Talks Resume on Transit of War Supplies through Pakistan

Photo by Anjum Naveed (AP) Pakistani Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani (2nd Right) meeting with U.S. Special Representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan Marc Grossman (2nd left) in Islamabad on Thursday 26 April.


Marc Grossman is in Pakistan for the first time since US forces killed 24 Pakistani soldiers in a cross border attack last November. The US has been unwilling to suspend drone attacks into Pakistan, one of the key demands before ground transit of NATO and US war supplies to Afghanistan can resume.

AP reports on the meeting yesterday.

“He said he didn't expect to get an immediate commitment that the routes would reopen but that "the task now is to begin a conversation about how to move forward." Grossman also repeated earlier U.S. statements of regret but didn't apologize.

Washington wants the supply routes open before a May 20-21 summit of NATO leaders in Chicago.”

Here is a review of the Pakistani demands.

"After weeks of debate, the Parliament of Pakistan has unanimously endorsed a list of demands to guide discussions with the United States.

The paper, drafted by the national security service, is the latest step in redefining ground rules after 24 Pakistani soldiers were killed by US airstrikes in a November cross border attack.

The result is a series of comprehensive demands, including an official apology for the killing of the Pakistani soldiers, an end to CIA drone strikes, and a ban on the transport of US/NATO weapons and ammunition thru Pakistan to the war in Afghanistan.

There is a prohibition on overt or covert military operations in the country, a ban on private contractors and a call on the government to pursue a natural gas pipeline with Iran.

This level of engagement by Parliament is really a demand for transparency. Claiming oversight responsibilities with the demand that no verbal agreements regarding national security be entered by the government.

If these demands are met, the US/NATO supply lines – for food and fuel – would be opened. The demands are non-binding and must be approved by senior US and Pakistani officials.”

A Few Good Men For Afghan Women

A nice profile of Afghan feminists by Lianne Gutcher.

A Few Good Men For Afghan Women

“Zafar Salehi knows his fellow students at university make fun of him and Tayeb Khan won't tell his family about his involvement — but as often as their schedules permit, the two young Afghan men make their way to a small office in the west of Kabul to volunteer at Young Women for Change (YWC), an Afghan non-profit organisation. The dirty little secret they keep from their families and many of their friends is that they are women's rights activists in Kabul.

On a March day, Salehi sits in the office surrounded by flyers advocating for girls' education and the elimination of violence against women, working out what still needs to be done to get the first women-only internet cafe ready for opening in a few days time. Stacked in the corner are 15 laptops, ready for installation at the site, once it has been painted.

Khan, smart in a business suit, arrives from his job as an administration coordinator at a local mobile phone company to help out before he rushes off to his evening class at the American University of Afghanistan, where he is studying business administration.

Salehi, 24, says he gets a "weird reaction" when he does tell people he works for free for a women's rights organisation.”

Read full article here.

Troops and Contractors in Afghanistan | March 2012

On Sunday it was announced that the United States and Afghanistan had agreed to the framework of a Strategic Partnership Agreement. The document has not been made public but we know it commits the United States to a lasting presence in Afghanistan through at least 2024.

In the U.S., it will by-pass congressional oversight and simply needs the signature of President Obama. In Afghanistan, Parliamentary hearings began on Monday but it is unclear whether or not they need to 'approve' the treaty or if it moves forward with the signature of President Karzai.

"What I understand is what it's like to be in a war zone and I understand the behavior in a war zone. And I would say that, first of all, that war is really an institution made up of criminal behavior. When we as civilians want to solve our problems, we're not allowed to murder people and burn their houses down. I don't see why war is an acceptable means of conflict resolution. And furthermore, the majority of people that die are innocent civilians." - Scott Camil, US Vietnam Veteran

According to the Brooking’s Afghanistan Index at the end of March there were 89,000 US troops in Afghanistan. The Department of Defense lists an addition 143,839 contractors.

89,000 – Troops Deployed (March 2012)
117,227 – Department of Defense (DoD) Contractors (March 2012)
26,612 – DoD Private Security – not USAID and State (March 2012)

Total – 232,839

Contractor numbers from CENTCOM Quarterly Contractor Census Report (DoD)
Number of US Troops from Afghanistan Index (Brookings Institution)

Aid Effectiveness in Fragile States | Intl. Peace Institute

The International Peace Institute takes a critical look at what's worked and what's failed as international institutions explore better ways to help resolve the aftermath of conflict peacefully.

The findings focus on strengthening international peace and security institutions, including recommendations for the UN. It does not focus as much on disarmament.

The report finds that ‘compacts’ will be more effective if the following recommendations are met:

• Compacts should be considered only when a peace accord is agreed upon and where basic security is in place.
• Civil society should be given the opportunity to participate in both compact creation and implementation.
• Compact commitments should be specific, balanced, and focused on short timelines.
• Compacts should reinforce and coordinate with ongoing international and national processes.
• Compacts should include specific mechanisms for implementation, oversight, and enforcement, with host governments in the lead.

Aid Effectiveness in Fragile States: Lessons from the First Generation of Transition Compacts

“Amid growing recognition that international efforts to support fragile and conflict-affected states are falling short of expectations, donors and partner governments continue to seek new approaches. Attention has recently focused on the notion of “compacts”—instruments that allow national and international partners to agree on the most urgent priorities requiring a collective effort in support of postconflict peacebuilding in a particular country, and identify how, and from which sources and instruments, implementation will be financed.”

There is a section on Afghanistan that looks at 2006 and the immediate post-Bonn realities. Here is the conclusion.

“The Afghanistan Compact was a good idea that fell short in implementation. At first, the intensity of the negotiations and personal commitment of its drafters fostered a true sense of trust among Afghan and international partners. In that sense, the document was effective as a high-level political statement of common purpose.

However, the lack of specificity, priority, and sequencing in its benchmarks and the unwieldy membership and weak authority of the JCMB made the compact difficult to manage and implement. In the words of one of its critics, “it was dead before it had a chance to live.”

Finally, the compact came too late to influence donor behavior or practices, as it was enacted long after donor policies had been set. Since 2002, aid had been focused in the east and the south, and other areas of strategic and military priority and deployment; and such policies continued despite evidence that they were undermining overall progress on reconstruction and development. Rather than refocusing donor investment, the compact and the JCMB became beholden to the existing priorities of individual nations.”

Here is the summary chart (click to enlarge).

The Soviet Withdrawal | Kabul Transit

A segment from the film Kabul Transit that looks at art and culture in the context of the Soviet withdrawal in February 1989.

“Afghanistan taught us an invaluable lesson . . . It has been and always will be impossible to solve political problems using force. We should have helped the people of Afghanistan in improving their life, but it was a gross mistake to send troops into the country.”

– Retired Red Army General Boris Gromov.

Drone Warfare: Killing by Remote Control | Medea Benjamin

From the introduction by Barbara Ehrenreich

"In many ways, drones present the same moral issues as any other action-at-a-distance weapon: They allow warriors to kill at a minimal risk to themselves, thus lowering the human cost of aggression. Thus the ancient contempt for archers, as recounted in The Iliad, where the Greek chieftains deride the Trojan prince Paris for his reliance on the bow and arrow. Real men are not afraid of hand-to-hand combat; only cowards attack from a distance, often hiding behind trees or rocks.

Drones are of course the ultimate action-at-a-distance weapon, allowing the aggressor to destroy targets in Pakistan or Afghanistan while “hiding” thousands of miles away in Nevada. But this alone does not make them uniquely pernicious: Missiles and aerial bombardment can also be launched from great distances, by individuals who need not see the extent of the violence they inflict. If we are to end war, we need to take aim at all the weaponry that makes it possible and even inviting – guns, artillery, fighter planes and bombs—and at the industries that manufacture them.

But in this remarkably cogent and carefully researched book, Medea Benjamin makes it clear that drones are not just another high-tech military trinket. In fact, it is hard to even claim that their primary use is “military” in any traditional sense. Drones have made possible a program of targeted assassinations that are justified by the U.S. “war on terror,” but otherwise in defiance of both international and U.S. law. As Benjamin documents, it is the CIA, not the Pentagon, that operates most drone strikes in Western Asia, with no accountability whatsoever. Designated targets, including American citizens, have been condemned without evidence or trial-- at the will, apparently, of the White House. And those who target the drones do so with complete impunity for the deaths of any civilians who end up as collateral damage.

One of Benjamin’s most disturbing revelations has to do with the explosive expansion of the drone industry in just the last few years, to the point where 50 nations now possess the devices. Drone Warfare sketches out the nightmare possibilities posed by this insane proliferation. We cannot only expect drones to fall into the hands of “rogue” nations or terrorist groups; we should brace ourselves, too, for the domestic use of surveillance drones and even armed drones at the Mexican border and possibly against American civilian protestors.

In anyone else’s hands, this could be a deeply depressing book. Fortunately though, Medea Benjamin is not just an ace reporter; she’s one of the world’s leading anti-war activists. Drone Warfare ends with the story of the global anti-drone movement, in which she has played a central role. At the end of this book, you’ll be inspired – and you’ll know exactly how to get involved!"

Order the book here.

David Swanson Review Robots Kills, But Blood is on Our Hands

Pulitzer Profile | Afghan photographer Massoud Hossaini

A nice profile of Massoud Hossaini by Abubakar Siddique. Massoud was award the 2012 Pulitzer Prize for breaking-news photography on Monday. You can find a slideshow of his others images at the bottom of the page.

He recalls the day he took the award-winning image vividly. It was December 6, 2011, on the occasion of the Shi'ite festival of Ashura.




Pulitzer-Winning Image Source Of Pride, Nightmares For Afghan Photographer

Tarana stands erect amid the dead and injured at her feet, her blood-stained hands opened as if asking, "Why?" Tears and blood stream down her face, her mouth agape.

It is a heartbreaking image, one that captures the ubiquitous violence that has befallen Afghanistan, and for that it has been awarded the 2012 Pulitzer Prize for breaking-news photography.

But for the man who took the picture, the photo that has earned him international recognition leaves him conflicted, a reminder of the traumatic experiences he encounters as a news photographer in one of the world's most violent places.

Afghan photographer Massoud Hossaini recalls the day he took the award-winning image vividly. It was December 6, 2011, on the occasion of the Shi'ite festival of Ashura.

As participants of a festival procession gathered outside the Abul Fazel Shrine in Kabul, a powerful blast went off. Standing just 15 meters away from the blast, Hossaini was spared major injury by the hundreds of mourners between him and the suicide bomber.

Hossaini rushed toward the center of the blast, which killed more than 70 people and injured scores more. There, as the smoke cleared, he saw the 10-year-old Tarana, dressed in green, screaming amid the chaos.

"In the blink of an eye, Tarana's surrounding's were filled with blood. The dead and injured bodies of her relatives surrounded her," Hossaini says. "Among them were her brother and playmates. This caused her to go into shock, which led her to stand in the mayhem and cry in pain."

Showing Afghans' Pain To The World

Despite his own shock and shrapnel injuries to his arm, Hossaini continued to shoot pictures. When he was done, he rushed back to his office at Agence France-Presse to upload the images for the world to see.

"The procession was drenched in blood, but I was still responsible for covering it. This sense of responsibility motivated me to continue taking pictures," he says. "So I covered that tragedy from many angles so that people around the world could see what pain I saw that day and what pain we observe almost every day in similar incidents."

Afterward, Hossaini sought treatment for his wounds and retreated home to his family. He soon began receiving telephone calls -- his photograph of Tarana had appeared on the front pages of major U.S. newspapers, including "The New York Times", "The Washington Post," and the "Los Angeles Times."

"To me the picture showed to the people of the world what had happened in Kabul that day. What had struck Tarana and what had I witnessed," he says.

Proud, Despite The Suffering

It was a point of pride for the 30-year-old photographer, who after fleeing to Iran to escape the Soviet occupation in Afghanistan had worked as a tailor to raise money to buy his first camera.

He documented subjects close to him -- the reformist movement in Tehran and fellow refugees living along Iran's border with Afghanistan.

Hossaini returned to his native Kabul after the fall of the Taliban in 2001. There he took various photojournalism courses and joined Agence France-Presse in 2007.

This year, his hard work was awarded, multiple times. He is currently in Holland to receive second prize in the Spot News category for the 2012 World Press Photo contest, which was awarded for his photo of Tarana. Next, he will head to New York to pick up his Pulitzer, and a $10,000 prize.

While Hossaini expresses satisfaction with his awards, they have also left him with conflicting emotions.

"I am happy that, as an Afghan, I am able to reflect the suffering of Afghans. But I am unhappy over what happened and that I witnessed it," Hossaini says.

"I saw Tarana in that condition and I am even in contact with her now. I know that she has nightmares about it just as I do."