Watching the Warmakers is based in Brighton, England.
Our aim is to support activists in educating themselves in the issues
which confront those struggling for peace and justice.

News archives for the week ending 7th August 2009

Afghan elections 'will not be perfect'

UK’s ambassador to Afghanistan Mark Sedwill, appearing in a video conference from Kabul, admitted to the media here on Wednesday that the forthcoming general elections in the war-torn country won’t be perfect.

‘The circumstances are very challenging. We have to recognise that these elections won’t be perfect, they won’t be up to the standards that they would be in a western democracy with an educated population,’ he said.

He said the test for success, therefore, ‘is whether elections are credible, secure and inclusive enough that they genuinely reflect the will of the people’.

‘If that’s the case, then we can consider that they are legitimate and the next government of Afghanistan will have the legitimacy that comes from reflecting the will of their own people,’ he said.

Dawn, Pakistan, 7/8/09

'Two more years' of heavy fighting in Afghanistan

An incoming adviser to the top U.S. general in Afghanistan predicted Thursday that the United States will see about two more years of heavy fighting and then either hand off to a much improved Afghan fighting force or "lose and go home."

David Kilcullen, a counterinsurgency expert who will assume a role as a senior adviser to Gen. Stanley McChrystal, has been highly critical of the war's management to date. He outlined a "best-case scenario" for a decade of further U.S. and NATO involvement in Afghanistan during an appearance at the U.S. Institute of Peace.

Under that timeline, the allied forces would turn the corner in those two years, followed by about three years of transition to a newly capable Afghan force and about five years of "overwatch."

San Francisco Chronicle, 6/8/09

Somalia is Obama's new Afghanistan

The Horn of Africa is a hotbed of pirates, Islamic radicals, warlords, refugees, and, lately, foreign armies trying to influence this killing field. The epicenter is Somalia, a Muslim land largely in chaos since 1991 and – this is the big worry – a possible nesting ground for Al Qaeda or its allies.

President Obama has taken on this trouble spot directly, as he has Afghanistan. He's beefing up US military aid and training for Somalia's besieged government, which can barely hold onto the capital, Mogadishu. And on Thursday, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton held a high-profile meeting with the country's elected president, Sheik Sharif Sheik Ahmed.

Mrs. Clinton boldly declared that Al Shabaab, the Islamic militants that are close to toppling Mr. Sharif, sees "Somalia as a future haven for global terrorism." A victory for them – much like the 1996 takeover of Afghanistan by the Taliban – might also destabilize nearby countries, such as Kenya. She noted the group's attempt to recruit followers abroad and its alleged plot for an attack in Australia.

Such Bush-like talk and Mr. Obama's expansion of military aid sets down a marker for the US president to rid Somalia of the threat from Al Shabaab and its fellow foreign fighters.

Christian Science Monitor, 6/8/09

Swat refugees pay price of offensive

The Pakistan military’s offensive against the Taliban in the Swat Valley has been hailed as a success despite the exodus of some two million men, women and children. Information is sparse because the area is still closed to the outside world, but reports from relief officials are trickling out and they say the dismal plight of the displaced and those returning home threatens to squander gains from disrupting the Taliban.

Now in the final stages of the offensive, the Pakistan government has begun ordering displaced people to return home and is reported to be systematically closing the IDP camps. Even though the government has declared that returns are voluntary, observers have witnessed incidents in which people have been given little or no time to make up their minds, asked to put a thumb print on an English document they cannot read, and instructed to join a convoy the next day or risk loss of government assistance.

Relief officials say people are returning to Swat but not to their homes, often because the Pakistan Army itself does not let them pass or has imposed a very restrictive curfew. The government is now talking about setting up new camps — inside Swat and Buner, a more southern district that was included in the offensive. This has the desirable side-effect of also shielding them from public view.

New York Times, 6/8/09

US takes greater control of NATO forces

NATO approved a reorganization of its command structure in Afghanistan on Tuesday to better coordinate the war there against Al Qaeda and the Taliban.

The Obama administration, which has moved to sharply increase the American military presence in Afghanistan, wanted the change to improve command efficiency over the NATO forces there, known as the International Security Assistance Force.

NATO agreed to establish a new Intermediate Joint Headquarters in Kabul under an American, Lt. Gen. David M. Rodriguez, to manage the day-to-day war.

New York Times, 4/8/09

Al Qaeda offers truce to Obama

In a newly released video interview, al Qaeda deputy Ayman al Zawahiri extended a truce offer from the terrorist group to President Obama today if the U.S. withdraws from Afghanistan.

The video references the President's speech in Cairo in early June, making it at least two months old, and suggesting that despite the U.S. manhunt for the terrorist leader, he is still able to follow current events. Zawahiri, like bin Laden, has a $25M reward for his capture.

ABC News, 3/8/09

Attacks underscore insurgents growing reach

Two attacks Monday in western and northern Afghanistan underscored the growing reach of the country's insurgency, which now stretches far beyond its early bases along the border with Pakistan.

That expansion – as well as more effective use of improvised explosive devices (IEDs) – shows a growing sophistication on the part of the insurgency, and has raised the stakes ahead of the upcoming presidential election.

"Everything has gotten much more sophisticated. These are very well trained guerrillas now. These are not rag-tag village peasants any more," says Ahmed Rashid, author of "Taliban."

Christian Science Monitor, 3/8/09

Afghan election poses dilemma for US...

When Hamid Karzai was installed as president by the international community in 2001, he was widely seen, particularly by the United States, as the bright hope of Afghanistan's future after the fall of the Taliban.

Now, as Mr. Karzai runs for re-election, the picture has changed markedly. The Taliban, once thought of as a defeated entity, has re-emerged as a full-blown insurgency. And Mr. Karzai is now widely seen as presiding over a corrupt government, says analyst Nora Bensahel of the RAND Corporation.

Afghan analyst Candace Rondeaux of the International Crisis Group says that puts the United States in an awkward position because the U.S. and Mr. Karzai are inextricably linked in Afghan minds.

"Earlier this year, the sort of strident sort of criticism that you heard coming out of the White House certainly indicated that there was displeasure with the disfunction of the government in Kabul," Rondeaux said.

"But they've had to back away from that, because any Karzai fault is something that really can be linked very much to the failure of the United States to press very hard for greater transparency, greater accountability, and to also put in place institutions that are responsive to the Afghan people."

Voice of America, 3/8/09

...and many Afghanis distrust process

Little more than three weeks before the presidential election, problems that include insecurity and fears of fraud are raising concerns about the credibility of the race, which President Obama has called the most important event in Afghanistan this year.

Many Afghans are convinced that foreign powers will choose the winner and fix the result. But no matter who prevails, the multitude of problems and what is expected to be a low turnout in conflict areas are likely to reduce the next president’s mandate.

Western officials and Afghans alike worry that the election could be so flawed that many Afghans might reject the balloting and its results, with potentially dangerous consequences.

If they cannot vote because of insecurity in the south, Pashtuns, the country’s largest ethnic group and the one most closely associated with the Taliban, could become even more alienated from the government and the foreign forces backing it, political analysts say.

New York Times, 3/8/09

Obama: Kuwait an 'outstanding host'

President Barack Obama said Monday that Kuwait has been an outstanding host for U.S. military stationed there since the beginning of the war in Iraq and that he looks forward to even stronger relations with the Persian Gulf ally.

The U.S. military used Kuwait as a staging ground for the 2003 invasion of Iraq. Obama said the U.S. and Kuwait enjoy strong bilateral relations.

"We are looking to make those relations even stronger," he said before an Oval Office meeting with Kuwait's ruler, Sheik Sabah Al Ahmed Al Sabah.

"Kuwait has been an outstanding host for the United States Armed Forces during its operations in Iraq. And as we transition our operations in Iraq, it's important for us to emphasize not only our gratitude to Kuwait, but also our ongoing commitment to Kuwait's security."

Associated Press, 3/8/09

Over 50 British troops suffer amputation

A spokesman for the Ministry of Defence said: "As of March 31 2009, a total of 51 UK service personnel have suffered amputations due to injuries sustained while on operational deployment on Operation Herrick."

This figure does not take into account Operation Panther's Claw, which resulted in July being the bloodiest month since operations began. The number who have lost limbs is already higher than the Falklands War in 1982, which killed 258 British troops. So far, 191 soldiers have died in Afghanistan.

Colonel Richard Kemp, the former commander of the British forces in Afghanistan, said the number of injuries was "shockingly high".

"We should never forget how life-shattering these injuries are. And in addition to the horrifying physical effects on these young people, there will also be deep psychological trauma," he said.

"This is one of the toughest insurgencies we've ever fought. The only thing comparable in modern memory is the Falklands and the Taliban... is a much tougher enemy. The number of amputees is now worse than the Falklands despite vast improvements in body armour and medical treatment."

Sunday Telegraph, 2/8/09

British Troops Leave Iraq As Mandate Ends

There are no longer any British troops in Iraq, as the mandate for their presence has officially expired.

That is in line with the withdrawal of British soldiers from the country that began at the end of April, when Britain ended combat operations in the country.

But even the handful of British troops, some 150, who were to remain behind to train the Iraqi Navy has had to leave the country temporarily and are now based in Kuwait. They now are waiting for the Iraqi parliament to approve a new agreement that will allow them to work following the current mandate's end

The new agreement, already signed by Iraqi and British government officials, awaits a final reading and expected passage in the Iraqi parliament in the coming weeks.

All this makes the official end to Britain's military role in Iraq a rather anticlimactic moment, with no parades and no final ceremonies. Nonetheless, it does mark a milestone in both British and Iraqi history. Some 45,000 British troops were in the coalition force assembled to topple Saddam Hussein in 2003.

After the war, the British remained responsible for security in much of the south of the country, particularly around Iraq's second-largest city and key port, Basra. The British lost 179 soldiers in the invasion and occupation, including those killed by hostile forces, in accidents, or from illness.

Radio Free Europe 2/8/09

Lawmakers urge UK to drop Afghan drugs mission

Britain should abandon its anti-drug role in Afghanistan and focus on securing the country against the Taliban insurgency, a prominent group of U.K. lawmakers said Sunday.

Britain, along with the United States, is one of the leading contributors to the international campaign to eradicate Afghanistan's opium crop. But nearly 160 million pounds ($267 million) were spent on its counter-narcotics role between 2004 and 2008, to little effect.

The U.K. also supplies the second-highest number of troops to NATO's military campaign against the Taliban. Its 9,000-strong contingent has taken heavy casualties in the past month.

Lawmakers on the House of Commons Foreign Affairs Committee say Britain does not have the resources to shoulder both burdens at once. The Foreign Affairs Committee said there could be "no question" of abandoning Afghanistan. Its chairman, Mike Gapes, said the international community needed to show "that it intends to outlast the insurgency and remain in Afghanistan until the Afghan authorities are able take control of their own security."

But the report said the international effort to put Afghanistan back on its feet had faltered. Lawmakers also had some harsh words for what they called the "unilateralist tendencies" of the U.S. under George W. Bush.

The Foreign Affairs Committee is made up of 14 lawmakers drawn from Britain's three major parties. Although its recommendations are not binding, they are generally taken into account by policy-makers.

Britain's foreign ministry said it welcomed the report and would study it closely before submitting a response to lawmakers in the coming months.

AP 2/8/09

Pashtun agenda at heart of Afghanistan war

In a recent debate leading up to the presidential elections here, the first question was not about terrorism, or violence, or even opium. It was about how candidates viewed a jagged line casually drawn on a map 115 years ago by British colonial rulers.

For the West, this border separates Afghanistan from Pakistan, and it is a source of great frustration that neither country seems able or even willing to enforce it. But for many Pashtuns, the most powerful ethnic tribe here, the line runs through what they call "Pashtunistan" and is no more legitimate than the border that once divided East and West Germany.

The Pashtuns and their ethnic agenda are in many ways at the center of the upcoming elections and the armed conflicts in both Afghanistan and Pakistan. Like the Pashtun-dominated Taliban, many Pashtuns who have not taken up arms still share the dream of a united Pashtunistan. This dream grows stronger as the Pashtuns on both sides of the border get more disgruntled.

"Pashtuns are critical to the Afghan election," says Hassan Abbas, research fellow at Harvard University's Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs. "Pashtuns are at the heart of insurgency in both Pakistan and Afghanistan because they have been used and abused in the last three decades by regional as well as international players. Their social fabric has been torn to smithereens and their tribal ethos has been under severe stress and strain due to the rise of fanatical religious elements. Pashtuns today are a victim of circumstances."

The Pashtuns number about 42 million people — 42 percent of the population of Afghanistan and 15 percent in Pakistan. They support and, indeed, largely make up the Taliban.

Associated Press, 1/8/09

Dyncorp looks forward to boost of profits from war

DynCorp International, the Virginia provider of mission critical services to the U.S. military, got good news Thursday from Houston rival KBR, which said it would not be protesting the recent loss of work supporting American troops in Afghanistan to DynCorp and Fluor Group.

The announcement was excellent news for DynCorp, which has been consistently winning government war-zone work from competitors like Blackwater USA and KBR that have had trouble in Iraq. DynCorp is counting on the expanding war in Afghanistan to provide corporate growth and was bracing for a potential challenge from KBR.

It is now likely that within six months DynCorp will begin working on a five-year, $5.9 billion deal awarded in July to logistically support U.S. troops in southern Afghanistan.

DynCorp has emerged as one of the big winners of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, which now generate 53% of DynCorp's $3.1 billion of annual revenue. The company's revenue grew 45% last year thanks to a 51%-owned joint venture that has a multiyear $4.6 billion contract to supply 9,100 linguists to translate for U.S. soldiers in Iraq.

Forbes.com, 30/7/09

Civilian deaths in Afghanistan up 24%

The United Nations said Friday the number of civilians killed in conflict in Afghanistan has jumped 24 percent so far this year, with bombings by insurgent and airstrikes by international forces the biggest single killers.

In a grim assessment of the first half of 2009, the U.N. assistance mission in Afghanistan said the Taliban and other anti-government militants have become more deadly by shifting from ambush attacks to suicide bombings, roadside explosives and targeted assassinations.

The report said international forces have given high priority to minimizing civilian casualties, but along with Afghan forces have killed 310 civilians. Of those, 200 were killed in 40 airstrikes. The total death toll — including those which couldn't be attributed to either side — of 1,013 civilians is 24 percent higher than in the same period in 2008, and 48 percent higher than in 2007.

Associated Press, 31/7/09

Problems plague Afghanistan reconstruction

U.S. agencies handling reconstruction work in Afghanistan lack direction and communication, problems that risk wasting U.S. tax dollars, says the special inspector general overseeing tens of billions of dollars worth of projects.

Inspector General Arnold Fields says that coordination between the Americans and the Afghans is poor, leading to a disjointed effort and slowing progress on critically needed improvements to the country's transportation, agriculture and energy production.

He also said that "there isn't always a direct connection between what the Afghans feel that they need and what the reconstruction effort is delivering."

Since 2002, the U.S. has committed $32 billion to Afghanistan's reconstruction. With President Barack Obama ordering more civilian and military personnel there to quell a growing insurgency, that figure is expected to rise to nearly $50 billion by 2010, according to a quarterly report released Wednesday by Fields' office.

Associated Press, 31/7/09