups from areas controlled by the Taliban;
(3) a government in Kabul headed—at least nominally—by men the Taliban would see as good Muslims and Afghan patriots;
(4) negotiations on a new Afghan constitution involving the Taliban and leading to the transfer of most powers from the center to the regions;
(5) de facto—though not formal—Taliban control of the region of Greater Kandahar, and by the Haqqanis of Greater Paktika;
(6) a return to the Taliban offer of 1999–2001 of a complete ban on opium poppy cultivation and heroin production in the areas under their control, in return for international aid.

On the last point, it should be remembered that the Taliban are the only force to have achieved such a degree of control of the drug trade during the past thirty years. Certainly, based on their record to date, the idea that our own Afghan allies will do so after the US withdraws is pure fantasy.”

Pakistan, the impact of a long-term US military presence, preparing for a post-Karzai Afghanistan.

"For the Pakistani military as a whole, however, a peace settlement along the lines I have sketched above would fulfill its essential needs. It would keep the influence of India in Afghanistan at a distance from Pakistan’s borders. It would ensure adequate Pashtun representation in Afghan government, limiting the power of forces linked to India. It would remove the catastrophic threat of Indian-backed Tajik forces fighting an ethnic civil war in Afghanistan’s Pashtun territories, sending fresh millions of refugees fleeing into Pakistan. And it would end the US drone strikes and raids that are infuriating the lower ranks of the Pakistani military and leading to catastrophic clashes between Pakistani and US forces along the Afghan border.

Such an outcome would serve a vital interest of the United States. For it is no exaggeration to say that the tension between the Pakistani military and the United States now poses a threat to US security that dwarfs either the Taliban or the battered remnants of the old al-Qaeda. As I have found from speaking with Pakistani soldiers, and from visiting military families in the chief areas of recruitment in northern Punjab and Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa, the fury of the junior ranks against the US is reaching a dangerous pitch. These soldiers share both the sympathy for the Afghan Taliban of the population at large and that population’s deep distrust of US intentions. They are increasingly angry with their own commanders, whom they view as cowardly and corrupt; and they are profoundly humiliated when they return to their towns and villages and are asked by neighbors—and even their own women—why as slaves of the US they are killing fellow Muslims.

There seems, as a result, a strong likelihood that if Pakistani soldiers encounter US soldiers on what is or what they believe to be Pakistani soil, they will fight. This is apparently what happened in the incident on November 26 in which twenty-four Pakistani soldiers were killed by US forces, leading to a drastic further deterioration in relations (including retaliatory closing of the border to NATO). That encounter was bad enough; but if such clashes continue then at some point things will go the other way, and Americans will be killed—possibly a lot of Americans, if for example the Pakistanis shoot down a helicopter. If on the other hand the Pakistani generals order their men not to fight, the resulting outrage could undermine discipline to the point where the unity of the army could be in question—and if the army breaks apart, not only will immense munitions and expertise flow to terrorists, but the Pakistani state will collapse. This would be a historic triumph for al-Qaeda and its allies—and like the invasion of Iraq, one made possible for them by the United States.

To my astonishment, I find that some US officials are now arguing that a principal reason why the US must retain bases in Afghanistan—even at the price of making a settlement with the Taliban impossible—is in order to continue striking at al-Qaeda and other extremist targets in Pakistan’s border areas. More than ten years after September 11, it is simply appalling that supposedly well-informed people are still treating the terrorist threat in such a crude and mechanistic fashion. Have they not realized that the membership of al-Qaeda and its allies is not fixed, but depends on al-Qaeda’s ability to recruit among Muslims infuriated by US actions? Or that a terrorist attack on the US is as likely—more likely—to be planned in Karachi, Lahore, the English town of Bradford, or New York as in Pakistan’s frontier areas? An essential US motive for a peace settlement in Afghanistan, one allowing complete withdrawal from Afghanistan, is precisely that it would allow America to pull back from the existing confrontation with Pakistan—not continue it into the indefinite future, with all the gains that this would create for resentment by extremists.

Even if the advantages of a settlement are recognized by Washington, how can the US sell it to its allies in Afghanistan, to President Karzai and his followers, and to the leaders of the non-Pashtun ethnic groups? The answer lies partly in assuring all the other parties that the US will continue to guarantee military support against any future Taliban move to attack Kabul or invade the north; and partly in the approaching train wreck that the simultaneous departure of both US troops and Karzai may cause.

The pursuit of a peace settlement should be combined with the discussion of a post-Karzai political order in Kabul, and with an Afghan national debate on reform of the constitution, which is now widely recognized to be deeply flawed and far too centralized, and which was never truly approved by the Afghan people. The first step to peace with the Taliban therefore should be to acknowledge their right to participate in a genuine national debate on a new Afghan constitution.

Finally, what of the fate of the social progress made since 2001, especially with respect to women’s rights? Jonathan Steele gives a powerful answer to the question. The melancholy truth is that the Taliban are no more reactionary in this regard than most of Afghan rural society. As the briefest glance at media coverage of Afghanistan in recent years makes clear, the limited gains for women’s rights have been made only under intense Western pressure and in the face of apparent strong resistance from our own Afghan political and military allies.

Where the Taliban were different—and attracted international opprobrium—was not in their basic culture, but in the way they codified the suppression of women in state law rather than leaving it to local and family custom. Moreover, they extended this suppression to the cities where women had made real though precarious progress over the course of the twentieth century. The task of the US and its allies therefore must be to preserve the cities at least as areas where women can continue to enjoy more rights and opportunities in the hope that a new culture will gradually spread from them to the countryside.

This is a depressing prospect when compared with the hopes that followed the overthrow of the Taliban ten years ago. But let us face facts. Our societies and official establishments have demonstrated beyond any possible doubt that they lack the stamina and capacity for sacrifice necessary to remain in Afghanistan for the decades that would be necessary to transform the position of Afghan women as a whole; and there is nothing ethical or responsible about setting goals from the safety of London or Washington that informed people know cannot in fact be reached. We do have a chance to try to do better than the Soviets and to try to save Afghanistan from an endless future of civil war, and to establish a peace in which future progress may be possible. It is our duty to take that chance."

The books

Afgantsy: The Russians in Afghanistan, 1979–89
by Rodric Braithwaite

A Long Goodbye: The Soviet Withdrawal from Afghanistan
by Artemy M. Kalinovsky

Killing the Cranes: A Reporter’s Journey Through Three Decades of War in Afghanistan
by Edward Girardet

Ghosts of Afghanistan: Hard Truths and Foreign Myths
by Jonathan Steele

The Wars of Afghanistan: Messianic Terrorism, Tribal Conflicts, and the Failures of Great Powers
by Peter Tomsen

Afghanistan and Pakistan: Conflict, Extremism, and Resistance to Modernity
by Riaz Mohammad Khan

Report on Progress Toward Security and Stability in Afghanistan
US Department of Defense

Decoding the New Taliban: Insights from the Afghan Field
edited by Antonio Giustozzi

An Enemy We Created: The Myth of the Taliban/Al Qaeda Merger in Afghanistan, 1970–2010. by Alex Strick van Linschoten and Felix Kuehn

Warlords and the liberal peace: state-building in Afghanistan

2012-01-19T11:37:00.000-08:00

This article by Roger Mac Ginty is pretty heavy on theory but insightful and important. It is part of the ‘war of ideas’ that are inspiring so many Afghans today. Movements for accountability and transitional justice, calls for de-centralized power-sharing, negotiations with the Taliban, and the need to rewrite the constitution are all being discussed.

The article helps to explain where the international community is coming from. Liberal peace in contemporary peacebuilding is the promotion of democracy, market-based economic reforms and a rage of other institutions associated with dominant states.

By examining these concepts Mac Ginty offers a critique of a framework that has guided virtually every post Cold-War intervention conducted in the name of the ‘international community’. That means leading states, leading international organizations and the international financial institutions.

This is about Afghanistan, an exploration of the systems that produce and maintain warlordism, and a discussion on the implications of incorporating warlords into government for the liberal peace. The pro's and con's excerpted.

Overview

"This article draws out the contradictions in the liberal peace that have become apparent in post-Taliban state-building in Afghanistan. In particular, it focuses on how warlords have been incorporated into the government. The government has been unable to achieve a monopoly of violence and has relied on the support of some powerful militia commanders to secure itself. This raises a number of practical and ethical questions for the liberal peace. The focus of the article is on warlordism, rather than in providing detailed narrative accounts of particular warlords. The case illustrates the difficulty of extending the liberal peace in the context of an ongoing insurgency."

***

"Criticisms of the liberal peace are extensive, and conform to the critical traditional in peace studies that is skeptical of ‘problem-solving’ approaches to conflict that seem to minister to manifestations but avoid structural factors. The criticisms can be listed in abbreviated form:

. Ethnocentric (conforming to the cultural and policy mores of the global North);
. Elitist (power is restricted to national and international elites);
. Security-centric (privileges order and security over emancipation and diversity);
. Superficial (disinterested in the underlying causes of conflict and inequality);
. Technocratic and rigid (it reduces peace-building to a series of technocratic,
. Privileges neo-liberal economic policies (it is insufficiently aware of the human costs of shock therapy);
. Conservative (despite emancipatory liberal language, it rarely heralds significant social change).

Notwithstanding the lengthy list of criticisms, and case study evidence to back them up, the liberal peace is not short of defenders. The most prominent defense stems from the international organizations, states, INGOs and policy think-tanks actively engaged in liberal peace projects. They point to the lives saved and improved by liberal interventionism, and note how it is often only leading states in the global North that have the logistical capability and political will to make stabilizing interventions into societies emerging from violent conflict. Moreover, they often stress the paucity of viable alternatives to the liberal peace. Quinn and Cox argue that narratives of neo-imperialism or US hegemony miss the point. Instead, the US and other liberal powers operate benignly: ‘whatever its shortcomings, the settlements produced by American driven interventions are often, at least arguably, equal or superior in quality to the social circumstances they have been imposed to address’."

Reconciliation, Justice and Mobilization of War Victims

2012-01-19T08:54:00.000-08:00

Sari Kouvo and Dallas Mazoori have an accounting of steps being taken in Afghanistan to embrace the concepts of transitional justice. The article was published in the November issue of the International Journal of Transitional Justice.

"Victims are the first people who want peace but peace should come with justice. We do not want revenge or to wash blood with blood but at least these criminals should come and publicly apologize to the people of Afghanistan.

– Man whose brother was arbitrarily detained, tortured and murdered by the Taliban, speaking at the Victims’ Jirga for Justice, Kabul, 9 May 2010"

Mural Image: The Women See Through a Different Lens
Janet Braun-Reinitz, Brooklyn, NY
Part of Windows and Mirrors

"I lost two of my children during the civil war. They imprisoned my husband, a medical doctor, for 10 months under the Taliban and he lost his mind under their torture. Under the present government, a judge who had been bribed deprived me of the ruins I had converted to a house, and gave it to somebody who had arrived from Canada.

– Woman who stated she had been a victim of all periods of the conflict, speaking at the Victims’ Jirga for Justice, Kabul, 9 May 2010"

“This article traces the early stages of civil society mobilization for transitional justice and recent efforts to establish a network of war victims in Afghanistan. Specifically, it focuses on the development of the Transitional Justice Coordination Group and its victim-centered activities, such as organizing a Victims’ Jirga for Justice in 2010 and a National Victims’ Conference in 2011. It also situates these developments in the context of the broader transitional justice and reconciliation processes occurring in Afghanistan.”

“Afghanistan has faced over three decades of conflict, beginning with a Communist coup in 1978, followed by a decade of Soviet occupation, a civil war, the emergence of the Taliban regime and, after the US-led international military intervention, ethnic and political tensions within the internationally supported government led by President Hamid Karzai and now a military conflict between a resurgent Taliban and the Afghan government and international forces. The civilian population has suffered during all phases of the conflict. Which region, ethnicity or segment of society has been most targeted has depended on who was in power at different times, but illegal detention, torture, disappearances, killings and indiscriminate bombings have been an Afghan reality for decades.

The UN-sponsored power-sharing conference organized after the US-led military intervention gave little attention to justice and accountability. However, the resulting Bonn Agreement did call for the establishment of the AIHRC, which has become one of the staunchest promoters of transitional justice in Afghanistan. National consultations undertaken by the AIHRC, the findings of which were released in 2005, show that the overwhelming majority of Afghans or their families are victims of human rights violations or war crimes and that they expect perpetrators to be prosecuted or removed from power. Moreover, Afghans are clear that, for them, reconciliation and justice are interconnected. They are equally clear that justice is integral to peace, with 76 percent of respondents believing that bringing war criminals to justice would increase stability and bring security. Only 10 percent felt that stability and security would decrease as a result.”

The strength and independence of the Afghanistan Independent Human Right Commission (AIHRC) has been challenged since all of its directors were not offered contract extensions at the end of December.

Additional posts on transitional justice are here. For a detailed accounting of the Afghan experience with war, go here.

There’s More to Peace Than the Taliban

2012-01-13T14:27:00.000-08:00

Two arguments highlighting the need to have all parties involved in negotiations for a political settlement to succeed. This is part of a series that will highlight different perspectives on the US strategy of negotiations with the Taliban. So far we have looked at armed groups, next week we will highlight the responses of civil society. The picture above is from the press conference described below.

There's more to peace than Taliban | M K Bhadrakumar

“On Monday, the alliance stalwarts came out against the Barack Obama administration's secret discussions with the Taliban. These leaders - Ahmed Zia Massoud, brother of late Ahmad Shah Massoud and formerly vice president under Karzai; General Abdul Rashid Dostum, the Uzbek leader who leads the Jumbish in northern Afghanistan; Haji Mohammad Mohaqiq, the Hazara Shi'ite leader from Mazar-i-Sharif who heads the Hezb-e-Wahdat; Amrullah Saleh, former head of Afghan intelligence - held talks with a group of four US congressmen - Dona Rohrabacher, Loretta Sanchez, Louie Gohmert and Steve King (all except Sanchez are Republicans) - in Berlin over the weekend and issued a joint statement on Monday.

This is the first time that the leadership of the Tajik, Uzbek and Hazara communities has come to a common line of thinking to oppose the US's peace strategy and to present an alternate blueprint of pan-Afghan settlement. In essence, the Northern Alliance is being resuscitated as a political entity.

Their statement attacked the power structure headed by Karzai as dysfunctional, far too centralized and rampantly corrupt and demanded that in the first instance what Afghanistan needed was an inclusive parliamentary form of government "instead of a personality-oriented presidential system", which could optimally represent all ethnic and regional interests.

They also sought a thorough revamping of the country's electoral system from the present single non-transferrable voting system to a "national-accepted variant of the proportional representative system" and the direct election of governors and provincial council leaderships with delegation of powers to create budgets, collect revenue and oversee local policing and administer social sectors.

But, most important, they frontally questioned the US's locus standi to initiate peace talks with the Taliban. Their statement said:

We firmly believe that any negotiation with the Taliban can be acceptable, and therefore effective, [only] if all parties to the conflict are involved in the process. The present form of discussions with the Taliban is flawed, as it excludes anti-Taliban Afghans. It must be recalled that the Taliban extremists and their al-Qaeda supporters were defeated [in 2011] by Afghans resisting extremism with minimal human-embedded support from the United States and international community. The present negotiations with the Taliban fail to take into account the risks, sacrifices and legitimate interests of the Afghans who ended the brutal oppression of all Afghans.

In order to speed the withdrawal of international forces, the participants believe it is essential to strengthen regional and national institutions that are inclusive and represent the concerns of all the communities of Afghanistan. [Emphasis added.]

A challenge to Obama

The Northern Alliance statement challenges the US's monopoly of conflict resolution and Washington's unilateralist estimation that the Taliban are the only group that matters as protagonists on the Afghan chessboard in a peace process.

Its entire approach is to take the "Afghan settlement" from the narrow path of a secretive US-Taliban-Pakistan compromise formula to a transparent, inclusive, broadly-participatory inclusive approach that would not ignore any Afghan interest group, which has genuine mass support, from participation, with strong, elected local leaderships that enjoy delegated powers of local governance.

In sum, it offers a vision for returning Afghanistan to its historical character of a federated system of government that allows a plural society to thrive, but with a representative form of government as a modern-day democracy. Indeed, the Northern Alliance statement implies readiness to reconcile politically with the Taliban, provided they "seize" power through the ballot box rather than the guns supplied from the Pakistani military inventory, among other places.

***

Their challenge to Barack Obama is to concede for the Afghan people the very minimum privilege of an Arab Spring so that Islamism can reconcile with democracy - quintessentially, expecting the US to be on the "right side of history". It is not too much to ask for, really.”

Ambassador M K Bhadrakumar was a career diplomat in the Indian Foreign Service. His assignments included the Soviet Union, South Korea, Sri Lanka, Germany, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Uzbekistan, Kuwait and Turkey.

About Talks With The Taliban | Abbas Daiyar

“After years of denial and doubts when the idea of negotiations with the Taliban were proposed seriously for the first time, it is indeed a major development that two parties to the conflict: the United States and Taliban militants have put aside their preconditions of talks such as complete disassociation from Al-Qaeda and acceptance of the Afghan constitution and on the Taliban part, full withdrawal of all foreign troops. However, there are many problems which, if not dealt properly, can end all the excitement of a political settlement into the last abyss of uncertainty and eventual descent into chaos for Afghanistan.

***

Whatever reasons have caused the positive change in thinking of the Taliban leadership to agree on direct talks with the US, it shows their extreme political immaturity still persisting to ignore the fact that the Taliban have more serious problems of acceptability within Afghan society than with the international community.”

Abbas Daiyar is a journalist from Kabul who has worked for newspapers in Afghanistan and Pakistan. He is a member of the Editorial Board of Daily Outlook Afghanistan, and writes a biweekly op-ed.

Talking to the Taliban | Michael Semple

2012-01-13T07:30:00.001-08:00

Critical insights into the hopes, demands, and challenges of dialogue with the Taliban. This is the first of a series that will highlight different perspectives.

Michael Semple worked as Oxfam’s aid program representatives for both Pakistan and Afghanistan in the 1980’s. During the Taliban period he served with the UN as a humanitarian coordinator traveling widely across the country. He then worked as a political officer with the UN during the immediate post-2001 efforts to support the establishment of a new political order.

From 2004 to 2007 he served as Deputy to the European Union Special Representative for Afghanistan. In 2007 he was expelled from Afghanistan by President Karzai for reconciliation efforts that involved discussions with people linked to the Taliban.

How to Talk to the Taliban, Michael Semple, Foreign Affairs

“Afghan Taliban spokesman Zabiullah Mujahid's announcement last week that the group will open a political office in Qatar is part of a process that could bring a peaceful end to the war in Afghanistan. To be sure, naysayers abound both in the region and in Washington. But, conditions in 2012, unlike those in years past, offer a realistic, if difficult, opening for a way forward.”

***

“With the olive branch from the Taliban, of course, comes a demand. Zabiullah made it clear that the Taliban expects the United States to release some of its members who are currently being held in the detention facility at Guantánamo Bay. Washington's granting the request would be a classic confidence-building measure. Taliban rank and file are obsessively fascinated with the fate of detainees in American custody. If the Taliban leadership gets some of them back, it will be in a better position to justify engagement with the West to its followers and commanders."

***

“As soon as you dare consider the optimistic scenario and imagine a speedy end to the war, however, you confront very real obstacles. Here are but a few. First, token prisoner releases have to be on the table as first-order confidence-building measures. In a U.S. election year, that is unlikely. Second, in Afghanistan there is little sign of anyone having prepared the Taliban base for the idea that it will have to compromise with the old Northern Alliance and with Karzai's government in Kabul. There is little doubt that many Taliban will go into this process holding their fallback option close: wait for NATO to draw down troops in 2014, then fight for control of Kabul. Worse, the Qatar office could turn out to be little more than a Taliban ploy for tactical advantage, especially if it uses the office deal to seek international recognition without making any compromises with fellow Afghans.”

Additional resources here.

Second CIA Drone Strike in 48 hours Kills 6 | Pakistan

2012-01-12T08:06:00.000-08:00

A second CIA drone strike has killed 6 people in North Waziristan. The targeted assassinations took place in the same region as yesterday’s strike. An attack that formally recommitted the US to the deadly drone war in Pakistan.

The resumption of the strikes coincide with Pakistan’s firing of the defense secretary over a memo sent to the Unites States offering new security guidelines. It is a dangerous political moment for the Government of Pakistan.

AP reports:

“Pakistan’s prime minister fired the defense secretary Wednesday in a dispute over a memo sent to Washington that has enraged the army, escalating a crisis pitting the civilian government against the powerful military leadership.”

*****

“The unsigned memo sent to Washington asks for its help in reining in the power of the military in exchange for favorable security policies. It was allegedly masterminded by Pakistan’ envoy to Washington, who resigned in a failed attempt to stem the fallout.”

The resumption also comes on the heels of the new US defense strategy announced by President Obama last week.

That strategy calls for fewer wars like Iraq, and more wars like Afghanistan where war-fighting coordination between the Pentagon, now run by former CIA chief Leon Panetta and the CIA now run by the former US commander in Afghanistan General Petraeus is the model.

As C.I.A. director Mr. Panetta transformed the spy agency into a paramilitary organization, with its drone attacks in Afghanistan and Pakistan as well as secret bases and covert operations. General Petraeus increased the use of Special Forces and private security contractors to conduct secret intelligence missions and armed and financed militia forces in both Iraq and Afghanistan. The Guidance envisions more of this in the future.

Additional Resources:
How the CIA became a Killing Machine

CIA Drone War Resumes in Pakistan | 4 Killed

2012-01-11T11:49:00.000-08:00

Six weeks after twenty-four Pakistani soldiers were killed in a cross border attack the CIA has resumed the drone war in Pakistan. Yesterday, four people were killed near Miran Shah, the main town in the North Waziristan tribal region by CIA drone strikes.

Spencer Ackerman writing in Danger Room makes this point.

“The drone strikes are not a supplement to a war; they’re the centerpiece of how the Obama administration confronts terrorists. The White House’s plan for counter-terrorism makes that clear, as does the Pentagon’s new strategy blueprint. Anonymous administration officials, evidently itching to get back to the strikes, floated the (evidence-free) proposition in the New York Times that terrorists were regrouping during the six-week pause.”

The LA Times reports that

"Current and former U.S. officials recently told The Times that the CIA had suspended drone missile strikes on gatherings of low-ranking militants suspected in attacks on U.S. troops in Afghanistan. The move, they said, was an attempt to patch up steadily eroding ties between the two countries."

Voice of America reports that "American officials have denied that the recent drop-off in drone strikes was deliberate."

Radio Free Europe ran an update last week on Pakistan’s decision to seal the border with Afghanistan – blocking NATO supply trucks – after the killing of its soldiers.

Action Step: No More of the Same in Pentagon Spending

What would Gandhi say to Afghan youth today?

2012-01-11T08:05:00.001-08:00

Ali, Faiz and Abdulai at the Gandhi Memorial in New Delhi, India

Too often the ’story’ about Afghan men is centered on violence. The $10 dollar Talib, warlord armies, government militias, armed private contractors, joining the foreign forces. It is an incomplete picture.

The steps being taken by young men - and women - to resist these forms of violence is one of the great stories of Afghanistan.

One group among many practicing nonviolent resistance to transform their society, is the Afghan Youth Peace Volunteers.

Click here to follow their visit to India and efforts to learn more about the practice and power of nonviolence. Here is the first entry, a teaser.

Indian, Afghan and Human Poverty

"Faiz, Abdulai, Ali and I are traveling in India to learn from Gandhian practitioners in Ekta Parishad. We wish to learn how to mobilize people from the villages to protest non-violently.

Immediately, we’re encountering our own poverty.

Thanks and love,
Hakim, Faiz, Abdulai, Ali and all"

Postcards from Kabul | Nathalie Handal

2012-01-10T07:17:00.000-08:00

I’m not that weak willow twisted by every breeze.
I’m an Afghan girl known to the world.

- Nadia Anjuman

In May 2011, poet Nathalie Handal was invited by the International Writing Program at the University of Iowa and the State Department to travel to Kabul, Afghanistan to participate in a literary tour, which also included National Book Award Finalist Joshua Ferris and essayist Christopher Merrill. While in Afghanistan, she taught a poetry workshop to young Afghan women students at Kabul University and participated in many literary dialogues with other poets from the country. The short film captures this unique poetic journey. Nathalie currently lives in New York City. From Bomblog.

Here is one of her poems she read…

Freedom

The Arab Revolt 2011

The story begins
with a song—
it’s stubborn,
breaks air
into history;
for a minute
it’s quiet
to allow everyone in,
and then it raises
to celebrate voices,
clears its throat,
says:
We will bury the smoke that blinds us,
plant our soul on every page,
we will divide our pain into towers
and fill our hands with rain,
we will arrive on time every day
to chase you away,
we will no longer be afraid
of what makes us shiver under the sun,
we will leave our names in every teahouse,
our messages at the bottom of every cup.

Light will no longer be illegal
nor will hope—
even the guards will count
the scars on their tongue
and prepare to heal,
even the children will keep
homeland in the mirror
and prepare to see,
even the women will turn
the fire inside the door
off, and prepare to live.

We will never whisper again.
There is evidence, there is evidence,
that now we can hear
the sounds that lift freedom
across a continent,
and say, Salaam to you,
welcome to my country.

by Nathalie Handal

From Guernica, A Magazine of Art and Politics

Community Voices for Justice, Peace and Reconciliation

2012-01-09T10:34:00.000-08:00

This newest report in the on-going series by the Afghanistan Research and Evaluation Unit focuses on the provinces of Ghazni, Bamiyan and Kabul. It explores the failure of the Afghan government and its international partners to implement a comprehensive program to provide justice or compensation for past and present war crimes. Its strength comes from a reliance on Afghan testimonies.

Accountability starts at the top, not just with Afghan actors, but with the immunity that has been a feature of foreign interventions in Afghanistan for the last 30 years.

Healing the Legacies of Conflict in Afghanistan
Emily Winterbotham | AREU | January 2012

“Ten years after the overthrow of the Taliban, Afghanistan is an environment of escalating conflict and prevailing impunity. In this context, the narrative of the Afghan government and its international partners has increasingly focused on ending the violence through negotiating with insurgent leaders and reintegrating their fighters into Afghan society. In their attempt to secure peace, policymakers have largely failed to include justice as a component of reconciliation and reintegration processes. This has continued the predominant approach since 2001 (and before) with the need for immediate stability outweighing the need for wartime accountability. The fact that the Afghan government and its international partners have failed to implement a comprehensive program to provide justice or compensation for past and present wartime crimes has inhibited people’s ability to deal with the legacies of conflict. Subsequently, the majority of people participating in AREU’s research said they were struggling to cope emotionally, psychologically and practically, and the desire for some form of “closure” remains strong.”

The author explores in details some of the options available to afghans. Including different models to address conflict that include a retribution model, a restorative model, a reparative model and finally, a forgive and forget model. She also explores the peace and reconciliation options from community-level to national level.

Different Models to Address Afghanistan’s Past and Present Conflicts

"To date, there have been no concerted efforts to deal with this complex legacy of wartime atrocities. At best, this has meant that wartime events have been largely ignored in Afghanistan. At worst, revisionist historical interpretations promoted by the perpetrators of crimes have dominated at the political level. In this environment, the experiences and suffering of ordinary people, who make up the bulk of Afghanistan’s victims, have been largely ignored…."

The Retributive model

“The demand for retribution was strong across all research sites. People widely argued that perpetrators of gross human rights violations should face punishment. While respondents suggested a number of different punitive measures, this paper concentrates on the mechanisms that received the most attention and only includes those in accordance with domestic and international law: criminal trials, including state-led prosecutions (administering capital punishment or imprisonment) and international trials; removing individuals from power; and punishing perpetrators through financial or material means. It is possible to broadly compare the provinces, although there was of course variation and fluctuation within communities. Respondents in Bamiyan and Ghazni widely rejected forgiving those guilty of wartime violations and came out strongly in favour of retributive actions. In Kabul Province, the urban community was most in favour of holding people to account. The rural site was more divided over how to deal with the perpetrators of wartime violations, especially between the men and women interviewed. Male respondents were the least in favour while a majority of women supported punishment.”

The restorative model

“Restorative processes are designed to uncover the truth about past events. Establishing a full, official accounting of the past is increasingly seen as an important element to a successful democratic transition. An accurate record of past crimes can make it embarrassing and difficult for official actors to deny them, apply pressure to remove perpetrators from power, and raise awareness toward preventing future abuse. However, in Afghanistan no official enquiry into either specific violations or the general consequences of Afghanistan’s wars has been published to date. Consequently, wartime actors have sought to fill this vacuum by promoting self-serving visions of the past. Most notably, the amnesty law glorified mujahiddin achievements during jihad against the Soviets, which as discussed also led to numerous atrocities. Others, including some who have occupied high-level positions in the Afghan government, deny any direct responsibility for past war crimes despite evidence to the contrary.”

Reparative policies

“International law recognises that a reparatory approach is an important way of acknowledging the collective societal responsibility that is owed to victims. Reparations can take many forms to compensate for harm and to rehabilitate the mind, body and status. These can include measures such property restitutions, monetary payments, education vouchers, memorials, apologies, or even the return of a loved one’s body for burial.153 While it may be impossible to fully repair the damage done to victims or make individual assessments of the harm suffered by each, a reparations programme can provide solutions to some of the problems derived from the harm suffered. There is growing consensus in international law that the state is obligated to provide compensation to victims of egregious human rights abuses perpetrated by the government and if the regime which committed the acts in question does not provide compensation, the obligation carries over to the successor government. Sierra Leone’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC), in its final report, recognised that reparations are a primary tool for rebuilding national trust and encouraging reconciliation. This section concentrates on two broad compensation policies that received the most attention from respondents—symbolic reparation in the form of memorialisation and financial or material compensation.”

Financial reparations

“While it may be impossible to fully repair the damage done to victims or make assessments of the harm suffered by individuals, a reparations programme can still offer certain solutions. The idea that the people of Afghanistan should be materially or financially compensated for the wide-scale damage caused by war was strongly supported by people in all research sites. There was a widespread perception that if people’s living conditions were improved and assistance was provided to help them manage the material aspects of their losses then they would be able to handle their wartime grief better. Compensation was identified to have several impacts of varying significance for different groups interviewed: firstly, people felt it would help repair the physical and material damages caused by war; secondly, it could assist healing processes; finally, in some cases, it was presented as an alternative to a retributive approach.”

Peace and Reconciliation in Afghanistan

"The overwhelming majority of people in all research sites stated that they did not currently feel “at peace.” Achieving durable security and long-lasting calm for all of the country was therefore one of the most basic demands shared by all respondents. While in Ghazni people most frequently linked this with ongoing violence in their province and presented a narrow interpretation of peace as the attainment of security, in Kabul and Bamiyan provinces people generally argued that security had largely been reached in their areas, but that they still did not feel they had achieved peace. Instead, they felt that peace in Afghanistan rested on the fulfilment of certain key conditions: security, legitimate government, justice and reconciliation. Even in Ghazni, while immediate responses to questions about peace concentrated on the lack of security, on further expansion peace also clearly encompassed these components. Moreover, reconciliation was identified as a component of both justice and peace. Consequently, processes of justice, peace and reconciliation were seen as intrinsically linked, overlapping and mutually beneficial.

Afghanistan has experienced decades of conflict, which has fractured the bonds between different groups, qawms and ethnicities in the country. Moreover, there is a clear lack of trust between the population and Afghanistan’s leaders. This social context influences prospects for peace and reconciliation. Having addressed the concept of justice for Afghanistan’s conflicts, this chapter explores how people felt peace and reconciliation could be developed at the community level between Afghan people and what is required at the high level to reconcile the different parties to Afghanistan’s conflicts. Finally, it explores people’s perceptions of what a legitimate Afghan government looks like."

Sher Mohammad | A Refugee Profile

2012-01-08T08:36:00.000-08:00

The UN refugee agency has been asking refugees and others all around the world to tell us their stories on camera. They are stories of escape, survival, and triumph after being forced to flee their homes.

"It really disturbs me when you don't have the right to defend yourself."

Sher Mohammad was born and raised in Afghanistan and trained as a pharmacist. Following the Soviet occupation of his country in the 1980s, he fled to Pakistan. His home village was bombed, he says, and his mother and nephew killed. In Pakistan, he continued to work as a pharmacist before starting a gemstone trading business in the mid-1990s in Peshawar. He has two sons and seven daughters and many grandchildren.

Here is the full play list.

Storytelling: Through the Eyes of Refugees.

Aid and Security in Afghanistan | Feinstein Int'l Center

2012-01-05T10:35:00.000-08:00

Winning Hearts and Minds?
Examining the Relationship between Aid and Security in Afghanistan
Paul Fishstein and Andrew Wilder | January 2012

Another detailed study on the impact of linking aid and assistance to the military strategy in Afghanistan.

"This paper by Paul Fishstein and Andrew Wilder presents findings from research conducted by FIC in five provinces of Afghanistan between July 2008 and January 2010 on the relationship between aid projects and security.

Afghanistan has been a testing ground for a key aspect of counterinsurgency doctrine, namely that humanitarian and development projects can help to bring or maintain security in strategically important environments, and by "winning hearts and minds" undermine support for radical, insurgent, or terrorist groups. The assumption that aid projects improve security has lead to a sharp increase in overall development funding, an increased percentage of activities programmed based on strategic security considerations, and a shift of development activities to the military. Given what is at stake, it is essential that policy makers understand whether and how aid projects can actually contribute to security.

The paper highlights the challenges inherent in using aid as an instrument of security policy. While in some areas aid projects may have had some short-term positive security effects at a tactical level (e.g., intelligence gathering and limited force protection benefits for international forces), and may have helped to facilitate creating relationships by providing a “platform” or context to legitimize interaction between international and local actors, there was little concrete evidence in any of the five provinces that aid projects were having more strategic level stabilization or security benefits such as winning populations away from insurgents, legitimizing the government, or reducing levels of violent conflict.

***

The findings have implications for the effectiveness of aid as a stabilization tool, suggesting the need to understand the complex, intertwined, and overlapping drivers of conflict, especially political and governance-related ones; to create incentives that value quality over quantity, and thereby reduce the counterproductive pressure to spend too much money too fast; to reverse current policy and instead focus on areas where investment can yield better results than in insecure ones; to reinforce a culture of evaluation and accountability; and, to value development as a worthwhile end in and of itself. Many of the study’s findings, which were documented in the previously published case studies, have been acknowledged by the U.S. and its NATO allies, but many of the institutional incentives for why aid funds are spent in ways that can be ineffective or destabilizing remain unchanged."

Talking to the Taliban | Bhadrakumar, Schirch, Habib

2012-01-04T12:30:00.000-08:00

Three insights to help make sense of the long road ahead.

M K Bhadrakumar, a former diplomat from India, offers a regional analysis of the challenges that lie ahead. He highlights the urgent need of a breakthrough by the Obama administration before the NATO summit in Chicago and speculates on the ramification of releasing Taliban detainees held by the United States in Guantanamo Bay Cuba.

“…Fazl's possible release from Guantanamo comes as a masterstroke by Washington aimed at scattering the growing regional bonhomie over the Afghan situation. The Obama administration hopes to release a fox into the chicken pen. Fazl is one of the most experienced Taliban commanders who has been with Taliban leader Mullah Omar almost from day one and he held key positions commanding the Taliban army.

He would have been a favorite of both Mullah Omar and Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) and his "homecoming" ought to bring joy to both. On the other hand, he was also culpable for the massacre of thousands of Hazara Shi'ites during 1998-2001 and was possibly accountable for the execution of eight Iranian diplomats in the northern Afghan city of Mazar-i-Sharif.

Fazl inspires visceral hatred in the Iranian mind and could create misunderstandings in Pakistan-Iran relations (which have been on an upswing in recent years) and put Islamabad on the horns of a dilemma vis-a-vis Mullah Omar.”

It is precisely this path – and a potential disregard for accountability - that has many in Afghan civil society so worried. Concerned that some of the gains achieved in recent years might be negotiated away.

Lisa Schirch commenting on the civil society forum at the Bonn gathering in early December articulates the Afghan call for a just peace. That any negotiation with the Taliban must included the participation of civil society if it is to be successful.

“What does justice mean in Afghanistan? A decade earlier, the 2001 Bonn Conference on Afghanistan excluded the Taleban while simultaneously including equally atrocity-prone warlords who had fought against the Taleban. The international community allowed the Afghan government to reward these warlords with government positions. This rush for a quick peace in 2001 laid an unstable foundation for peace and contributed to a decade of corruption, further violence and injustice. A just peace requires negotiations between all stakeholders, including armed groups like the Taleban as well as unarmed civil society groups. It also means accountability mechanisms to ensure all are held to account for past crimes. But a just peace will not bargain away the Afghan constitution’s protections of human rights and women’s rights. And a just peace requires a process including the Afghan public.”

Mina Habib, writing for the Institute for War and Peace Reporting offers this on-the-ground-reaction from 23 December 2011.

“Political analyst Abdol Ghafur Lewal expressed suspicions about the Americans’ intentions in pursuing peace talks along a separate track.

“Afghans do not want the gains they have made to be sacrificed for deals between the Americans and the Taleban. It is possible they [the Americans] might trade away those achievements,” he said. “They are trying to clinch a deal with the Taleban to secure peace and get America out of the war.”

Lewal said that if talks were to be held, it was essential that the Afghan government was at the centre of them.

“Every negotiation and contact is a positive step towards ensuring peace, and the Afghan people prefer the logic of talks over war,” he said, “but if such talks take place without the Afghan government being aware of them, they could do irreversible damage.”

Mohammad Ismail Qasemyar is a member of the High Peace Council, which Karzai has tasked with negotiating with insurgent groups, and insists this body should manage all talks.

“It has been accepted that the process is an Afghan process, owned by the Afghans…, not foreigners. We will be seriously concerned if this principle is violated,” he said.

In September, the High Peace Council’s chairman Burhanuddin Rabbani was assassinated by a suicide bomber.

Those with long memories recall the last days of the Soviet-backed regime in the late 1980s, arguing that attempts to reach a settlement with mujahedin groups failed because the talks were led by the Russians, rather than the then government of President Najibullah.

“The results of that mistake, that calamity still cause us pain,” Lewal said.

Collateral Damage | WAM Review Bob Sommer

2012-01-03T12:18:00.000-08:00

Mural art tends toward bluntness. Its images are large, its imagery thick with meaning. The nature of the medium—walls!—lends itself best to simplicity, directness. The audience for walls is, after all, everyone passing by. Walls with murals ask us to stop and look and think. They tell stories about people we know, about our communities. Mural art is surely the best medium for “Windows and Mirrors: Reflections on the War in Afghanistan,” an exhibit assembled by the American Friends Service Committee and now touring the country. The exhibit brings together more than forty-five mural paintings in what the AFSC catalogue describes as “a traveling memorial to Afghan civilians who have died in the war.”

Mural Image: Eternal Scream
Michael Schwartz, Tucson, AZ.

America’s longest war has also been its most invisible. After visiting the exhibit in Kansas City, my wife and I pondered a hypothetical question: What if the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq had only been covered by the news media with Vietnam-era communications technology? In other words, what if there were no social media now, no internet, no 24/7 cable, no embedded cheerleaders in Kevlar vests and oversized helmets clamoring like underage groupies on a rock tour and posing as journalists; what if we only had the evening news, the local paper, and maybe the New York Times or Wall Street Journal, to cover these wars—what would we know about them?

After Walter Cronkite took his glasses off on camera and gave the lie to the notion that America was “winning” in Vietnam, and after Life Magazine published a large black-and-white photo of a terrified naked child running from the nightmare of napalm, America began to get it. That war was no longer about whose military casualty count was worse, but about the millions of innocent civilians suffering and dying as bombs fell and war crashed into their lives. And it was also about the tragic waste of sending young men to die for reasons that defied any moral explanation, and throwing billions of dollars at the effort.

Yet now, despite all the information we have at our fingertips and even in our pockets, a medium that traces its beginnings to some ancient and remote caves in France may offer the best way for those of us who will never visit Afghanistan to understand these wars and their consequences.

“Windows and Mirrors” is a tour through the civilian cost of the war in Afghanistan. It is a gallery of windows into an Afghanistan we rarely see, a place whose people we don’t tend to think of with empathy. In turn the exhibit becomes a gallery mirrors reflecting who we Americans are in the bitter reality of what we are doing there. An untitled panel by Jessica Munguia illustrates the evolution of ever-changing rationales for waging this war in a collage of texts in military-speak, images of weaponry and flowers, and the faces of a woman and child weeping in despair and grief.

The question of our purpose in Afghanistan pervades the exhibit, as does the issue of complicity. The invisibility of this war is the result of a willingness, even an eagerness, on the part of Americans to choose shopping as the prime strategy for fighting the so-called “war on terror”—the bizarre and weirdly ironic notion (brilliantly marketed by the Bush administration) that pretending there were no wars was how we’d win them: Rationing and Victory Gardens turned inside out. And it worked! Such patriotism was easily sold to a nationalistic public that confused the reality of war with video games like “Call of Duty” and patriotism with shedding tears as “God Bless America” rang out in every sports stadium in the country and bone-rattling flyovers filled us with wonder and awe. Meanwhile, actual war continues even now in places we choose not to see, or are prevented from seeing by a corporate media complex that fills the airwaves with pablum.

Michael Schwartz’s painting, “Eternal Scream,” goes straight to the theme of complicity. It depicts a grief-stricken man crying out as he clutches the body of his dead child. The unusual descriptive text that accompanies the painting takes the form of a letter from the artist to the anonymous taxi driver who inspired the work: “Dear Taxi Driver: Thank you for sharing your story. I asked. Nothing I can say to you will bring back your brother’s children, your cousins’ store, your sister. I can weep with you, get angry, try to organize, but nothing will bring back the people who you loved, killed by bombs, made with dollars that should have gone to teach kids about empathy, compassion, science, history, art, math, and yes, poetry….”

Children are the most vulnerable victims of this war and figure in many of the paintings. “Learning to Walk Again,” by John Pitman Weber, depicts the disturbing image of a child wearing a prosthetic leg and pushing a walker past a rack of prosthetic limbs. “Unknown Loss” by Christine Moss positions a madonna and child against the black-and-white backdrop of a refugee camp. Ann Northrup’s “Mountain Kites” portrays children flying kites in an open field. Her accompanying text describes the painting best: “I wanted to show the beautiful Afghanistan that still survives the violent incursions of war, and show ordinary Americans that here is life and value that must be respected and loved. I wanted an image that people could identify with, a child that they could fall in love with and that they would want to cherish and protect.”

Ashley Scribner’s untitled work points out that three children died every day in Afghanistan in 2009 as a result of war-related incidents. A set of textual panels catalogues the weddings bombed during the course of the war and cites reports from international press coverage of innocents killed: In one incident, five women, three children, and an elderly man were killed in their mud hut when a 2,000 pound bomb was dropped on their village. In another, a man who could neither hear nor speak did not know CIA paramilitaries were shouting at him to stop running, so they shot him. In yet another, a man was shot dead by occupation forces as he drove to the hospital to inquire about his ailing sister.

The texts give substance to the paintings. They remove the temptation to find subjectivity in the stark imagery and unsettling themes that surround viewers. They reinforce the vastness of these tragedies across time—this is our longest war—and place. This exhibit is both visceral and evocative, a submersion in human tragedy and the responsibility Americans share for creating it.

“Windows and Mirrors” closes this week in Kansas City and moves on to Pittsburgh. The full schedule and more information is available here.

This article appeared in the weekend edition of counterpunch.

BOB SOMMER’s novel, Where the Wind Blew, which tells the story how the past eventually caught up with one former member of a 60s radical group, was released in June 2008 by The Wessex Collective. He blogs at Uncommon Hours.

Afghan Refugee Strategy a Big Mistake | UNHCR

2012-01-03T08:59:00.000-08:00

In 2002 the United Nations High Commission for Refugees (UNHCR) embarked on an ambitious strategy to facilitate the return of Afghan refugees to their country.

Last Tuesday (December 27), Peter Nicolaus, UNHCR representative in Afghanistan described the strategy as the “biggest mistake the UNHCR ever made”.

“The head of the UN refugee programme in Afghanistan on Tuesday described its strategy in the war-wracked country since 2002 as the "biggest mistake UNHCR ever made".

Almost a quarter of the population of Afghanistan is made up of refugees returning from Pakistan and Iran. Many find themselves homeless, or living in slums under tarpaulin.

But Peter Nicolaus, UNHCR representative in Afghanistan, said the international community had failed to help returnees find a means of earning a living and therefore reintegrating into society.”

…

"This is what the donor community constantly forgets. This has been overlooked and it's still overlooked. Nobody has taken this seriously. It's a tragedy.

"We are now -- for the first time -- bringing this up in the spring conference."

An international conference with Afghanistan, Iran, Pakistan and the refugee agency is to be held in April to present the new long term strategy.

In November, The State Department Office of the Special Representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan reported that U.S. economic and humanitarian aid to Afghanistan has peaked in 2010 at $4.1 billion and would be reduced to $2.5 billion this year.

Bringing Refugees Home, the challenge ahead spells out some of the recent history.

See this link for other resources - and poems - on Afghan refugees.

Afghan Taliban Publicly Embrace Talks

2012-01-03T07:32:00.000-08:00

By Abubakar Siddique for Radio Free Europe.

- reproduced in full below -

After a decade of insurgency, the Afghan Taliban says it has reached preliminary agreement to set up a "political office" in Qatar and is willing to enter talks.

The group did not say when the office would open.

"We are now ready to open a political office outside the country [Afghanistan] along with our strong presence inside the country for negotiations with the international community," a Pashto-language statement issued to journalists said. "In this regard we have reached an agreement with Qatar and other relevant sides."

The Taliban office is seen by Western and Afghan officials as key to moving forward with efforts to reach a negotiated end to a decade of war in Afghanistan.

In Kabul, Afghan analyst Wahid Mozhdah called the move a good omen. "I think this is a good step because one of the major problems so far was that the Taliban did not have an address where they can be contacted and from where they can issue their statements and let their positions be known," he said. "It will pave the way for beginning the peace talks."

Mozhdah, a former Taliban diplomat, said many Taliban officials -- including former deputy foreign minister Sher Mohammad Abbas Stanekzai and Tayyab Agha, a key political adviser to Taliban leader Mullah Mohammad Omar -- are already in Qatar to oversee the opening of the office.

The Taliban statement, also issued on their purported website the "Voice of Jihad," said that the group is demanding the release of its prisoners from the U.S. detention facility in Guantanamo Bay as a form of prisoner exchange.

Kabul last month recalled its ambassador to Qatar for consultations over reports that the Taliban was planning to open an office in the Persian Gulf state.

But last week, President Hamid Karzai said his government would accept the Qatar location if the United States insisted on it -- adding that Saudi Arabia or Turkey would be preferable venues.

Since then, the head of the foreign relations department of the Afghan High Peace Council, Mohammad Ismail Qasimyar, has said negotiations with the Taliban could now move in the right direction.

"There are no differences of opinion over establishing a [Taliban] office in Qatar so that they have a known address," he told RFE/RL's Radio Mashaal on January 3. "[And this will help] in moving the negotiations forward with them."

The peace council is tasked with seeking a negotiated solution to the country's three-decade-old conflict.

But its efforts were hampered by the September assassination of its head and former Afghan President Burhannudin Rabbani. He was killed by a suicide bomber posing as a Taliban peace envoy.

Arsala Rahmani, a top negotiator on the peace council, also welcomed the Taliban move.

"It is a gesture of good faith," he said. "The Taliban are blacklisted by the U.S. so it is very important for them to engage in talks with the U.S. "

The Taliban first emerged in 1994 in southern Afghanistan and controlled most of Afghanistan before the demise of their regime in late 2001. The group and its allies have been fighting President Hamid Karzai's Western-backed government and NATO-led troops during the past decade.

The hard-line Islamist movement vowed that it would not drop its goal of establishing a theocratic government.

"The Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan [the Taliban] has always said that the occupation must end," the Taliban statement said. "And Afghans should be allowed to form an Islamic government that would not harm anybody."

What I Will | Suheir Hammad

2011-12-29T09:46:00.000-08:00

A poem of resistance.

Suheir Hammad was born in Amman, Jordan to Palestinian refugee parents on October 25, 1973. Her family immigrated to Brooklyn NY when she was five years old. She is the author of three poetry collections and has written and performed with the Def Poetry Jam on Broadway hosted by Russell Simmons. Check out this tribute to her father. She also starred in the 2008 Cannes official selection film Salt of This Sea.

This recording is from a 9 December show in Philadelphia hosted by Al-Bustan Seeds of Culture. The center is dedicated to presenting and teaching the Arabic language, arts, and culture.

What I Will
by Suheir Hammad

I will not
dance to your war
drum. I will
not lend my soul nor
my bones to your war
drum. I will
not dance to your
beating. I know that beat.
It is lifeless. I know
intimately that skin
you are hitting. It
was alive once
hunted stolen
stretched. I will
not dance to your drummed
up war. I will not pop
spin beak for you. I
will not hate for you or
even hate you. I will
not kill for you. Especially
I will not die
for you. I will not mourn
the dead with murder nor
suicide. I will not side
with you nor dance to bombs
because everyone else is
dancing. Everyone can be
wrong. Life is a right not
collateral or casual. I
will not forget where
I come from. I
will craft my own drum. Gather my beloved
near and our chanting
will be dancing. Our
humming will be drumming. I
will not be played. I
will not lend my name
nor my rhythm to your
beat. I will dance
and resist and dance and
persist and dance. This heartbeat is louder than
death. Your war drum ain’t
louder than this breath.

Here is the Def Poetry version from 2007.

Justice Seekers | A Profile by Kathy Kelly

2011-12-28T10:28:00.000-08:00

Kathy Kelly writing from Kabul-

"Arab Spring, European Summer, American Autumn, and now the challenge of winter. Here in Kabul, Afghanistan, the travelers of our small Voices for Creative Nonviolence delegation share an apartment with several of the creative and determined “Afghan Youth Peace Volunteers” who’ve risked so much for peace here and befriended us so warmly over the past two years.

…

Yesterday, I met with three young people who’ve sustained an inspiring example of community formation. Weeda Ahamd directs the Social Association for Afghan Justice Seekers, with help from Basir and Riha, her co-workers.

…

During their University years, Weeda and her colleagues had become impassioned on behalf of achieving social justice for those brutalized and bereaved by the violent forces at work within Afghanistan. “We realized that many young people who were thinkers had sacrificed their lives” said Weeda. “They refused to say anything but the truth, and there are so many of them to remember. Whereas the war criminals in power will not remember any of these people, we will hold up the pictures in walks. Some of them are people whom family members have not seen for a long time. These are the heroes whom people of Afghanistan should remember.”

Since 2007, Weeda and her colleagues have worked to gather information about people killed, imprisoned or disappeared by armed forces. They go to villages and talk to families who have lost loved ones to Taliban fighters, US/NATO forces, warlords and druglords. They carefully preserve the data. Once it became public that they intended to issue their report, they received threats from several warlords. The report should appear in the near future.

Not only do Weeda and her co-workers assemble stories, documents and pictures from the families of victims of war, they also help build supportive communities amongst the families whose trust they have gained through their repeated visits. Then they invite the families to form larger networks and come together for public protests and demonstrations, demanding an end to the wars. Grassroots democracy is even harder work at gunpoint.

“It’s always a present reality that we could die tomorrow or be killed,” said Basir, “but we would rather do that than have people remember us in the future as people who didn’t live in a principled way. We hold on to truth and justice principles. We’d rather live this way than live under the control of those who commit the crimes.”

“Crimes are not only crimes of the past,” Weeda explains. “War criminals are continuing to commit the crimes, and the US and NATO give military, political and financial support to the war criminals. Their militaries commit crimes as well.

“If a government were formed by the people of Afghanistan,” says Weeda, “we wouldn’t find Afghans easily accepting permanent military bases. Nor would they accept warlords in positions of power.”

“America is in Afghanistan to gain strategic control against China, Iran and regional countries,” she continues. “On top of power and strategic control, we know that America is here to tap on resources that may be present in Afghanistan, or Afghanistan may be a strategic route for the transport and sale of raw materials.” Estimates say these materials may have a net worth of one trillion per year.

She wishes that activists beyond Afghanistan, whose governments are occupying and fighting in her country, would pressure their own governments to stop interfering in the affairs of other countries.

“Any human with a conscience needs to consider himself or herself as a member of the larger human family,” says her colleague, Basir. “I feel I am a member of every family that has become a victim of war. Hundreds of mothers have buried their children with the beautiful white burial cloth. Hundreds walk the streets without a father.”

Weeda is aware that a solution is not easy. She says it may take a long time and insists it must come from the people themselves. Uprisings in the Middle East have encouraged her. “We need to get out into the streets,” she says, recalling images from Cairo. “There, people filled the streets as far as you could see.” Smiling softly, she mentioned the “Occupy” movement. “Maybe they will highlight the crimes that their governments are committing here,” she said, “and speak out against them — call on them to end complicity with war criminals.”

It’s hard work in the winter, and it seems like winter everywhere, but we create small patches of warmth to get us through the winter. All around us, people are finding hope in new connections and in their own startling example of the determination to create hope for others; fear is being traded in for ardent compassionate service; visions are being exchanged, seeds planted beneath the snow, crossing borders and creating new, unprecedented circumstances.

The warmth we keep alive now, the fires we stoke in a dark season, are small, but they’re everywhere. There is simply no predicting what we may be building with the work we do now to keep ours lit, guarding precious human warmth as we move towards another astonishing Spring."

Additional Resource:
Social Association of Afghan Justice Seekers

Scraps of men do not exist | Alberto Cairo

2011-12-27T14:48:00.000-08:00

Alberto Cairo heads the orthopaedic program for the International Committee of the Red Cross/Crescent Society in Afghanistan. He has lived there for 21 years.

Over the years, he and his teams have enabled more than 100,000 Afghan landmine victims to go on with their life, to become agents for change.

In a country where the disabled are generally given pity but no rights, Cairo found a way -- through micro-loans, local employment solutions and home schooling -- to give tens of thousands of disabled Afghans a job and a sense of dignity and pride.

Listen and you will be rewarded.

Civil Society | Transitional Justice | Removing HR Monitors

2011-12-27T08:57:00.001-08:00

Last week three of the nine members of Afghanistan’s Independent Human Rights Commission (AIHRC) were removed from their posts. The commission is one of the most successful, outspoken and respected institutions of post-Taleban Afghanistan.

This is how it is described by Patricia Grossman yesterday in an NYT Op-Ed.

“Watershed moments in Afghanistan happen by stealth. Last weekend — the anniversary of the Soviet invasion 32 years ago — President Hamid Karzai rid himself of his most outspoken critic, a prominent official with one of the few government institutions in Afghanistan that actually performs well — the Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission. The move, announced Thursday, seems intended not only to silence a critic but bury the truth about the crimes of the past.”

Kabul's Stealth Attack on Human Rights

Thomas Ruttig details the impact this will have on the work of the organization.

“Nader Nadery and Fahim Hakim have been part of the AIHRC since its establishment, and driving forces for human rights and democratic development in Afghanistan. Some of our members know Nader from pre-AIHRC times already when he and friends were operating a small human rights organisation from a ramshackle office in a not very inviting part of Peshawar while the Taleban were still in power. From there, they regularly travelled into Afghanistan, contributing to our knowledge about the situation in the country. Nader also came to the 2001 Bonn conference as part of a fifth delegation, composed from pro-democracy activists in the Afghan underground and in exile which was excluded from the conference table at the last hour in order ‘to reduce the number of actors’ (Lakhdar Brahimi).

As commissioner for the AIHRC, Nader has had a particular focus on transitional justice, as well as on war crimes (civilian casualties) committed as part of the current conflict. He managed the national consultations that resulted in the A Call for Justice report documenting opinions about how to deal with the legacies of conflict and was the commissioner most keenly involved in developing the government Action Plan for Peace, Justice and Reconciliation. For the past three years, he has managed the commission’s documentation of war crimes covering the period 1978 to 2001, the commission’s contribution to the implementation of the government action plan.”

Another Blow to Justice: Three Commissioners Fired from the AIHRC

Some background from last year by Sari Kouvo.

“In 2003, the UNHCHR initiated a much more modest mapping exercise in Afghanistan. Based on open source material, most of it the UN’s own, a team of three consultants compiled a 300 page report on human rights violations and war crimes in Afghanistan in the civil war years between 1978 and 2001. The report contains detailed accounts of indiscriminate bombings, massacres, illegal detention, torture, rape and looting from the communist period to the fall of the Taliban regime. In January 2005, then UNHCHR Louise Arbour travelled to Kabul to release the mapping report simultaneously with the release of the Afghan Independent Human Rights Commission’s national consultation about Afghans’ opinions about how to deal with legacies of human rights violations and war crimes, entitled “A Call for Justice”. At the eleventh hour a decision was taken not to release the UN mapping report. The UNHCHR participated in the launch of the AIHRC’s “A Call for Justice” report, and handed a copy of her report to the Commission as a basis for future documentation work. Commissioner Arbour then met with President Karzai and presented him with a copy of the report. The report has to date not been officially released, but copies of it have done the rounds of human rights organizations, embassies, web sites etc.”

Facts for Reconciliation: Human Rights Documentation Needed

Additional Resources:

UN Mapping Report on Human Rights Violations and War Crimes (1979 – 2001)

Violence Increases 21% | We Are Not Leaving

2011-12-20T09:00:00.000-08:00

Mural Image: The Forgotten,
Elise Bonail, Narbonne, France

From the traveling mural exhibit Windows and Mirrors.

Afghanistan has become more insecure in 2011 from a year ago, with a sharp rise in security incidents and higher numbers of civilian casualties, displaced people and complex suicide attacks. These are the findings of the U.N. quarterly report to the Security Council released yesterday.

The total number of security incidents recorded for the first eleven months of the year represented a 21 percent rise from the same period of 2010. There is no doubt that 2011 will be the most dangerous year for Afghans since the invasion of 2001.

It has been an upward trend since 2005.

The September quarterly report documented an increase of 39%

The most recent report was released one day after Afghan President Hamid Karzai told Fareed Zakaria that "we are negotiating with the United States towards an enduring partnership." A partnership that many suspect will involve involve US troops far beyond 2014.

Also on Sunday, the top commander of US and NATO troops in Afghanistan warned Taliban and other forces in the region that there was no date certain for the withdrawal of US forces. Saying "[I]f you been waiting for us to go, we're not leaving."

Click here for additional posts on civilian casualties.

The Pakistanis Have a Point | Bill Keller

2011-12-19T12:35:00.000-08:00

Bill Keller had this long expose in the weekend magazine section. It is an important effort to articulate the Pakistan perspective in the relationship with the United States. It also has some great graphics. Click to enlarge.

His point is really simple, “it’s hard to be an ally of the United States.”

The Pakistanis Have a Point

“The Pakistani version of modern history is one of American betrayal, going back at least to the Kennedy administration’s arming of Pakistan’s archrival, India, in the wake of its 1962 border war with China.

The most consequential feat of American opportunism came when we enlisted Pakistan to bedevil the Soviet occupiers of Afghanistan in the 1980s. The intelligence agencies of the U.S. and Pakistan — with help from Saudi Arabia — created the perfect thorn in the Soviet underbelly: young Muslim “freedom fighters,” schooled in jihad at Pakistani madrassas, laden with American surface-to-air missiles and led by charismatic warriors who set aside tribal rivalries to war against foreign occupation.

After the Soviets admitted defeat in 1989, the U.S. — mission accomplished! — pulled out, leaving Pakistan holding the bag: several million refugees, an Afghanistan torn by civil war and a population of jihadists who would find new targets for their American-supplied arms. In the ensuing struggle for control of Afghanistan, Pakistan eventually sided with the Taliban, who were dominated by the Pashtun tribe that populates the Pakistan-Afghanistan frontier. The rival Northern Alliance was run by Tajiks and Uzbeks and backed by India; and the one thing you can never underestimate is Pakistan’s obsession with bigger, richer, better-armed India.”
Click here for other entries on Pakistan.

Voices of Afghan School Children | Zaher Wahab

2011-12-19T12:04:00.000-08:00

Zaher Wahab has asked colleagues – and their students – to write or draw about life and war. Here are some of the recent wishes translated from Pashtu and Dari.

The selected drawing really tells the story. Click on the image for a better view.

“War causes death, destruction and ruin. If / when there is war, children are unable to get on education or study. Peace is the best thing. When there is peace and security, we can enjoy life, build our country and make progress. During peace time, children can attend school, get educated, learn knowledge and skills, work, and serve their families and our beloved country ( a seventh grade girl).

Peace is an indication of good fortune; peace is mandated by the holy Quran. In order to establish peace between two governments or two individuals, we need an intermediary party to make peace. These wars in our country have destroyed peace. Peace is very Afghanistan’s hope and dream. We pray that Allah almighty will bring peace, stability, and security to Afghanistan.

Due to the endless wars, violence and upheaval over the last three decades, Afghan children have faced countless and serious difficulties, which have scarred them physically and emotionally. Current living conditions for children too are intolerable. Afghan children are sick and tired of war; because war has deprived the children of their parents need and demand peace (A seventh grade girl).

Bring / provide peace, tranquility, reconciliation and coexistence, because we humans need peace. Where are there is peace and security, people are happy and comfortable. And when people feel secure and happy, they can serve/ help their families and country better and more effectively. Our beloved country needs peace desperately and urgently. War has done deep and serious damage to our beloved country- and to our people. Afghanistan is the home of all Afghans, and they should be able to, and must live in peace in their homeland. We must study hard, rebuild the ruined country, and take active part in the progress and development of our country (An eighth grade boy).

Long live (the Afghan – US friendship). Unity is the best thing ( an eighth grade boy).

I have three wishes / needs:
1. I want peace and stability throughout the word, but especially in our beloved Afghanistan
2. All Afghans, including us children want / desire / peace
3. All of us Afghanistan children detest and dislike war and destruction ( by a seventh grade boy).

The government system must deploy everything within its power to prevent the kidnapping, trafficking, sale exploitation, and / or abuse of children in the country (the grade boy).

Afghanistan is a proud, dignified and Islamic country. Afghanistan is a famous country with courageous people. The Afghan nation leads lives of dignity and courage. But the traitors and the enemies of our religion and country betray and attack us all the time. Millions of Afghans have been displaced and migrated to neighboring and other countries where they lead dignified and honorable lives; where er they happen to be Afghans are proud of their culture, dignity and religion; because Afghanistan is a country of true believers in God/ Allah, Islam and their culture ( Seventh grade boy).

We must not abuse, oppress, or humiliate our children. We must treat our children nicely and kindly; and we must allow them the freedom to defend their rights, and receive good education – so they can become good adults Muslims and citizens who will serve the country. We should listen to what they have to say so they can acquire the courage to speak up (Eighth grade boy).

Give peace and security, we can lead happy lives, get an education, build our country and achieve progress. We do not war and turmoil in our country anymore. We desperately need, want and demand peace. We love our homes and our homeland and do not want them to be destroyed (Seventh grade girl).

Cigarettes and drugs are harmful to our/ your health. Do not let or allow anyone to get you to use or sell these narcotics anywhere or any time (Seventh grade boy).

I love my mother more than myself. Women constitute half of the human race and society. They must not be mistreated or subjected to abuse or cruelty. Especially Afghan women, who have, over the decades of war suffered enormously and have endured lots of hardships; but who still managed to protect and take care of their families and homes. Afghan women really are heros (Eight grade girl).

Life has meaning when there is peace and security. Then life and everything else will be full of joy and happiness; and there will be no pain, sorrow or tragedy. A life of peace is truly beautiful (Seventh grade girl).

Afghanistan is a mountainous country where more than 60% of the area consists of mountains. The country has many rich natural resources such as iron, gold, copper, uranium, lithium, oil, gas timber and rivers. But we are extremely poor (Eighth grade boy).

War always produces death, destruction and misfortune; it burns everything in its path. And I hate the savage face of war; we do not war anymore. Peace is always beautiful, and it is God’s greatest gift to his creation the humans. During peace everything becomes beautiful and humans make progress; we build our country; and people are physically and psychologically better of. Peace, I love you and I need and want you (Fourth grade girl).”

Monika Bulaj: The hidden light of Afghanistan

2011-12-16T07:49:00.000-08:00

Monika Bulaj offers a beautiful tribute to the Afghan people, and a powerful condemnation of war.

She starts with the question what do we know about the country and the people we pretend to protect?

The result lifts a curtain. Throwing light on the small worlds ignored by the media and the prophets of a global conflict.

Beyond Power Sharing: Options for an Afghan Peace Process

2011-12-14T11:51:00.000-08:00

Beyond Power-sharing: Institutional Options for an Afghan Peace Process
Hamish Nixon and Caroline Hartzell | Peaceworks | December 2011

This paper is part of a joint research project to identify issues and options to support durable peace in Afghanistan. The collaborating organizations are the United States Institute of Peace (USIP), the Peace Research Institute Oslo (PRIO), and the Chr. Michelsen Institute (CMI).

Hamish Nixon also published Durable Peace: Afghan Perspectives on the Peace Process in May.

The chapters

Introduction: Peace Is Possible
Challenges for a Peace Process: Analyzing the Afghan Conflict
Initiating and Structuring a Negotiation
Transitional Arrangements and Implementation Challenges
Beyond Power Sharing: Institutional Arrangements for the Long Term
Conclusions

"The Framework: Any negotiated settlement to the Afghan conflict should involve a set of transitional arrangements to govern the period between the signing of a peace settlement, a cease-fire, and the entry into force of more permanent institutions for conflict management."

A big lesson from the Iraq war of 2003 is the need for firm deadlines for the removal of foreign troops and bases. The vision and options set out in this report have a better chance of being implemented if that reality is kept at the center of all discussions and dialogue.

"Introduction: Peace is Possible

The need for a peace process to end the conflict in Afghanistan becomes clearer with each passing month, just as quickly as hopes for one often seem to recede. Despite many positive changes, ten years of deepening international involvement, both military and civilian, have been accompanied by a pattern of mounting violence. Since 2009 a dramatic escalation by NATO of both conventional counterinsurgency and special operations has certainly cost the insurgency lives and territory, and the prospects of an outright Taliban victory seem negligible. At the same time, the Taliban movement and its allies have shown resilience and flexibility, presenting a consistent tactical challenge in narrowing areas of the south and broad areas in the southeast and east, while extending their reach in the north. A string of high-profile at¬tacks and assassinations has undermined government and NATO claims of increasing security and eliminated key government allies, while deepening tensions among political factions with distinct ethnic overtones, raising the specter of a widening civil conflict."

***

"This report takes a different approach. Rather than lifting wholesale the experience of other peace processes that writ large may have limited applicability to the complexities of Afghanistan, it examines some specific challenges a peace process in Afghanistan will face, and then presents theoretical observations and some real world comparative examples that may be applicable to these challenges. The report does not aim to recommend a complete or a single set of institutions for an Afghan peace process, but rather to stimulate discussion on how to connect the particular challenges an Afghan peace process faces with the possibilities for peace that careful and innovative arrangements can and have produced even in complex and seemingly intractable conflicts."

Additional posts on Peace Building.

The Generals Visit | Night Raids and Militia Forces

2011-12-14T09:28:00.000-08:00

William McRaven, commander of US Special Operations Forces, gave a rare interview in Kabul over the weekend. Defending two of the most controversial US/NATO war tactics he pledged to continue the kill/capture program being carried out through night raids, and gave his support to expand the Afghan Local Police, a paramilitary force.

It's a dangerous and deadly path.

As commander of US forces in Afghanistan before taking over as head of the CIA David H. Petraeus said in hearings before the US Senate Committee on Armed Services that the arming of the private militias was “… in essence, a community watch with AK–47s”

Most Afghans understand the program to be the creation of unaccountable militia armies. Bringing back memories of the terrible violence of the civil war fought between foreign armed militia armies.

In September Human Rights Watch said the initiative was "a high-risk strategy to achieve short-term goals in which local groups are again being armed without adequate oversight or accountability."

The Wall Street Journal reports

The U.S. military is preparing to triple the number of local fighters in the program over the next two years, with 30,000 members set to fan out in 99 districts, said Col. John Evans, deputy commanding officer of Combined Forces Special Operations Component Command in Afghanistan.

There is a sobering link with the US policy of arming the Sunni Awakening in Iraq and the legacy it left behind. The awakening is estimated to still have between 50,000 – 80,000 armed members, and are resisting Iraqi government demands that they disarm by the end of the year.

The New York Times observes

With two weeks left before the United States military completes its withdrawal from Iraq, these units, known broadly as the Sunni Awakening, still remain outside the new Iraqi police force and army. Ragtag groups of men wearing jeans and carrying rifles at dusty checkpoints throughout western Iraq, they are a loose end left by the United States.

For more background: Afghanistan 101 posts on Afghan Militias, Night Raids, and the Afghan experience with war.

*****

Mural Image: What's Left of Kabul

Created by Guilford College Community and Hanna Swenson, Courtney Mandeville and Layth Awartani

Windows and Mirrors: Reflections of the War in Afghanistan

CIA Vacates Pakistan Drone Base | US Drone in Iran

2011-12-12T08:08:00.000-08:00

The CIA has vacated the Shamsi air base in western Pakistan. The base has been used to help coordinate the CIA (not-too-secret) drone war in Pakistan's tribal areas. Attacks from the base have been reduced since the targeted killing of Osama Bin Laden in May with the US increasing striking from bases in Afghanistan.

The government of Pakistan demanded the removal of the CIA after a cross border attack killed 25 soldiers.

However.

“...[a] senior American counterterrorism official, speaking on condition of anonymity because the drone operations at Shamsi were classified, said that vacating the base would not end American counterterrorism operations in Pakistan. “The United States retains robust capabilities to fight Al Qaeda and its militant allies,” the official said. “Our operations will continue.”"

Pakistan responded on Sunday saying they will shot down US drones flying in their air space.

Also last week a drone called the ‘Beast of Kandahar’ crashed in Iran. It was flying out of an air base in Herat with sensitive sniffing sensors to monitor Iran nuclear program.

The government of Iran has formally complained to the Afghan Ambassador about the US drone.

KABUL, Afghanistan — The Iranian Foreign Ministry expressed its displeasure to Afghanistan’s ambassador to Iran over an American drone aircraft that Iran says flew deep into its airspace and crashed last week, a spokesman for the Afghan Foreign Ministry said Sunday.

According to Afghan officials, the drone was flown from the American and Afghan base at Shindand in western Herat Province. American officials have acknowledged the loss of an RQ-170, a C.I.A. stealth drone made by Lockheed Martin and designed to fly covert missions and collect information in hostile territory, but have declined to confirm or deny that it is the plane that Iran says it recovered.

A critical issue in the negotiations for a strategic partnership between the US and Afghanistan is the Afghan demand that their territory not be used by foreign powers to attack its neighbors.

The strategic agreement is envisioned to provide the framework for US troops to stay in the country beyond 2014 and to have control of military bases.

Legacies of War in Iraq

2011-12-09T15:56:00.000-08:00

Wednesday 28 December 2011 | 5:30-8 PM
Friends Center | 1501 Cherry Street | Philadelphia

There is no victory and no victors in this war.

We will mark the exit of US combat troops and the impact of 30 years of war and sanctions for the people of Iraq.

You are invited to call-in and listen to the program. It is an open call.

Toll-free Number: 866.740.1260
Access code: 2414586#

*****

For 30 years the Iraqi people have endured three wars and for 20 years suffered under some of the most severe and comprehensive economic and political sanctions ever imposed against a nation and its people.

A war of choice starting in 2003 destroyed the infrastructure, left hundreds of thousands dead, opened the way to civil war/ethnic fighting, and created the largest movement of refugees and internally displaced in the region since the creation of Israel in 1948.

With the withdrawal of US combat troops by the end of this year it is time to look back on the past to better understand future challenges. Join us to explore the legacies of war in Iraq: war that has gutted our economy.

Speakers:

Kathy Kelly is a co-coordinator of Voices for Creative Nonviolence, an outgrowth of a campaign to end economic sanctions against Iraq. With members of the Iraq Peace Team, she lived in Iraq during the 2003 U.S. invasion and initial weeks of the U.S. Occupation.

Mary Trotochaud was the AFSC country representative from 2004 – 2007. She worked with Iraqi women in early efforts to help create a new vision for their country. She later worked in Washington with the Friends Committee on National Legislation (FCNL).

Rick McDowell has lead fifteen delegations to Iraq (1996-2003) to witness the impact of comprehensive economic sanctions. In 2002 he led a group of Nobel Laureates and was the AFSC Iraq Country Representative from 2004-2007 before working with FCNL.

Raed Jarrar is an Iraq specialist, political analyst and former AFSC consultant based in Washington, D.C. After the U.S.-led invasion in 2003, Raed became the country director for CIVIC Worldwide, the only door-to-door casualty survey group in post-war Iraq.

Abdulla Al-Obeidi grew up in Baghdad. As a refugee in Egypt he worked with other Iraqi teens. He is now studying sociology/pre-med at Rowan University and active on campus – and community – efforts to bridge the gap between Middle Eastern and US cultures.

Celeste Zappala is a Gold Star Mother for Peace. Her son, PA Guard Sgt. Sherwood R. Baker, was killed in Iraq on April 2004. His unit was in charge of guarding those looking for Iraq's non-existent Weapons of Mass Destruction.

Moderator: Peter Lems, AFSC Program Director, Education and Advocacy for Iraq and Afghanistan.

A Time of Remembrance and Prayer
For Peace, Remember the Cost of War
Friday 30 December | 5 - 7 PM
Arch Street United Methodist Church | Broad and Arch

This solemn Candlelight and Bell-Tolling vigil will be the formal closing of the monthly vigil held since 2005 at the corner of Broad and Arch Street by Celeste Zappala, Gold Star Mother for Peace. Her son, PA Guard Sgt. Sherwood R. Baker, was killed in Iraq, April 2004, guarding the unit looking for Iraq's non-existent Weapons of Mass Destruction. The vigil will be followed by a special time of remembrance with music, prayer, and reflection beginning at 6 PM inside the church

Global Day of Listening | Occupy Your Heart

2011-12-09T11:56:00.000-08:00

Global Day of Listening
21 December 2011

Talk with ordinary people from Afghanistan, Iraq, Palestine, Israel, Egypt, Yemen, and others. Check the schedule for times (4-5 hours).

Begins 7:30 PM Afghanistan time
10 AM Eastern | 7 AM Pacific (US)

LiveStream

Inspired by

Afghan Youth Peace Volunteers,
Afghans For Peace, and the
Iraqi & American Reconciliation Project.

The last call was 21 September.

24 Hour Bomb Tolls Reach 78 | Anand Gopal Analysis

2011-12-07T09:10:00.000-08:00

A wave of violence continues to sweep across Afghanistan. Today, nineteen people were killed by a mine planted on a highway in Helmand Province.

The deaths come amid mourning for 59 people, mainly Shia worshipers, who were killed in twin bomb attacks in the country yesterday.

It brings to 78 the number of Afghans killed in the last 24 hours from bombings. The number is likely to rise.

“Dawoud Ahmadi, the spokesman for the governor of Helmand Province, said the victims were among 24 people crammed aboard a minibus traveling from Lashkar Gah,the provincial capital, to the Sangin District, a dangerous part of the province where Taliban insurgents have been active. The minibus drove over the mine.”

Anand Gopal offers insights into the impact of yesterday's attack. Posing a dark question, "how do you end a war that no one can control?"

From Bad to Worse

“You would think that, after ten long and bloody years, there would be little new the Afghan war could offer in terms of brutality. But Tuesday's twin suicide strikes on Shi'a Muslim processions in Kabul and Mazar-i-Sharif, leaving 58 dead and more than a hundred wounded, marks an unprecedented insurgent assault on civilians. Never before in the current war have Afghanistan's Shi'a been deliberately targeted, and rarely has an attack been so completely devoid of a military target.”

Open Conference Call Briefing on Iraq | Raed Jarrar | Tuesday 13 December | 7 PM EASTERN

2011-12-06T13:27:00.000-08:00

Ending the War in Iraq:
Elements of a Success Story

Tuesday 13 December
7 PM – 8 PM (EASTERN)

Toll-free Number: 866.740.1260
Access code: 2414586#

This is an open call. All are invited

Send your questions in advance to questions@afsc.org

The call will be recorded.

For seven years we have called for the complete removal of U.S. troops and bases from Iraq.

By the end of this month the United States has pledged to remove all combat troops and relinquish control of all bases. These are elements of a success story - for the people of Iraq and the peace movement. But it is accompanied by tremendous tragedy for Iraq and its people.

A war of choice destroyed the infrastructure of a country, left hundreds of thousands dead, opened the way to civil war/ethnic fighting, and created the largest movement of refugees and internally displaced in the region since the creation of Israel in 1948.

To better understand the legacy of this war, join us for a conference call briefing with Iraq specialist and former AFSC consultant, Raed Jarrar.

With broad experience in the region, Raed offers a clear-eyed analysis of the impact of the war, how we got to where we are today, and challenges for the future.

He returned from his most recent visit to Iraq last month.

Brief Bio: After the U.S.-led invasion in 2003, Raed became the country director for CIVIC Worldwide, the only door-to-door casualty survey group in post-war Iraq. He then established Emaar, (meaning "reconstruction" in Arabic), a grassroots organization that provided humanitarian and political aid to Iraqi internally displaced persons (IDPs). Emaar delivered medicine and food as well as helped initiate micro-enterprise projects for IDPs.

On Wednesday 28 December we will have a follow-up call exploring three decades of war and sanctions in Iraq with other Iraqi voices and activists.

Targeted Bombings Kill 60 in Afghanistan

2011-12-06T09:46:00.000-08:00

One day after the after a Bonn conference dominated by state actors tragedy has struck in Afghanistan.

Coordinated noon-time bombings in Kabul and Mazar-i-Sharif have left 60 dead with many more wounded and traumatized. Eyewitness accounts report that 56 people were killed in Kabul where hundreds of Shia were singing at the Abu Fazal shrine. A third attack in Kandahar did not result in any deaths.

Nobody has claimed responsibility for the attacks, and a Taliban spokesperson has condemned them. The attacks coincided with the Shia festival of Ashura. An important day in the Shia calendar and observed as a public holiday in Afghanistan.

The on-going war threatens to deepen division across the board - ethnically, politically and regionally.

The escalating violence is fueled by all sides with 2011 likely to replace last year as the most deadly year yet for Afghans.

As the most powerful military and economic force in Afghanistan the U.S. must be clear in regional and internal dialogue that includes all groups involved with the violence. On that front Bonn was a failure.

Until that is clear the cycle will continue.

Targeted assassinations of government officials and targeted assassinations of ‘leaders’ by US drone strikes. Night raids on Afghan towns and villages and attacks on NATO/Afghan military outposts and personal. Cross border raids from Pakistan and attacks into Pakistan.

Additional coverage at NYT, BBC, Reuters

Ashura Attacks: Playing with Fire
Kate Clark, Afghanistan Analyst Network.

“Attacks have targeted Shi’as in two of Afghanistan’s major cities as they gathered for Ashura, to lament the martyrdom of Imam Hussein and members of his family in Iraq in 680 AD. The attack in Kabul was particularly serious and left dozens dead. Such violence is a new phenomenon, says Kate Clark, deeply troubling and potentially very dangerous for Afghanistan, which has managed to avoid the sort of sectarian and indiscriminate attacks suffered by Pakistanis and Iraqis in recent years. At least, she says, all parties so far, including the Taleban, have condemned.”

Bonn II Conference

2011-12-05T12:39:00.000-08:00

President Hamid Karzai told the international gathering in Bonn this morning that Afghanistan will need the financial support of the international community for at least another decade beyond the 2014 departure of international troops.

The Associated Press has some details.

“During the one-day conference, about 100 nations and international organizations, including the United Nations, jointly pledged political and financial long-term support for war-torn Afghanistan to hinder it from falling back into chaos or becoming a safe haven for terrorists.”

Also.

“The United States announced it would free more than $650 million in support for small community-based development projects in Afghanistan, frozen because of financial irregularities in Afghanistan's key Kabul Bank.”

Jean MacKenzie writing for the Global Post has context and the reduced expectations.

Thomas Ruttig comments - Reading Between the Lines at Bonn II

“Finally, last but not least (and only because we have reported from their two-day conference on 2-3 December already), the statements from the two Afghan civil society representatives were extremely strong. They did not limit themselves – as I had feared for a moment – to politeness and indirect messages. The two who, deservedly, had more time than most foreign ministers, reiterated their message of the days before. Barry Salam said that ‘we have chosen democracy’ and ‘we want peace and reconciliation, but not when it jeopardises our fundamental rights and freedoms. […] Therefore we cannot change our constitution and compromise on our democratic rights’, Barry Salam stated. ‘We need a government that rules by law but not by the power of individuals’. His demand for the full inclusion of civil society in key decision-making processes could have been more direct, but should not be overlooked just because of this.

His female colleague, Selay Ghaffar, strongly advocated an ‘end [to] the prevailing culture of impunity’ and for transitional justice. She made clear that Afghanistan’s problems do not only lie in the Taleban or al-Qaida. She said that, ‘in the current system, there are elements in power who committed war crimes [and] need to be brought to justice. […] Giving a ministry to those who committed rapes and war crimes is like committing these crimes again.’ This is the strongest message of the day, and an explanation of the current quagmire which is not only military, but also moral. It is a message that Western governments probably still don’t want to hear.”

Last month, The State Department Office of the Special Representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan reported that U.S. economic and humanitarian aid to Afghanistan has peaked in 2010 at $4.1 billion and would be reduced to $2.5 billion this year.

Additional Resources

Fact Sheet: Bonn Conference Unlikely to Produce Results for Afghanistan

International Afghanistan Conference in Bonn: Priorities for action

A Decade of Mistakes

We Meant Well | Peter Van Buren

2011-12-02T10:28:00.000-08:00

We Meant Well, is an insider account of the civilian side of the surge in Iraq. The challenges and failures should be lessons for Afghanistan.

Of course there are differences; major UN agencies and well funded international NGO’s remain active in Afghanistan, and the country is one of the poorest in the world. However.

The odious role of military-controlled reconstruction teams linking humanitarian and development assistance to a military strategy is the same for both countries. As in Iraq, these opposing efforts led to confusion and resentment, becoming band-aids, symbolic measures to mitigate the destruction of escalating military action.

This book, and reports from many NGO’s on-the-ground make a clear call to end the military's role in development.

Here are the questions for Afghanistan. Will the U.S. learn these lessons as the military surge winds down in Afghanistan? Is it possible to offer transparent and sustained support to Afghan governmental and nongovernmental institutions seeking to heal the wounds of war?

We Meant Well:
How I Helped Lose the Battle for the Hearts and Minds of the Iraqi People
By: Peter Van Buren

“From a State Department insider, the first book recounting our misguided efforts to rebuild Iraq—a shocking and rollicking true-life cross between Catch-22, Dispatches and The Ugly American.

Charged with rebuilding Iraq, would you spend taxpayer money on a sports mural in Baghdad’s most dangerous neighborhood to promote reconciliation through art? How about an isolated milk factory that cannot get its milk to market? Or a pastry class training women to open cafés on bombed-out streets without water or electricity?

According to Peter Van Buren, we bought all these projects and more in the most expensive hearts-and-minds campaign since the Marshall Plan. We Meant Well is his eyewitness account of the civilian side of the surge—that surreal and bollixed attempt to defeat terrorism and win over Iraqis by reconstructing the world we had just destroyed. Leading a State Department Provincial Reconstruction Team on its quixotic mission, Van Buren details, with laser-like irony, his yearlong encounter with pointless projects, bureaucratic fumbling, overwhelmed soldiers, and oblivious administrators secluded in the world’s largest embassy, who fail to realize that you can’t rebuild a country without first picking up the trash.

Darkly funny while deadly serious, We Meant Well is a tragicomic voyage of ineptitude and corruption that leaves its writer—and readers—appalled and disillusioned but wiser.”

Additional Resources:

Democracy Now: State Department Veteran Defies U.S. Censors to Recount Failed Reconstruction in Iraq

Book Reviews:

Bonn | Pakistan Boycott |Afghan Civil Society

2011-12-01T09:28:00.000-08:00

Following the death of 24 soldiers in a US cross-Border raid, the Government of Pakistan is boycotting the Bonn II gathering.

“Prime Minister Syed Yusuf Raza Gilani on Thursday said Pakistan’s decision to boycott the Bonn Conference in protest against the NATO/ISAF attack and violation of its sovereignty, was final and taken collectively. “How we can attend the conference when our sovereignty came under attack”

Josuha Foust writing in the Atlantic predicts failure.

“So a conference about the future of Afghanistan that is meant to leave a lasting, workable regional framework in place to manage the many diplomatic, economic, and security consequences of an American withdrawal might not include four of the most important participants: Pakistan, Iran, Uzbekistan, or the Taliban. And yet, the other 90 countries that participate hope to accomplish something.

The sad reality of the U.S. endgame in Afghanistan is that it is happening completely outside a consideration of Afghanistan's politics. The war in Afghanistan is a fundamentally political war, and U.S. policymakers continue to ignore Afghanistan's (and Pakistan's) politics at tremendous cost. The worst political excesses get identified and removed, but the strategic planning -- what little there is -- is happening within American preferences and beliefs, not Afghan ones.”

In addition to the need for participation from all parties to the conflict, Afghan civil society networks have also lobbied to have more representation.

Afghan Civil Society Message to Bonn Gathering on what is expected from Government.

The second phase of transition (Inteqal) should be based on a thorough evaluation of the first phase and the lessons learned, giving full consideration to the necessary capacities, resources (human and financial), and the demands and satisfaction of the people,

Equal attention must be paid to the civilian dimension of the transition process (quality of the delivery of social services without any gender or ethnic discrimination, good governance, effective measures to curb corruption, promotion and protection of human rights, as well as the reform and independence of the judiciary) in parallel to the military aspect of transition (qualitative and quantitative support for Afghan security institutions),

It should give priority to implementing the rule of law, supporting and strengthening the democratic process and institutions (i.e. reform and independence of the electoral process, in particular), and to merit-based appointments,

It should strengthen healthy working relations between the judiciary, legislative, and executive, and specifically to establish a professional, effective, and responsive cabinet.

Beginning tomorrow you can start to check-in to a livestream of the civil society gathering that will take place on the 2nd and 3rd of December.

US Helicopters and Aircraft Kill 24 Pakistani Soldiers

2011-11-28T08:57:00.000-08:00

Late Saturday evening, US attack helicopter gunships and jet fighters killed 24 Pakistani soldiers in a cross border raid. There are conflicting accounts of what happened, with US/NATO forces claiming the attack originated from Pakistan and Major General Athar Abbas, chief spokesman for the Pakistan military, stating "I cannot rule out the possibility that this was a deliberate attack by ISAF…"

Pakistan has responding by shutting down NATO supply routes into Afghanistan and giving the U.S. 15 days to remove the Central Intelligence Agency from the Shamsi air base that is a key facility for drone strikes in both countries. Nearly half of the US/NATO land shipments travel through Pakistan.

Steven Lee Meyers writing today in the NYT’s looks at the US military strategy, noting that “[A] major offensive last month involving 11,000 NATO troops and 25,000 Afghan fighters in seven provinces of eastern Afghanistan killed or captured hundreds, many of them using Pakistan as a base.” The attacks are symbolic of the US policy of “fight, talk, build” which seeks to try and negotiate while still fighting.

Eric Schmitt and Salman Masood have a good summary of the US diplomatic response in the NYT’s and the Global Post has a good summary of the Pakistan response.

One of the demands that came out of the recent Loya Jirga on a long-term US military presence was a prohibition on allowing US forces to attack bordering countries from bases in Afghanistan. It is certainly a demand the Afghan Parliament will makes as well.

Additional resources from Afghanistan 101 Pakistan posts.

Drone Strikes Kill 18 in Pakistan

2011-11-16T13:23:00.000-08:00

Pakistani security officials report that five CIA operated drones working together killed at least 18 in South Waziristan early this morning. According to AFP up to 10 missiles were fired “into the sprawling compound in the Baber Ghar area” of South Waziristan.

The location is less than two miles from the border with Afghanistan’s Paktia province. One of the regions in Afghanistan where the US troop surge has been deployed.

Last week a spokesman for the governor in Paktia reported that between 60-70 people had been killed when a NATO/Afghan base was attacked.

In October the New York Times ran a profile of the province from an embedded reporter that talked about a border war.

U.S. officials have never publicly acknowledged drone strikes against militants in Pakistan's tribal areas but have anonymously confirmed such strikes to various news outlets.

Pakistan has condemned the strikes as a violation of its sovereignty, but they are believed to be carried out with the help of Pakistani intelligence.

A survey released yesterday by the Asia Foundation notes the following attitudes towards international forces.

“The majority of respondents say they would have some level of fear voting in a national election (57%), participating in a peaceful demonstration (66%), running for a public office (63%), traveling from one part of Afghanistan to another part of the country (75%) and encountering international forces (76%). However, more than half of respondents say they would have no fear participating in resolving problems in their communities (59%) or encountering officers of the Afghan National Army (ANA) (55%) or Afghan National Police (ANP) (51%).”

Additional Resources:

How the CIA Became A Killing Machine

Killing Our Citizens Without Trial

David Cole has a piece in the New York Review of Books exploring additional issues in the use of drones and the killing of Anwar al-Awlaki. He begins with a provocative question.

When can the president order the execution without trial of an American citizen?

Benjamin Wittes writing in Lawfare unpacks the issue from a slightly different perspective.

Buzkashi Boys | Afghan Film Project

2011-11-16T10:55:00.000-08:00

If you have not traveled to Afghanistan the sights and sounds of this trailer will take you there.

Buzkashi Boys tells a compelling coming of age story that offers a glimpse of a rarely seen Afghanistan through the eyes of two of its youngest sons, as they make their way to manhood in the most war-torn country on earth.

This groundbreaking short film will be produced in partnership with the Afghan Film Project, a non-profit NGO with a mandate to strengthen and build the capacity of Afghanistan's fledgling film industry.

Key Issues for the Traditional Loya Jirga

2011-11-16T08:14:00.000-08:00

The long anticipated loya Jirga officially convened this morning in Kabul.

More than 2,000 invited politicians, tribal leaders, and clerics have gathered for four days of debate on critical issues facing the country. In addition to relationships with Afghanistan's neighbors, the future US-Afghanistan strategic partnership and a consensus for a path towards negotiations with the Taliban are the key issues.

The gathering is not without controversy. Members of Parliament have called it unconstitutional and political groups are boycotting the gathering.

In preparing for the Jirga, the commission’s spokeswoman Safia Sediqi highlighted that this was a ‘traditional’ Jirga.

"...the decisions of this particular jirga are not binding. The traditional loya jirga will only provide the Afghan government with general advice."

Kate Clark from the Afghanistan Analysts Network has a good summary of day one and the presidents vision. This is an excerpt.

Traditional Loya Jirga: The President's Vision

"President Karzai said the jirga would deal with nothing but the strategic partnership agreement and peace talks, thereby denying rumours that he might use the jirga to change the Constitution to lengthen his term in office or allow him to run again. He also repeated many times that this was an ‘advisory jirga’ and the government needed the ‘people’s advice’ to allow them to make the right decisions about Afghanistan’s future. In other words, the jirga is not a decision-making body.

There was almost nothing new of substance in the speech and journalists, looking for news, have been struggling to report on the jirga in an interesting way. Possibly the only fresh line was a reference to Iran being a little more reasonable (aqlani) than the US in the dealings between the two countries.

The aim of the jirga appears not to be to deliver fresh policy, but to get political cover, so that the President can cite it as evidence that the people supported a deal with the Americans and that his government is not, to use Sighbutullah Mujadiddi’s term, watan frush, sellers out of the nation (more below).

Using repetition, homely similes and bonhomie, the President tried to hide the unpleasant fact at the heart of his policy: Allowing permanent US military bases – or ‘institutions and establishments’ as he described them – on Afghan territory will inevitably compromise national sovereignty. Yet the President repeatedly emphasised that he wanted both the strategic partnership and independence. The inherent tension in this came across in contradictions and convoluted messaging..."

Afghanistan in 2011: A Survey of the Afghan People

2011-11-14T09:47:00.000-08:00

To be released tomorrow.

On November 15, the U.S. Institute of Peace will host the Washington launch of The Asia Foundation's "Afghanistan in 2011: A Survey of the Afghan People" -- the broadest, most comprehensive public opinion poll in the country.

The report covers all 34 provinces, with candid data gleaned from face-to-face interviews with more than 6,000 Afghan citizens on security, corruption, women's rights, development, the economy, and negotiating with the Taliban.

Webcasts:

This event will be webcast live beginning at 9:30am on November 15, 2011 at www.usip.org/webcast .

Speakers:

David Arnold, introduction
President
The Asia Foundation

Sunil Pillai, panelist
Technical Adviser, Kabul
The Asia Foundation

Sheilagh Henry, panelist
Deputy Country Representative, Kabul
The Asia Foundation

George Varughese, panelist
Country Representative, Nepal
The Asia Foundation

Andrew Wilder, moderator
Director, Afghanistan and Pakistan Programs
United States Institute of Peace

A Short-Film Festival | Women From The Muslim World

2011-11-10T12:08:00.001-08:00

Afghanistan Link

Festival Link

Home Page

The End and the Beginning | Wislawa Szymborska

2011-11-10T07:30:00.000-08:00

After every war
someone has to clean up.
Things won’t
straighten themselves up, after all.

Someone has to push the rubble
to the sides of the road,
so the corpse-laden wagons
can pass.

Someone has to get mired
in scum and ashes,
sofa springs,
splintered glass,
and bloody rags.

Someone must drag in a girder
to prop up a wall.
Someone must glaze a window,
rehang a door.

Photogenic it’s not,
and takes years.
All the cameras have left
for another war.

Again we’ll need bridges
and new railway stations.
Sleeves will go ragged
from rolling them up.

Someone, broom in hand,
still recalls how it was.
Someone listens
and nods with unsevered head.
Yet others milling about
already find it dull.

From behind the bush
sometimes someone still unearths
rust-eaten arguments
and carries them to the garbage pile.

Those who knew
what was going on here
must give way to
those who know little.
And less than little.
And finally as little as nothing.

In the grass which has overgrown
causes and effects,
someone must be stretched out,
blade of grass in his mouth,
gazing at the clouds.

— Wislawa Szymborska
(translated from the Polish by Joanna Trzeciak)

Wislawa Szymborska, a Polish poet who writes about ordinary and extraordinary moments, won the Nobel Prize for Literature in 1996.

Afghanistan in Transition: Putting Children at the Heart of Development |STC

2011-11-09T12:18:00.001-08:00

"2014 is not going to be like 1989."

— Staffan de Mistura, UN Security Council (UNSC), 6 July 2011, referring to the 2014 date by which “transition” is slated to be completed and the 1989 Soviet withdrawal from Afghanistan that led to the Afghan Civil War.

Overview

“This report will assess the record of the international community in its efforts to achieve development success in Afghanistan. The first section will assess the progress in the last 10 years through achievements made in key social sectors, such as health, education and child protection. The second section will look at the reasons that progress has been slow; arguing that geographic inequity in donor funding, lack of adequate funds to basic services and misappropriation of aid has stunted progress. Finally, the third section will look at the transition period and make recommendations regarding development and governance to both the Government of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan (GIRoA) and the international community. It suggests a sustainable agenda for development in Afghanistan that focuses on a needs-based and community-led approach, promotes accountability to the Afghan people and donor public, and builds government capacity.”

Save the Children in Afghanistan

"Save the Children is an independent non-governmental, non-profit organisation that fights for a world in which every child attains the right to survival, protection, development and participation. Our mission is to inspire breakthroughs in the way the world treats children, and to achieve immediate and lasting change in their lives. We work in 120 countries worldwide.

Save the Children has worked in Afghanistan since 1976 and we currently reach over 3 million children per year through our programmes. We work directly in 9 provinces, providing protection, health and nutrition and education programming in the northern provinces of Faryab, Jawzjan, Sari Pul, Balkh and Samangan; the central province of Bamyan and Kabul; the eastern province of Nangahar, and in Kandahar and Uruzgan in the south. We work in a further 10 provinces through partners."

The authors are clear-eyed on the work ahead, noting that Afghanistan in 2001 represented an extraordinarily low base for development efforts.

Achievements in the Last Decade:

• There has been a 26 percent reduction in child mortality over the past decade.
• Today 85 percent of the population has access to primary health care, up from 9 percent in 2001.
• The number of Community Health Workers has increased to 20,000 (by the end of 2008), compared to 2,500 in 2004.
• Vaccine coverage for children against the childhood diseases of diphtheria, tetanus and whooping cough is at 83 percent, compared to just 31percent in 2000.
• In 10 years primary school access rates have jumped from 1 million to 7 million.
• A decade ago not a single formal girls’ school was functioning; now over 2.5 million girls are in school.
• The promotion and protection of child rights has improved. Afghanistan ratified the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child in 1994 and submitted its first report in 2008.

Afghanistan in 2011 | Key Facts

Children

550 — the number of children who die every day in Afghanistan of preventable causes, primarily of diarrhea and pneumonia

37,000 — the number of street working children in Kabul

1 million — the number of children in school in 2001

4 million — the number of children out of school, accounting for 42% of the school-age population

8.3 million — the number of children in school today

1 child in 5 dies before reaching his or her fifth birthday

57% — the number of Afghans under the age of 18 (68% under 25)

44 years — average life expectancy at birth

Funding

$300 — the cost of training one Community Health Worker, who can save thousands of children’s lives

$26.7bn — Aid (ODA) disbursed (2002-09)

$70bn — the total sum committed by the international community for security, governance and development in Afghanistan since the intervention in 2001

$259.8bn — Foreign military operations, peacekeeping and security related aid disbursed (2002-09)

97% — total aid equivalent to Afghanistan GDP

Millennium Development Goals

0 — the number of MDGs (of a total of 8) that Afghanistan is on-track to meet

13 years, beginning in 2001 — the length of time international community will have been ‘on the ground’ and allocating large-scale development funding by the time the military ‘transition’ is due to be completed

14 years, beginning in 2001 — the timescale set by the international community for the realisation of the Millennium Development Goals

Civilian Casualties

2,777 — the number of civilians killed during the conflict in 2010

1,462 — the number of civilians killed in first 6 months of 2011, an increase of 15% on the same period in the previous year

Paktika Province | Battle leaves 60-70 dead

2011-11-09T08:58:00.000-08:00

The Associate Press is reporting that 60 to 70 people have been killed after an attack on a NATO/Afghan base along the border with Pakistan.

Mokhlis Afghan, a spokesman for the governor of Paktika, told the BBC:

"Between 60 and 70 insurgents attacked a joint NATO-Afghan National Security Forces (ANSF) base in Bermal district's Margha area on the border with the Durand line.

The insurgents were armed with heavy and light weapons. In retaliation, ANSF launched their own attack. After a fierce gun battle and air support from NATO, all of the insurgents were killed.

There were no civilian, NATO or ANSF casualties.”

Some Background -

Last month the New York Times ran a profile on the increasing violence along the border with Pakistan. At the time, these were my thoughts.

“It says something about the way the war is fought in Afghanistan when having your hands tied means you need to limit the number of high explosive weapons used and must refrain from using artillery shells with White Phosphorus.”

Reports on the fighting show there were no such restraints this time with US/NATO aircraft killing all of the insurgents.

Additional Resources: Civilian Casualties, Troop Levels.

Roadside Bomb Kills 11 in Badghis Province

2011-11-08T10:23:00.000-08:00

The Associated Press is reporting a roadside bomb has killed 11 in northwestern Afghanistan. The Afghan Interior Ministry says “nine of the 11 killed were from one family, including six children and two women. Two policemen were also killed while three people - a 10-year-old child and two other policemen - were wounded.”

"A ministry statement on Tuesday says the bomb went off as a police vehicle was driving by Monday evening in Badghis province's Qadis district. The vehicle was part of a three-vehicle police convoy that had stopped shortly before to pick up a family that needed a ride into town."

Some Background: The violence does not take place in a vacuum.

The Guardian newspaper has a revealing interactive graphic that gives a sense of the 'cycle of violence'. The graphics document and detail US/NATO kill-capture operations throughout Afghanistan. It is based on research by the Afghanistan Analysts Network who went through and analyzed all of the NATO press releases.

Their findings clearly show that the vast majority of people killed or captured in the NATO actions were civilians. Not Taliban leaders and facilitators.

*****

From the Report | In Their Own Words

From 1 December 2009 to 30 September 2011, ISAF press releases reported a total of 3,157 incidents.

Of that there were 2,365 capture‐or‐kill raids.
3,873 individuals were killed.
7,146 detained.

Of that 174 ‘leaders’ were killed and 501 detained.
25 ‘facilitators’ were killed and 423 detained.

The number of ‘leaders’ and ‘facilitators’ killed equals approximately 5% of the total deaths.

The number of ‘leaders’ and ‘facilitators’ detained equals approximately 13% of the total detentions.

*****

Here are the specific figures for US/NATO attacks in Badghis Province.

Badghis
Total Operations: 31
Kills: 140
Kill/Capture (KC) Raids: 18

Kills in KC Raids: 33
Captures in KC Raids: 43
Ratio, kill to capture: 2.979

The Drone War in Pakistan

2011-11-04T15:16:00.001-07:00

"Signature strikes target groups of men believed to be militants associated with terrorist groups, but whose identities aren't always known. The bulk of CIA's drone strikes are signature strikes.

...Signature strikes were first used under former President George W. Bush. His administration began arming unmanned aircraft to hunt al Qaeda leaders in Afghanistan immediately after the Sept. 11 attacks. As al Qaeda militants fled to Pakistan, the CIA began a secret drone program there, with quiet backing from Islamabad."

This Wall Street Journal article outlines the struggle behind the scenes over the undeclared CIA drone war in Pakistan. The battle is not over the covert use of drones, but the number of people being killed.

“The Central Intelligence Agency has made a series of secret concessions in its drone campaign after military and diplomatic officials complained large strikes were damaging the fragile U.S. relationship with Pakistan.

The covert drones are credited with killing hundreds of suspected militants, and few U.S. officials have publicly criticized the campaign, or its rapid expansion under President Barack Obama. Behind the scenes, however, many key U.S. military and State Department officials demanded more-selective strikes. That pitted them against CIA brass who want a free hand to pursue suspected militants.”

On Thursday the NYT’s ran a powerful piece on the impact of CIA war in Pakistan.

For Our Allies, Death From Above
By CLIVE STAFFORD SMITH

"LAST Friday, I took part in an unusual meeting in Pakistan’s capital, Islamabad.

The meeting had been organized so that Pashtun tribal elders who lived along the Pakistani-Afghan frontier could meet with Westerners for the first time to offer their perspectives on the shadowy drone war being waged by the Central Intelligence Agency in their region. Twenty men came to air their views; some brought their young sons along to experience this rare interaction with Americans. In all, 60 villagers made the journey.

The meeting was organized as a traditional jirga. In Pashtun culture, a jirga acts as both a parliament and a courtroom: it is the time-honored way in which Pashtuns have tried to establish rules and settle differences amicably with those who they feel have wronged them.

On the night before the meeting, we had a dinner, to break the ice. During the meal, I met a boy named Tariq Aziz. He was 16. As we ate, the stern, bearded faces all around me slowly melted into smiles. Tariq smiled much sooner; he was too young to boast much facial hair, and too young to have learned to hate.

The next day, the jirga lasted several hours. I had a translator, but the gist of each man’s speech was clear. American drones would circle their homes all day before unleashing Hellfire missiles, often in the dark hours between midnight and dawn. Death lurked everywhere around them.

When it was my turn to speak, I mentioned the official American position: that these were precision strikes and no innocent civilian had been killed in 15 months. My comment was met with snorts of derision.

I told the elders that the only way to convince the American people of their suffering was to accumulate physical proof that civilians had been killed. Three of the men, at considerable personal risk, had collected the detritus of half a dozen missiles; they had taken 100 pictures of the carnage.

In one instance, they matched missile fragments with a photograph of a dead child, killed in August 2010 during the C.I.A.’s period of supposed infallibility. This made their grievances much more tangible.

Collecting evidence is a dangerous business. The drones are not the only enemy. The Pakistani military has sealed the area off from journalists, so the truth is hard to come by. One man investigating drone strikes that killed civilians was captured by the Taliban and held for 63 days on suspicion of spying for the United States.

At the end of the day, Tariq stepped forward. He volunteered to gather proof if it would help to protect his family from future harm. We told him to think about it some more before moving forward; if he carried a camera he might attract the hostility of the extremists.

But the militants never had the chance to harm him. On Monday, he was killed by a C.I.A. drone strike, along with his 12-year-old cousin, Waheed Khan. The two of them had been dispatched, with Tariq driving, to pick up their aunt and bring her home to the village of Norak, when their short lives were ended by a Hellfire missile.

My mistake had been to see the drone war in Waziristan in terms of abstract legal theory — as a blatantly illegal invasion of Pakistan’s sovereignty, akin to President Richard M. Nixon’s bombing of Cambodia in 1970.

But now, the issue has suddenly become very real and personal. Tariq was a good kid, and courageous. My warm hand recently touched his in friendship; yet, within three days, his would be cold in death, the rigor mortis inflicted by my government.

And Tariq’s extended family, so recently hoping to be our allies for peace, has now been ripped apart by an American missile — most likely making any effort we make at reconciliation futile."

Clive Stafford Smith, an American lawyer, is the director of Reprieve, an organization that advocates for prisoners’ rights.

For more details about Reprieve, visit this post.

National Youth Video Festival | If I Had a Trillion Dollars

2011-11-03T09:50:00.000-07:00

No we Can’t - $1 Trillion and Counting

AFSC, BAY-Peace, Met West High School, Emiliano Zapata Street Academy

The Trillion Dollar Question

The Village of Arts & Humanities, Philadelphia, PA

One of the most exciting projects we worked on last year was the If I Had a Trillion Dollars Youth Video contest. The responses were so compelling - two of my favorites are above - that we decided to have another. We are again partnering with the National Priorities Project (NPP).

This year will end with a big festival celebration from 7-10 April 2012 in Washington DC. AFSC and NPP will host a youth leadership conference and organize film screenings for members of Congress. There will also be community events.

Please take a minute to forward this invitation. There is still plenty of time, but videos must be received by 15 January 2012.

What Would Youth Do With $1 Trillion?

Some ideas for outreach and groups that participated last year.

Teachers and school video clubs
Community groups
Your kids, their friends
Faith communities
Occupy communities

The National Youth Video Festival asks young people to speak out on the federal budget and to consider:

The nearly $1 trillion spent every year on the US military.
The more than $1 trillion spent on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
The more than $1 trillion in tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans.

Windows and Mirrors | Next Week | KS and MO

2011-11-02T07:47:00.000-07:00

After three action-packed weeks in San Francisco, the traveling murals are now being set up in Kansas and Missouri.

12 November - 30 December
KCMO Central Library, Kansas
Johnson County Library, MO

In San Francisco the murals were divided between the University of San Francisco and the Islamic Cultural Center of Northern California. For the next exhibit, they will again be divided between public libraries.

Check out the exciting events that are planned. They include a forum for youth voices, AFSC staff, Afghan activists, veteran peacemakers and an evening with Kathy Kelly.

Mural Image: What's Left of Kabul

Created by Guilford College Community and Hanna Swenson, Courtney Mandeville and Layth Awartani

If you have any friends or family in the area, please share this link.

KCMO Central Library
(Exhibit Opens November 12)
14 West 10th St.
Kansas City, MO

KCMO Central Library Hours:
Monday-Wednesday: 9am-9pm
Thursday: 9am-6pm
Friday: 9am-5pm
Saturday: 10am-5pm
Sunday: 1pm-5pm

Johnson County Central Resource Library
(Exhibit Opens November 19)
9875 W. 87th St.
Overland Park, KS

Johnson County Central Resource Library Hours:
Monday-Thursday: 9am-9pm
Friday: 9am-6pm
Saturday: 9am-5pm
Sunday: 1pm-5pm

*******************
KCMO Central Library
*******************

Sunday 13 November

Reception | 1 PM
Mike Ferner | 2-3 PM
A Veteran Reflects on the Afghan Windows and Mirrors Exhibit

Sunday 11 December 2 PM:

Kathy Kelly
Courage for Peace: Perspectives from Afghanistan
Kathy is the co-coordinator of Voices for Creative Nonviolence

*************************************
Johnson County Central Resource Library
************************************

Saturday 19 November

Reception | 1:30 PM
KC Area Youth Reflections on Afghan War | 2:00 PM
Peter Lems | Afghanistan: What's Next?

Sunday 4 December 2 PM

Suraya Sadeed
Director, Help the Afghan Children
Forbidden Lesson in a Kabul Guesthouse (book)

*****************
Speaker Background
*****************

Mike Ferner

Mike served two terms on Toledo City Council, organized for the public employees’ union, AFSCME, and worked as Communications Director for the Farm Labor Organizing Committee (FLOC), and for the Program on Corporations, Law & Democracy. He traveled to Iraq twice, with a Voices in the Wilderness delegation just prior to the U.S. invasion in 2003, and in 2004 for two months as a freelance writer. His book about those trips, Inside the Red Zone: A Veteran For Peace Reports from Iraq, (Praeger) was released in September, 2006, days before Mike was released from two months house arrest for painting “Troops Out Now!” on a highway overpass. He has been arrested several times for protesting the war in Iraq, including disrupting a Congressional hearing. He served as a Navy Hospital Corpsman during Vietnam, taking care of hundreds of wounded soldiers, was discharged as a conscientious objector and is on the national board of Veterans For Peace. Mike participated in a December 2010 delegation to Afghanistan.

Suraya Sadeed

Suraya was born and raised in Kabul, Afghanistan and immigrated to the United States after the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan. In the US she became a successful business woman. During the height of the Afghan Civil War (1993), Suraya returned to Afghanistan and was shocked by the horrific conditions of children and the destruction of her homeland. That same year, she established a non-profit organization; Help the Afghan Children, Inc. Since then, Suraya's courageous efforts in providing humanitarian aid, medical care, education, and hope against seemingly insurmountable odds in some of the most inhospitable conditions imaginable, have directly benefited an estimated 1.7 million Afghan children and their families.

Help the Afghan Children was AFSC’s partner for our first delivery of funds to Afghanistan in 2001 to mitigate the suffering.

Kathleen Kelly

Kathy Kelly co-coordinates Voices for Creative Nonviolence, (www.vcnv.org) a campaign to end U.S. military and economic warfare. During late June and early July of 2011, Kelly, 58, was a passenger on the “Audacity to Hope” as part of the US Boat to Gaza project. She also attempted to reach Gaza by flying from Athens to Tel Aviv, as part of the Welcome to Palestine effort, but the Israeli government deported her back to Greece.

Since May 2010, she has visited Afghanistan four times with small delegations intent on learning more about conditions faced by ordinary people in Afghanistan, a country afflicted by three decades of warfare. Voices for Creative Nonviolence has been working closely with the Afghan Youth Peace Volunteers in search of non-military solutions to end the war.

In 2009, she lived in Gaza during the final days of the Operation Cast Lead bombing; later that year, Voices formed another small delegation to visit Pakistan, aiming to learn more about the effects of U.S. drone warfare on the civilian population and to better understand consequences of U.S. foreign policy in Pakistan. From 1996 – 2003, Voices activists formed 70 delegations that openly defied economic sanctions by bringing medicines to children and families in Iraq. Kathy and her companions lived in Baghdad throughout the 2003 “Shock and Awe” bombing.

She was sentenced to one year in federal prison for planting corn on nuclear missile silo sites (1988-89) and spent three months in prison, in 2004, for crossing the line at Fort Benning’s military training school. As a war tax refuser, she has refused payment of all forms of federal income tax since 1980.
She and her companions at the Voices home/office in Chicago believe that non-violence necessarily involves simplicity; service, sharing of resources and non-violent direct action in resistance to war and oppression.

Kathy organized and participated in the Spring 2011 delegation to Afghanistan to join the Afghan Youth Peace Volunteers in their campaign Live Without Wars.

UNHCR | Large Drop in Afghans Returning in 2011

2011-11-01T11:43:00.000-07:00

There may be no greater indicator of conditions inside Afghanistan than the decisions of refugees to return or those displaced to leave.

Decades of war created an Afghan refugee crisis that has been one of the worlds largest. This vulnerable community has at times been seen as a destabilizing factor in Iran and Pakistan, the countries that host the largest number.

UNHCR has issued a statement that the number of Afghans returning from Pakistan has fallen by almost 60% since last year.

The lack of jobs, land, shelter, and violence from increased fighting in eastern Afghanistan, are the most frequently cited reasons for not returning.

In Iran, the number of Afghans returning is increasing due in part to a government decision cut off subsidies for food, fuel, and other commodities for both Iranian and Afghan families.

The reductions were part of government cost-cutting measures after the country was placed under US-led international sanction over its nuclear program.

An estimated 1.7 million Afghan remain as refugees in Pakistan with the majority living in the border provinces of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and Balochistan. Due to weather, the UN does not seek to repatriate Afghans from Pakistan during the winter months.

About 4.6 million Afghans have returned since 2002, helped by the UNHCR and its government counterparts. In total, about 5.7 million have returned from Pakistan and Iran, roughly 25 per cent of the total population.

This link has more background, including reports and poetry.

Details on the Afghan-Indian Strategic Agreement

2011-10-31T12:39:00.000-07:00

The India-Afghanistan strategic agreement will have major implications for the region. The deal, made public earlier this month, precedes an anticipated US-Afghan strategic agreement that is expected to include a long-term US troop presence. The US will also likely pledge to cover the expenses of a large standing army that the Government of Afghanistan can't possibly meet.

Last week Secretary of State Hilary Clinton told a congressional hearing that 90% of the US-Afghan Agreement is complete. The outstanding issues are critical and include troop levels, weapons transfers and training. The Government of Afghanistan will be hosting a Loya Jirga in the coming weeks to try and get approval for these controversial issues.

Afghan-Indian agreement heralds a strategic shift in the region
CJ Radin, Long War Journal, 31 October

"Signaling a shift in policy, Afghanistan and India have signed a strategic partnership agreement. Afghan President Hamid Karzai and Indian Prime Minister Dr. Manmohan Singh signed the document, which includes provisions for both security and economic cooperation, earlier this month in New Delhi. This is the first time Afghanistan has made such an agreement with any country, at least since 1979.

The document has three notable provisions.

First, India will help train Afghan National Security Forces. India will train and mentor Afghan army and police personnel in Afghanistan, and Afghans will attend training academies in India. India will also assist in equipping the Afghan forces. The agreement does not include any deployment of Indian combat troops to Afghanistan. Both countries already share intelligence information.

Second, India will furnish Afghanistan with economic aid and assistance. The agreement provides an additional $500 million on top of the $1 billion India has already spent since 2002. In addition, India and Afghanistan will cooperate in the development of mining and energy production.

Third, Afghanistan and India will establish a strategic dialogue between their respective national security advisers "to provide a framework for cooperation in the area of national security."

The agreement leaves open the possibility of even closer ties in the future. The Indian prime minister has said that India will support Afghanistan as it assumes the responsibility of governance and security after the withdrawal of international forces.

Strategic significance

This agreement signals a shift in policy for Afghanistan and India. Up until now, India has played a very limited role in Afghanistan in spite of India's national interest in the country. This has been largely due to Pakistani sensitivity to the issue of Indian presence in Afghanistan. Significant Indian involvement in Afghanistan has been seen by Pakistan as a threat, an attempt by India to encircle Pakistan. Accordingly, the US and Afghanistan have sought to maintain relations with Pakistan, even if it meant keeping Indian relations at arm's length.

The new pact indicates that Afghanistan's strategic calculation has changed. Maintaining a relationship with Pakistan is no longer the top priority, and Indian support for Afghan development is now a higher priority. This does not mean, however, that India and Afghanistan have decided to disregard their relationships with Pakistan entirely. Both Afghanistan and India have attempted to reassure Pakistan in the wake of the agreement. Speaking in New Delhi, President Karzai said:

Pakistan is our twin brother, India is a great friend. The agreement we signed with our friend will not affect our brother ....This strategic partnership ... is not directed against any country ... this strategic partnership is to support Afghanistan.

Similarly, the Indian prime minister said after announcing the agreement: "Our cooperation with Afghanistan is an open book.""

Loya Jirga to Approve Long-Term US Military Presence

2011-10-26T14:20:00.000-07:00

The Afghan government has announced that a Loya Jirga will convene in November to try reach unity on a new security agreement that would allow a long-term U.S. military presence in the country beyond 2014. A key issue will be the legal framework. Much will hinge of the level of immunity the Afghan government will allow to the foreign troops and contractors.

The proposed agreement has been drafted over many months by representatives of the U.S. and Afghan governments.

The United National Front a newly formed Afghan political group is pushing back. Calling for the removal of all foreign forces.

"Experience has shown us that foreign forces cannot bring peace to Afghanistan. We will have peace when we remove the causes of conflict among [Afghan] people," Mozhdah said. "One of the key reasons for fighting here is that we don't trust each other. We need to sit and talk to each other to gain each others trust."

Abubakar Siddique has the story. Entitled Afghan Opposition Grows to Next Stage of U.S. Military Presence.

"The opposition to the draft agreement also reached the halls of parliament, where the issue was discussed this week. The next stage for the debate is a loya jirga, or national council, whose date was announced this week and is intended to help determine a course of action.

The traditional gathering, set to begin on November 16, will provide a setting for more than 2,000 Afghan politicians, tribal leaders, clerics, and lawmakers to debate over a four-day period.

The 2005 security agreement signed by Kabul and Washington pledged U.S. cooperation for democracy building, improved governance, and economic and security cooperation. The new agreement focuses on the U.S. military role in the country after 2014, when most NATO combat operations are expected to be over.

Specific details are unavailable, but Afghan officials reportedly say the new agreement would likely give the government greater control over foreign aid and military operations while allowing a long-term U.S. presence in the country.

Afghan officials have also suggested in local media that some of their key demands, such as an end to night raids by foreign forces and mechanisms to protect Afghan civilians, are likely to be part of the final agreement.

In Afghanistan's Interests

These are among the most divisive issues within the Afghan government in its dealings with the United States, according to lawmaker Gul Badshah Majidi. He says that lawmakers on October 24 rejected a 2002 agreement with the International Security Assistance Force that allowed them to freely conduct military operations across Afghanistan. This, he says, indicates opposition to the new strategic agreement, which was also opposed by some lawmakers in recent debates.

Majidi says that the government needs to launch a robust information campaign to convince Afghans that the new agreement is different from the past agreements. And that it will actually serve Afghanistan's national interests. He says that the issue comes up in discussions with his constituents in southeastern Paktia Province who express pessimism over the deal.

But he says that they often change their views after learning more about the nature of the agreement. "I think the ultimate decision about the agreement will entail a legal framework for the presence of these forces. Their presence is needed in Afghanistan and it will serve Afghanistan's national interests," Majidi says. "The people of Afghanistan are still concerned about the return of the Taliban. They are also worried about an occupation by the Pakistan-based [fundamentalist] militias."

Afghan officials expect to host 2,030 people in the November loya jirga. They plan on briefing participants on the draft agreement before the assembly formally opens on November 16.

Afghan President Hamid Karzai recently indicated that the draft agreement agreed by the traditional leadership council will be sent to the parliament for final approval."

115 Dead After 7 Day NATO Assault in Kunar

2011-10-20T11:58:00.000-07:00

The Associated Press is reporting that "NATO and Afghan forces have killed at least 115 insurgents over the past week as part of an ongoing operation in a northeastern Afghanistan province."

“NATO said the operation has been going on since around Oct. 15 and has included the use of fighter jets and long-range bombers.”

Last week, a study of NATO press releases by the Afghanistan Analysts Network found that 5% of the casualties from NATO attacks were 'leaders' or 'facilitators'.

NATO continues to claim they are deliberate in their targets.

"The fact is, we target bad guys," said Nicholas Conner, NATO Spokesperson. In tandem with NATO's Afghan partners, "we go after them wherever they are; whoever they are."

The details of the on-going campaign coincides with a surprise visit by Secretary of State Hilary Clinton who is in Kabul urging Afghan officials to continue negotiating with Pakistan and the Taliban.

Kajaki Dam and the Helmand Valley Authority

2011-10-18T10:32:00.000-07:00

Jean MacKenzie reports about the history of the Kajaki dam project in Helmand Province. The upgrade of the dam has been billed as the linchpin of the military effort in Helmand, and key to delivering power – and of course influence – in Kandahar. It is a story of a failure.

Watershed of Waste: Afghanistan’s Kajaki Dam and USAID

It is also an update of a project with a very long history, and many previous failures. A project that was modeled in many ways on the Tennessee Valley Authority in the US .

It started in 1946 when the government of Afghanistan first “hired the largest American heavy engineering firm, Morrison Knudsen, Inc. of Boise, Idaho, to build a dam. Morrison Knudsen, builder of the Hoover Dam, the San Francisco Bay Bridge, and soon the launch complex at Cape Canaveral, specialized in symbols of the future. The firm operated all over the world, boring tunnels through the Andes in Peru, laying airfields in Turkey.”

It is a fascination story told by Nick Cullather.

He explores the way development was used in the post-colonial period to gain influence and sheds light on the chapter of Afghan history that is little know; when the U.S. and the Soviet Union sought influence in Afghanistan through development project and not armies.

From New Deal to New Frontier in Afghanistan: Modernization in a Buffer State

The goal of the project was to project power – by a central government – over areas of the country it had little control. It was to modernize the country. It was political, fueled eventually by the desire of the Monarchy to create a ‘Pastunistan’ consisting of most of Northern Pakistan that would address the uncertainty of Pashtuns after the partition of India in 1947.

The long history of US companies and U.S. aid.

The Helmand Valley project “came under American supervision in 1946 and continued until the departure of the last reclamation expert in 1979, outlasting the theories and rationales on which it was based. It was lavishly funded by U.S. foreign aid, multilateral loans, and the Afghan government, and it was the opposite of piecemeal. It was an “integrated” development scheme, with education, industry, agriculture, medicine, and marketing under a single controlling authority. Nation-building did not fail in Afghanistan for want of money, time, or imagination. In the Helmand Valley, the engines and dreams of modernization had run their full course, spooling out across the desert until they hit limits of physics, culture, and history.”

Here is how it starts.

“In May 1960, the historian Arnold Toynbee left Kandahar and drove 90 miles on freshly paved roads to Lashkar Gah, a modern planned city known locally as the New York of Afghanistan. At the confluence of the Helmand and Arghandab rivers, close against the ancient ruins of Qala Bist, Lashkar Gah’s 8,000 residents lived in suburban-style tract homes surrounded by broad lawns. The city boasted an alabaster mosque, one of the country’s best hospitals, Afghanistan’s only coeducational high school, and the headquarters of the Helmand Valley Authority, a multipurpose dam project funded by the United States. This unexpected proliferation of modernity led Toynbee to reflect on the warning of Sophocles: “the craft of his engines surpasseth his dreams.” In the area around Kandahar, traditional Afghanistan had vanished. “The domain of the Helmand Valley Authority,” he reported, “has become a piece of America inserted into the Afghan landscape. …The new world they are conjuring up out of the desert at the Helmand River’s expense is to be an America-in-Asia.”

…..

“Nothing becomes antiquated faster than symbols of the future, and it is difficult, at only fifty years remove, to envision the hold concrete dams once had on the global imagination. In the mid-20th century, the austere lines of the Hoover Dam and its radiating spans of high-tension wire inscribed federal power on the American landscape. Vladimir Lenin famously remarked that Communism was Soviet power plus electrification, an equation captured by the David Lean film Dr. Zhivago in the image of water surging, as a kind of redemption, from the spillway of an immense Soviet dam. In 1954, standing at the Bhakra- Nangal canal, Nehru described dams as the temples of modern India. “Which place can be greater than this,” he declared, “this Bhakra -Nangal, where thousands of men have worked, have shed their blood, and sweat and laid down their lives as well? …When we see big works, our stature grows with them, and our minds open out a little.”43 For Nehru, for Zahir Shah, for China today, the great blank wall of a dam was a screen on which they would project the future.”

GLOBAL DAY of LISTENING | Friday 21 October

2011-10-18T08:10:00.000-07:00

6:30 pm Afghanistan time (10 am Eastern, 7 am Pacific).
Will continue for 4 hours.

Click here for details

Click here for news.

The Goal

Every month people from around the world listen together to ordinary people living in war-torn countries. It is a way of letting them know that someone is listening; and a way for us to learn what the realities of war and hope look like.

The meetings began with the Afghan Youth Peace Volunteers and spread to include conflict and war zones around the world.

Join Us.

Details on last meeting here.

Write to GlobalDaysOfListening@gmail.com to request a time to talk.

The Border War with Pakistan | Focus Paktika

2011-10-17T13:53:00.000-07:00

The NYT has a front page article on increased violence in Paktika Provence. The region includes a long border with North and South Waziristan in Pakistan. The details come from an embedded journalist at the US base Sharana, one of the areas of the country where the US surge has sent additional troops.

The point of the article is to show that soldiers feel their hands are tied.

It says something about the way the war is fought in Afghanistan when having your hands tied means you need to limit the number of high explosive weapons used and must refrain from using artillery shells with White Phosphorus.

The article notes that there is a CIA base in the province. But say’s nothing of the CIA drone strikes in Pakistan. Over the past six years strikes have focused on North and South Waziristan. Over the past two years, there has been a dramatic shift in the location of the strikes. In 2009, 42% of the strikes took place in North Waziristan and 51% in South Waziristan. In 2010, 89% of the strikes took place in North Waziristan and 6% in South Waziristan.

The graphic above is from the Long War Journal.

The map shows the number of internally displaced Afghans along the border.

Here are the details.

“There were at least 102 of these so-called close-border attacks against the same outposts since May, including one on Oct. 7 that the American military called the largest and most coordinated insurgent operation in the province since 2009. Last year, during the same period in the same places, there were 13 close-border attacks. Most of the indirect-fire attacks, officers said, have been with 107-millimeter rockets, which have a range of about five miles.”

Interviews with soldiers focus on their frustration.

“When taking fire from Afghanistan, they said, they return fire with barrages of high-explosive and white phosphorus artillery rounds. (The burning effects of white phosphorus, they said, can detonate rockets waiting on launchers; for this reason, white phosphorus falls within rules guiding the soldiers’ use of force.)

When receiving fire from Pakistan, they said, they do not return fire with white phosphorus and fire far fewer high-explosive rounds. Attack helicopters and aircraft are also less likely to fire ordnance the closer the firing position is to the border, they said, even if it is on the Afghan side.”

Ghosts of Afghanistan | New Book by Jonathan Steele

2011-10-14T11:07:00.000-07:00

Jonathan Steele has covered Afghanistan for the Guardian (London) for more than thirty years. He was part of the Guardian team which published the Wikileaks Afghanistan cables.

His latest book, Ghosts of Afghanistan: Hard Truths and Foreign Myths, has just been published.

Advanced praise:

"In this original look at the West's obsession with Afghanistan the ghosts include, of course, the inevitable innocents who fall in war but also the public myths, official lies and inconvenient truths that lie behind so much of the bloodshed there. In a riveting chapter, Steele also puts to rest the notion that America had no choice but to go to war after Osama bin Laden's orchestration of the 9/11 attacks." —Seymour Hersh, The New Yorker

"Ghosts of Afghanistan is the best single book on the inter-related US policy crisis in Afghanistan and Pakistan and should be read by all students of foreign affairs." —Selig S. Harrison, author of Out of Afghanistan: The Inside Story of the Soviet Withdrawal

Synopsis

Yes, there are dozens of books on the Afghan wars. Most of them are all about firefights and heroics. But this is the first to take the events of the war Bush and Blair started and put them in the context of the Soviet war and even the British imperial wars that preceded them, and draw the lessons out, and make a sharp summary of what should happen next. No war is ever won against the Afghans. The only option is to give up, but the military never want to give up. The politicians eventually resume control, but Obama has not overruled his generals yet.

Read Steele to see how the Russians coped; how Gorbachev ended the wasteful war, and see how Obama might. This is an extremely well-written modern history -- clear, coherent, with real explanatory power. It's a synthetic work, drawing on Steele's deep experience of the Soviet-Afghan War of 1979-1988 during which period he was the Guardian's man in Moscow, and using that to illuminate the course of war since the post-9/11 invasion.

As Steele makes plain in reporting the views of all sides on the ground, almost all Afghans simply want all foreigners off their soil whether they be jihadist Arabs or Texans, and will fight until that happens. This is, as Steele demonstrates, like all previous foreign invasions of the country, an unwinnable war for the Western allies.

Ghosts of Afghanistan stands out for the combination of its calm clarity and comprehensibility, the firmness of its arguments, Steele's stature as an analyst of the region of 30 years standing, his position as the one UK journalist who had first access to the WikiLeaks cache on Afghanistan, and his interpretation of what he found there.

10 Myths About Afghanistan | Recent article by Jonathan Steele

Documenting the Kill/Capture Missions

2011-10-13T11:26:00.000-07:00

Click here for interactive maps.

The Afghanistan Analyst Network has a new report documenting the foreign forces policy of targeted assassinations and arrests in Afghanistan. The report is based on an analysis of all 3,700+ ISAF press releases from 1 December 2009 thru 30 September 2011.

The operations known as kill/capture have long been presented by ISAF as one of the more effective parts of the international military mission in Afghanistan. A close study of press releases show that “the terms used by ISAF to denote that 'key leaders' were being killed or captured is confusing at best, misleading at worst”

From the Report | In Their Own Words

From 1 December 2009 to 30 September 2011, ISAF press releases reported a total of 3,157 incidents.

Of that there were 2,365 capture‐or‐kill raids.
3,873 individuals were killed.
7,146 detained.

Of that 174 ‘leaders’ were killed and 501 detained.
25 ‘facilitators’ were killed and 423 detained.

The number of ‘leaders’ and ‘facilitators’ killed equals approximately 5% of the total deaths.

The number of ‘leaders’ and ‘facilitators’ detained equals approximately 13% of the total detentions.

The overwhelming number of civilian deaths prompted the writers to conclude with a question. “To what extent is violence in a particular area at least in part a product of the presence of ISAF troops?

The Guardian newspaper has a datablog (above) of interactive graphs and maps that highlight the findings of the investigation. The report itself has charts and graphs to better understand the way ISAF is fighting the war, and how they talk about it.

The missions mushroomed under General Petraeus and peaked in June 2011. There has been a steady decline since then. "The decline may well be linked to the seemingly unsustainable pace of the capture-or-kill operations coupled with the departure of General Petraeus."

About the authors:
Alex Strick van Linschoten and Felix Kuehn are researchers and writers based in Kandahar. They have worked in Afghanistan since 2006, focusing on the Taliban insurgency and the history of southern Afghanistan over the past four decades. Their research extends to other Muslim countries, and they are regular commentators on major western news channels.

Full Report:

A Knock on the Door | 22 Months of ISAF Press Releases

Windows and Mirrors | Albany NY Area | October 13 – November 13

2011-10-12T13:06:00.000-07:00

One of the two Windows and Mirrors community exhibits will begin a month-long schedule of activities in Albany starting tomorrow.

The Capital District Chapter of Women Against War will co-sponsor the exhibitions.

Skidmore, Union, Russell Sage College, and the College of St. Rose are among the region's colleges and universities that will be involved.

The costs of the Afghanistan war – on a personal and global scale – will be the subject of three upcoming events sponsored by Skidmore's Office of Religious and Spiritual Life.

Skidmore Events

On Thursday, October 13, guest speaker Donna Marsh O'Connor will lead a discussion titled "No End in Sight," about the U.S. being a nation at war. Her talk, free and open to the public, begins at 5 p.m. in Gannett Auditorium, Palamountain Hall.

On Friday, October 14, a new exhibition titled "Windows and Mirrors on Afghanistan" opens at Wilson Chapel. Skidmore is one stop on a national tour of this exhibition, which is sponsored by the American Friends Service Committee.

A reception in conjunction with the exhibition is planned at 5:30 p.m. Monday, Oct. 17, at the chapel. Hours of the exhibit are 8 a.m. to 10 p.m. daily through Friday, Oct. 21.

On Wednesday, October. 19, Ed Kinane will present "Eyewitness in Kabul: One month on war-torn Afghanistan." His talk begins at 5 p.m. in Davis Auditorium, Palamountain Hall.

Admission to all events is free and open to the public.

Donna Marsh O'Connor is the mother of three children. Her daughter Vanessa was murdered on 9/11. Vanessa worked in the South Tower of the World Trade Center and at the time of her death, was five months pregnant.

Since 9/11, Donna has worked to counter the discourse of hate and fear that has been the primary mechanism of America's violent responses to the tragedy of that day. Donna Marsh O'Connor is an adjunct faculty member in the Writing Program at Syracuse University and has taught writing and rhetoric for over 25 years.

This community exhibit is a selection of 25 installations from the originals. The war in Afghanistan is now the longest in U.S. history, yet for many of us it has been rendered largely invisible. This exhibit is an opening and an invitation to reflect upon the impact of this war on a civilian population caught in the crossfire.

Ed Kinane will talk about the effects on the people of Afghanistan of our 10-year war in their country. He had just returned from a month in Kabul and was in Iraq with "Voices in the Wilderness" for five months when the "Shock and Awe" campaign there began in 2003. He has been a lifelong activist for social causes, having traveled in Africa for three years and joining the anti-apartheid movement there and in the U.S. he has twice been jailed for participating in protests against the School for the Americas.