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 11th December 2009

NATO admits civilian deaths...

A senior NATO commander in Afghanistan conceded on Wednesday for the first time that civilians may have been killed during a joint military operation with Afghan forces in the east of the country this week.

"There is confusion. The initial reports are confusing like always in this situation. In the confusion there was obviously a fire-fight and we are investigating," Lieutenant General David Rodriguez told journalists.

"There could possibly have been some civilians killed," added Rodriguez, the number two commander of NATO troops serving in Afghanistan.

President Hamid Karzai's office said six civilians, including a woman, died when troops from the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force conducted an operation in the eastern province of Laghman.

AFP, 9/1209

...and says more are inevitable

NATO will step up fighting in Afghanistan next year as 37,000 more troops join the conflict, and is aware that increased civilian casualties may be the result, a military spokesman said on Wednesday.

"I think the intent of General McChrystal with the force strength is as soon as possible to demonstrate the ability to do just that," Brigadier-General Eric Tremblay, spokesman for the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan, said on Wednesday when asked if combat would intensify.

But Tremblay said increased fighting generally risked more casualties. "An increase in tempo could lead to increased collateral damages," he said.

Reuters, 9/12/09

US will be in Afghanistan for years

America’s involvement in Afghanistan could stretch on for years and cost upward of $10 billion annually just to finance an adequate Afghan security force, the overall commander in the region told Congress on Wednesday.

Testifying before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, the commander, Gen. David H. Petraeus, one of the military’s most influential generals, estimated that building and maintaining a combined army and police force of 400,000 — a size that American commanders believe may eventually be needed to fully secure the country — would cost more than $10 billion a year.

On Tuesday, President Hamid Karzai, at a news conference with Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates, said Afghanistan would not be able to pay for its own security until at least 2024, an assertion that surprised Mr. Gates and drew expressions of concern from senators of both parties.

“We’re talking about $150 billion, just on the security side, before we get to the development side,” said Senator Robert Menendez, Democrat of New Jersey.

New York Times, 9/12/09

EU caves in to Israel on Jerusalem

The European Union sought to avoid a confrontation with Israel by toning down a declaration that called for the recognition of east Jerusalem as the capital of a future Palestinian state.

Under pressure from Germany, France and Italy, EU foreign ministers removed language from a draft statement introduced by Sweden that had met with protests from Israel and charges that the EU was interfering with the peace process. Instead, EU foreign ministers meeting in Brussels today said Israelis and Palestinians should work through negotiations and that Jerusalem must be “the future capital of two states.”

Bloomberg, 8/12/09

Japan suspends Okinawa talks

A rift between the United States and Japan over the future of a military air station on Okinawa widened Tuesday, as Foreign Minister Katsuya Okada told Japanese media that talks on relocating the base have been suspended.

The report offers additional evidence that the newly elected government of Japan is uncomfortable with the military footprint of the United States. Most of the 36,000 U.S. military personnel in Japan are based on the southern island of Okinawa.

The Futenma Marine air station is in a densely populated part of Okinawa and has become a symbol of the noise, pollution and crime that many Japanese associate with the U.S. military presence.

Washington Post, 9/12/09

Iraq auctions off oil

The threat of bombs and violence will compete with the lure of some of the world's most promising oilfields when oil majors fly into Baghdad this week to bid in Iraq's second auction of oil contracts since the U.S. invasion.

The risks, nearly seven years after U.S. forces toppled Saddam Hussein, were on display on Tuesday when a series of car bombs killed 112 people in the capital, rattling the windows of the Oil Ministry where the Dec. 11-12 auction will be held.

The bulk of the planet's top oil companies, including Exxon Mobil, Royal Dutch Shell, BPl, Chevronl and Total will compete for the deals -- if executives come despite Tuesday's bombings.

"The vastness of its undeveloped reserves, its nine supergiants, among the lowest extraction costs in the world at $2 per barrel, and the fairly decent deal being offered by the government of Iraq -- it's difficult to overstate the attractiveness of these fields for oil companies," said Evan Pressman, a partner at Iraq-focused research firm Ergo.

Reuters, 8/12/09

US threatens to increase attacks on Pakistan

The Obama administration is turning up the pressure on Pakistan to fight the Taliban inside its borders, warning that if it does not act more aggressively the United States will use considerably more force on the Pakistani side of the border to shut down Taliban attacks on American forces in Afghanistan, American and Pakistani officials said.

United States officials said the message did not amount to an ultimatum, but rather it was intended to prod a reluctant Pakistani military to go after Taliban insurgents in Pakistan who are directing attacks in Afghanistan.

For their part the Pakistanis interpreted the message as a fairly bald warning that unless Pakistan moved quickly to act against two Taliban groups they have so far refused to attack, the United States was prepared to take unilateral action to expand Predator drone attacks beyond the tribal areas and, if needed, to resume raids by Special Operations forces into the country against Al Qaeda and Taliban leaders.

New York Times, 7/12/09

Gates: US will withdraw 'a handful' of troops in 2011

The Obama administration sent a forceful public message Sunday that American military forces could remain in Afghanistan for a long time, seeking to blunt criticism that President Obama had sent the wrong signal in his war-strategy speech last week by projecting July 2011 as the start of a withdrawal.

“We have strategic interests in South Asia that should not be measured in terms of finite times,” said Gen. James L. Jones, the president’s national security adviser, speaking on CNN’s “State of the Union.” “We’re going to be in the region for a long time.”

On NBC’s “Meet the Press,” Defense Secretary Robert Gates said that under the plan, 100,000 American troops would be in Afghanistan in July 2011, and “some handful, or some small number, or whatever the conditions permit, will begin to withdraw at that time.”

New York Times, 6/12/09

'Strategic American interests' determine US line on Sri Lanka

A report on Sri Lanka to be released next week by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee urges a less confrontational approach to that nation, citing strategic American interests in the region.

The United States and other Western countries abstained from a vote at the International Monetary Fund in July to lend $2.6 billion to Sri Lanka. The United States has also curbed military aid because of concerns about human rights abuses in the war against the Tamil Tigers. But Sri Lanka is too important a country to be isolated from the West, the report argues.

“Sri Lanka is located at the nexus of crucial maritime trading routes in the Indian Ocean connecting Europe and the Middle East to China and the rest of Asia,” the report says. “The United States, India, and China all share an interest in deterring terrorist activity and curbing piracy that could disrupt maritime trade.”

New York Times, 6/12/09

Obama secures Iraq election deal

Iraqi lawmakers ended a governmental crisis Sunday by passing an election law just before a midnight deadline, after intense wrangling among the sides and, according to several participants, late phone calls from President Obama and Vice President Joe Biden.

The law paves the way for national elections to be held most likely by the end of February, according to U.N. officials and Iraqi lawmakers. The vote is considered a test of Iraq's democratic ambitions as American combat troops here are scheduled to start their withdrawal this spring.

The tide was said to have turned only after evening phone calls from the White House to the president of Iraqi Kurdistan, Massoud Barzani, a Kurdish nationalist considered deeply suspicious of the Arab motives and alarmed by America's imminent withdrawal. Biden spoke with Barzani for 50 minutes, and the Kurdish leader also talked to Obama, participants said.

Kurdish lawmakers said Barzani secured U.S. guarantees that an oft-delayed Iraqi national census would be conducted in 2010 and that the status of disputed northern territories -- including the oil-rich region of Kirkuk -- would be resolved according to the parameters of Iraq's Constitution.

Los Angeles Times, 7/12/09

US 'comfortable' with Pakistan's nuclear security

The United States has helped Pakistan improve security arrangements for its nuclear arms and is "comfortable" the weapons are secure, Defense Secretary Robert Gates said in an interview aired on Sunday. Asked how he could be sure, given reports the United States does not know where all the arms are located, Gates would only say that based on the information available, U.S. officials were comfortable with their safety.

"We have a good relationship with them. We've actually given them assistance in improving some of their security arrangements over the past number of years. This is not a new relationship. And I think just based on the information available to us, that gives us the comfort," he said.

New York Times, 6/12/09

NATO surge less than meeets the eye

U.S. President Barack Obama's NATO allies have met his offer of 30,000 extra troops with as many as 7,000 of their own, but while Washington will be grateful for those pledges they could add up to less than meets the eye. While some countries are indeed sending extra troops, two of the most important allies, Canada and the Netherlands, could withdraw nearly as many in the next two years as the others are adding.

Italy will increase its 2,800-strong force by 1,000, but the other additional numbers are being made up mainly from small contingents from smaller countries, who lack the same firepower and cohesion of a larger unit from a single big country.

The result will be a fighting force built much more around U.S. and British troops than before, similar in composition and size to the U.S.-led force that fought in Iraq, rather than the broader NATO-led operation previously seen in Afghanistan.

Reuters, 6/12/09

French are opposed to surge...

In France, a recent opinion poll suggests that a vast majority of the people are against sending more French troops to Afghanistan. The poll conducted for the weekly Sud Ouest Dimanche showed over 82 percent of French adults are apposed to the planned reinforcement of some 3,300 French troops already in the war zone.

Press TV, Iran, 6/12/09

...and so are Germans

The proportion of people in Germany wanting a full withdrawal of troops serving in Afghanistan has significantly increased, according to a poll by Infratest-Dimap released by ARD. 69 per cent of respondents support bringing all the troops back from Afghanistan, up 12 points since September.

Angus Reid Polls, 6/12/09

'Too many officers have been implicated in kidnappings, burglaries and shakedowns'

Current plans call for increasing the Afghan Army from 90,000 troops to 134,000 by next fall. General McChrystal wants 240,000 a year later.

Highly critical reports this fall by American officials showed why this is so hard: 90 percent illiteracy levels for Afghan troops; desertion rates so high that thousands must be recruited each year to keep the force from shrinking; broken logistics; and, most tellingly, “a lack of competent and professional leadership at all levels.”

Afghan soldiers get about $100 a month, a third of what some local warlords pay fighters, a major reason for desertion. This is a false, dangerous economy. The United States has spent nearly $60 billion on Afghanistan this year, and Mr. Obama’s troop increases would add at least $30 billion. Adding 30,000 Afghan Army soldiers at triple their current pay costs under $1 billion.

Most Afghan soldiers are paid in cash, which means that they often have to return home to deliver money to their families, sometimes going AWOL. A modest investment in wire or digital money transfer systems could ease that problem, reduce the desertion rate and make it harder for corrupt commanders to steal recruits’ pay.

While we have some hope for the Afghan Army, we fear the police, with members recruited from warlord and anti-Taliban militias, may have to be rebuilt almost from scratch. Too many officers have been implicated in kidnappings, burglaries and shakedowns.

New York Times, 4/12/09

Clinton : US won't cut and run...

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton rejected suggestions Friday that the Obama administration plans to abruptly cut and run from Afghanistan. She emphasized that the transition to total Afghan power will be gradual and responsible.

"I want to make clear to the people of Afghanistan and Pakistan that we're looking for a long-term partnership," said Clinton.

CNN, 4/12/09

...and neither will Cameron

David Cameron has visited British troops serving in southern Afghanistan. The Tory leader travelled to Helmand Province, the epicentre of the battle against the Taliban, where nearly 100 UK personnel have died this year.

Mr Cameron told the troops at their base in Lashkar Gah that he was "not interest in cutting and running" from Afghanistan.

"I am not interested in trying to set out some sort of timetable and convince people in that way. What I am interested in doing is helping you, whether in opposition or in government, to succeed in what we are doing here and then to come home."

BBC News, 4/12/09

Obama to expand drone attacks in Pakistan

A report by the New York Times, claims that the white house has authorised an expansion of CIA's drone program in Pakistan’s tribal areas. The authorisation the report says is to parallel the president’s decision to send 30,000 more troops to Afghanistan.

Accordiong to the NYT, US officials are talking with Pakistan about the possibility of striking in Balochistan for the first time. The drone program has generated public anger in Pakistan, and some counterinsurgency experts wonder whether it does more harm than good.

Dawn, Pakistan, 4/12/09

Majority want US to 'mind its own business internationally'

President Barack Obama may have sought to sell his revamped Afghanistan war strategy to a skeptical US public, but a poll showed Thursday that he faces a tough task amid a growing isolationist surge.

For the first time since the Pew Research Center began conducting the survey 45 years ago, more participants (49 percent) agreed that the United States should "mind its own business internationally" and let other countries manage on their own than those who disagreed (44 percent).

A majority of the public disapproved of Obama's handling of the war in Afghanistan, with 49 percent of the public giving the president low marks and 36 percent approving of his performance.

AFP, 4/12/09

NATO pledges more troops to Afghanistan

NATO says at least 20 countries plan to increase their troop levels in Afghanistan, following U.S. President Barack Obama's announcement of a 30,000-troop boost to the war-torn nation. NATO spokesman James Appathurai told reporters NATO members had shown a clear determination to support President Barack Obama's strategy in Afghanistan - not just through rhetoric, but by dispatching more troops.

"I can confirm we have now well over 20 countries that are indicating or have already indicated they intend to increase the amounts of forces they have in the country - in Afghanistan. This is on top of the 38,000 (troops from other NATO members and allies) that are already there, taking into account a doubling over the past two years," he said.

While many European countries have hailed Mr. Obama's planned troop increase, Germany and France in particular have not come forward with any new troop pledges of their own. But several other NATO members, notably Italy, Poland, the Czech Republic and Slovakia have reportedly agreed to boost their troop commitments.

Voice of America, 3/12/09