Mediaboss Marketing

Updated April 22, 2017 08:19:46

American commanders in Afghanistan are not saying how many Islamic State fighters died when the largest conventional bomb in history was dropped on their hideouts last week but experts say it, like the missile strike in Syria, points to an American president more willing to intervene abroad.

American troops reached the bomb site a day after last Friday's detonation, but have not confirmed reports that between 90 and 100 IS fighters were killed.

US military spokesman Captain Bill Salvin said "access has been restricted ... because it's a combat zone".

In a statement, he said that the US had "high confidence" no civilians were harmed.

Kate Clark, director of the independent Afghan Analysts' network, said there had been an "information blackout" from Achin, the IS controlled part of Nangarhar province, for some time.

"Journalists haven't been able to reach there because of the IS control and the threats to them, even local elders, they'd fled," Ms Clark said.

IS, she said, was capitalising on the official silence.

"IS, Daesh locally, have been bullish about the attack, they claim that they didn't lose anyone.

"It may be that this actually helps their recruitment."

The bomb's fallout for Donald Trump is being assessed in foreign policy circles.

William H Avery, a former American diplomat who has served in and written about South Asia, said the action was consistent with the President's promise to target IS.

"I think he is following up on campaign promises, leaving America first to one side for a moment he did say that the wanted to bomb the hell out of ISIS," he said.

The New York Times has reported that America's military commander in Afghanistan, General John Nicholson, did not ask the President for permission to drop the bomb.

Ms Clark said Mr Trump had promised "to take the gloves off his military".

What is still unclear though, she said, is what he will do on the ground.

"One of the things he said on Twitter is 'why should we support people who hate us?'," Ms Clark said.

That has prompted many to speculate Mr Trump would end the "nation building" aspect to America's support for Afghanistan.

This week Mr Trump's national security adviser, Lieutenant General HR McMaster, visited Afghanistan and told local television network Tolo that America was committed long-term.

"What's critical is the strengthening of Afghan security institutions, the army and the police," said Lt General McMaster, an Afghanistan veteran.

"So what can we do together, with the national unity government leaders and the ministries to strengthen those institutions?

"Provide them with better support, with the continuing commitment of the United States to back them up on the battlefield."

The big question is whether President Trump will agree to his generals' request for more boots on the ground there.

America currently has 8,400 troops in Afghanistan, bolstered by an additional 5,000 NATO personnel.

Military leaders are pressing for "several thousand" more.

Agreeing carries obvious risks for a President who campaigned on Americans' fatigue with long-running conflict in Afghanistan and Iraq.

But analysts say President Trump's recent moves indicate he appears less willing to abandon the fight.

Ms Clark says reports of renewed Russian interest in Afghanistan will also likely factor into his decision.

"The thing about Afghanistan is for well over a century, its main attraction has been for countries who don't want someone else to control it," she said.

Mr Avery said concern over Russian influence was heightened following the Russians' defence of Syrian leader Bashar al-Assad following the chemical attack in Syria.

He believes that would give the President more reason to stay the course in Afghanistan.

"I think you will see a willingness to get involved, to use US military might," he said.

"The Trump administration would make the case that that isn't in contradiction with 'America First' principles, but is really supporting them."

Topics: donald-trump, person, foreign-affairs, government-and-politics, unrest-conflict-and-war, afghanistan

First posted April 22, 2017 05:53:46

Link:
Donald Trump's Afghanistan 'mother of all bombs' shows US President's interventionist side, experts say - ABC Online

Memories of Afghan children, gaunt and pale with cancer, still haunt Ehsan Bayat.

Even now, all these miles and all these years removed from the Kabul hospital ward, thoughts of them bring tears to his eyes.

What they remind him, what they continue to teach Bayat is the never-ending, extreme need in Afghanistan, where fighting between government forces and the Taliban often devastates civilian communities.

Those children suffered without pain medication, without treatment, Bayat said. Doctors begged him and his wife, Fatema, to supply medicine to the childrens cancer ward. He knows situations like that or even worse in the suburbs and provinces outside Afghanistans capital city are not uncommon.

But, the Bayats have done more than just provide medicine. Ehsan and Fatema Bayat, who live in Ponte Vedra, have built or refurbished 13 maternity hospitals throughout Afghanistan, providing medical care to more than 2 million women and children.

They dont do it alone.

More than a decade ago, the Bayats established a foundation to nourish the lives of Afghans, and so doctors in Afghanistan now recognize just whom they are asking when they seek more medicine, more supplies or more equipment.

The foundation also built schools, supplied clean drinking water to isolated areas, and has given clothing, food and blankets to people in need.

Now, it has sights set on building a maternity and surgical hospital to assist in childbirth and any complications arising from delivery. The center will also diagnose cervical and breast cancer, as well as correct obstetric fistulas, a common problem Afghan women face after giving birth. The facility will be the 14th hospital the Bayat Foundation has built and it has been in the planning stages for approximately two years.

The state-of-the-art facility in Kabul is finally coming to fruition.

Theres a need for this. Some cities have very little help, Fatema Bayat said. We want to be a voice of hope. We want to keep Afghanistan relevant.

According to the Afghanistan Ministry of Public Health, more than 50 percent of pregnant women do not have access to essential health services and more than 50 percent of the births take place without nursing facilities. As a result, both women and infants lose their lives. The country had the second highest infant mortality rate in the world in 2015 and has seen an increasing amount of women die during childbirth. With proper access to health care, these deaths are preventable.

So this Friday, The Bayat Foundation plans to hold the Nourish so They May Flourish fundraising gala at the Ponte Vedra Inn and Club.

Serving Afghans has been, and always will be, the heart of our mission, Fatema Bayat said. The funds we raise from the gala will help expand the foundations efforts to improve the quality of life for Afghan families.

The event will highlight the contributions made by the foundation toward improving the health, literacy and economic development of Afghan families and as the Afghanistans largest, private nonprofit dedicated to health and education, there have been many. Mostly, however, the gala will foster partnerships between the Bayat Foundation and several organizations helping in the construction of the new maternity hospital, as well as raise money for the project.

Every little bit here means a lot on the other side, Ehsan Bayat said. Theres no boundary for when you want to do something for someone who is really in need, but in Afghanistan, theres so much need.

As a child, Ehsan Bayat lived in Afghanistan. There, his father ran an import-export business and young Ehsan attended a private school. But, communists imprisoned his father during a 1978 revolt that overthrew the Afghanistan republic. A year later, when the Soviet Union invaded, they released his father. The family fled the country.

Ehsan Bayat was 18. It was 1981 and he found himself in New York City with nothing but his dedicated, determined attitude. After a friend told him about the First Coast, Ehsan Bayat moved to Ponte Vedra with his wife and three daughters. He now owns several successful businesses, including the first and largest mobile phone company in Afghanistan.

We take things for granted here, Ehsan Bayat said. You appreciate what god has given you so why not give some back?

Over the last 11 years, the Bayat Foundation has completed approximately 300 projects, including a partnership with the Starkey Hearing Foundation to provide hearing aids to 5,000 Afghan men and women. Theyve built or refurbished countless schools; constructed dormitories, gymnasiums and sports fields; and clothed and fed orphanages. Millions of books have been distributed throughout Afghanistan by the Bayats. In 2002, fewer than 800,000 children attended school and the vast majority of those were male students.

Now, females are allowed, in some cases, to acquire an education. While the education system still needs aid, more than 9 million children are now enrolled in schools. An estimated 39 percent are female, according to World Education News and Reviews. The organization does say data out of Afghanistan could be misleading, as it calculates students both present and absent. It acknowledges many children are enrolled, but not attending.

We have real emphasis on improvement and knowledge, Ehsan Bayat said. You help build a person and then, millions of people together can change the country.

That, he said, is the goal of the Bayat Foundation.

^

Amanda Williamson: (904) 359-4665

Continued here:
Ponte Vedra nonprofit to build its 14th hospital in Afghanistan - Florida Times-Union

Despite the hullabaloo over the U.S. Air Forces decision to drop the GBU-43 Massive Ordnance Air Blast (MOAB) in Nangarhar province in Afghanistan, we still dont really understand the scope of the destruction caused by the mother of all bombs.

Sure, the footage of the detonation released by the Department of Defense is damn impressive, and reports suggest the blast killed at least 94 ISIS militants. But the Pentagon has remained relatively tight-lipped on the impact of the devastating weapon, and local media reports allege that U.S. forces have sealed off the area from civilians, journalists, and Afghan security forces.

But new satellite photos from aerospace firm Airbus Space and Defense appear to capture the devastating impact of the MOAB in all its glory:

The War Zone suggests that, based on these photos, the MOAB did exactly what it was supposed to do: flatten everything in its blast radius. The massive air blast appeared to have worked just as advertised, with the mountainside focusing it effects, and the shock wave expanding down into the valley below, The War Zones Tyler Rogoway observes. The images above also closely correlate with the official infrared video we have seen of the strike.

Meanwhile, the New York Times reports that despite the bombs high casualty rate, ISIS militants continue to engage American troops and Afghan security forceswho are calling in more airstrikes to target the militants positions.

Thats okay, though! If Mattis is impressed, then so are we and even the secretary of defense isnt too fixated on body counts.

For many years we have not been calculating the results of warfare by simply quantifying the number of enemy killed, Mattis told reporters of the MOAB during his trip to the Middle East on Thursday. You all know of the corrosive effect of that sort of metric back in the Vietnam War. Its something that has stayed with us all these years You dont want to start calculating things, as far as what matters, in the crude terms of battle casualties.

Read the original post:
New Satellite Photos Suggest The 'Mother Of All Bombs' Did Its Job In Afghanistan - Task & Purpose

4 hours ago.

In the span of just a week, US President Donald Trumps administration managed to flip flop on a dizzying number of top shelf foreign policy issues Syria, Russia, the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation and Afghanistan.

The series of reversals began with an unexpected US strike on a Syrian airbase on April 6 in response to a chemical attack allegedly carried out by the Syrian regime in a rebel-held area in the country. Then, at a press conference on April 12, Trump spoke of the crucial role that NATO could play in fighting terrorism, an intergovernmental alliance he had earlier dismissed. He explained this disconnect by saying: I said it was obsolete. Its no longer obsolete. At the same event, he also said that ties with Russia were at an all-time low.

And on April 13, , the US military dropped the GBU-43 Massive Ordnance Air Blast, termed fthe Mother of All Bombs in the Achin district of Nangarhar in Afghanistan targeting ISIS hideouts in a network of caves and tunnels.

Trump hailed the bombing as a very very successful mission. Caught off guard by both military actions, US commentators hurriedly gave the president a stamp of approval for acting presidential.

Given that Candidate Trump and pre-strike President Trump were noticeably averse to ramping up involvement in Afghanistan (and Syria), these military assaults came as bolts from the blue. On Afghanistan, it reversed hundreds of tweets and statements Trump had made over the years criticising US involvement in the region and calls for his predecessor Barack Obama to pull US troops out of the South Asian country.

This prompts the question: does the latest bombing in Afghanistan signify an important shift in Trumps thinking on US policy or is it merely grandstanding?

During his election campaign, Trump had repeatedly bashed the Obama administration for losing the war on terrorism. Trumps anti-terrorism invective has been mostly aimed at ISIS in the Middle East and during his campaign, he declared that as president he would quickly and decisively bomb the hell out of ISIS.

After the strike on Afghanistan last week, US officials made it clear that the Mother of All Bombs was used to directly target an ISIS stronghold in the craggy mountains of Nangarhar.

Thus the lethal attack in Nangarhar fits into Trumps dominant anti-terrorism outlook that sees ISIS as a principle threat. Besides, it is one campaign promise he can say he is keeping, particularly as the much ballyhooed repeal of the affordable healthcare plan or Obamacare that he promised his conservative base, suffered a dramatic fall last month.

Indeed, a day after the bombing in Afghanistan, Trumps son tweeted an emoji of a tick mark next to the phrase bomb the hell out of ISIS. Trump Jr also tweeted an emoji of a bomb and the hashtag #maga, (short for make America great again).

However, while all of this may go down well politically speaking, it does not say much about the new administrations longer term strategy on Afghanistan.

In February, soon after Trump took office, the top US General in Afghanistan, John Nicholson, testified in Congress that Americas longest war was in a stalemate, with the Taliban controlling much of the countryside, leaving the Kabul government with just the major cities.

According to him, the National Unity Government of Afghanistan under President Ashraf Ghani and Chief Executive Officer Abdullah Abdullah now control only 57% of all districts, down from 72%. (Interestingly, in the same sobering testimony, General Nicholson said one positive development was that the area in which ISIS operated in Afghanistan had been greatly reduced). The general complained of a shortfall in his military force and called for a few thousand more troops to train and advise Afghan soldiers.

At present 8,400 US troops are deployed in Afghanistan, down from a high of 100,000 in 2010. In June 2011, a month after a US special forces raid in Pakistans Abottabad that killed Osama bin Laden, the Obama administration announced a plan for troop withdrawal, saying that US objectives in Afghanistan were being met. But in 2015, the situation in Afghanistan was deemed too fragile for a full military pullout, and plans were modified to keep some troops in the country indefinitely.

Breaking the Afghan stalemate is thus the real challenge, one that Trump seems to have given little thought to. Apart from criticising the American war in Afghanistan as a complete waste, Trump has expressed little on US priorities in Afghanistan or the best way to stabilise the country. Even in the aftermath of the April 13 bombing, evidence of real US policy change is hard to come by.

However, there are clues that some serious thinking may finally be taking place. National Security Advisor HR McMasters sudden unannounced visits to Afghanistan, Pakistan and India this week, right after the US military action, indicates quick and high-level engagement. More importantly, the reported strategic review underway of Americas Afghan policy offers a path to recalibration, if not a revamp.

Getting a workable US policy to defeat the Taliban and its continuing threat to a democratic Afghanistan ultimately means getting the Pakistan military to stop playing spoiler. McMasters comments in Kabul rather starkly put Pakistan on notice for its long standing double-dealing in the region. Speaking to the media, McMaster said, As all of us have hoped for many many years, we have hoped that Pakistani leaders will understand that it is in their interest to go after these groups less selectively than they have in the past and the best way to pursue their interest in Afghanistan and elsewhere is through diplomacy not through the use of proxies that engage in violence.

American frustration with Pakistan on this score is nothing new, with US-Pakistan relations hitting unprecedented lows under the Obama administration in 2011. But such statements indicate a lower tolerance.

No doubt, the Trump administration wants to demonstrate that it is going to do something different on terrorism and by extension, Afghanistan, than its predecessor. As Trump put it soon after the Nanganhar bombing, If you compare the last eight weeks to whats happened over the last eight years, big difference.

So far, a big difference is that the new administrations preferred instrument of foreign policy seems to be high decibel bombing and military shows of force. Recent American history would suggest that this hardly translates well in defeating terrorism and creating political stability.

Deepa Ollapally is Research Professor of International Affairs, Elliott School of International Affairs, George Washington University.

Read the rest here:
US bombing of Afghanistan: Policy shift or just political grandstanding? - Scroll.in

Former Afghanistan President Hamid Karzai claimed Wednesday that the Islamic State militant group (ISIS) was a tool of the U.S. Karzai, a former ally to Washington who has become increasingly critical of U.S. foreign policy, said Americas two-year fight against ISIS has been weak.

Speaking to Voice of Americas (VOA) Afghan Service, Karzai criticized a recent U.S. attack on ISIS in Afghanistan. On April 13, the U.S. dropped the largest ever non-nuclear weapon known as the mother of all bombson an ISIS stronghold in the countrys east. Karzai said the attack, which he condemned at the time, failed to eliminate the group. (The assault killed 95 ISIS militants).

I consider Daesh [the U.S.] tool, Karzai went onto say, using the Arabic acronym for the Islamic State. I do not differentiate at all between Daesh and America.

Try Newsweek from $3.25 per week

Read more: Heres why ISIS isnt succeeding in Afghanistan

The U.S. is currently battling ISIS in Afghanistan, along with NATO forces and local troops. Washington has promised to defeat the group by the end of the year, while combined military efforts have already cut the number of districts ISIS holds from more than 10 to between three and five. (Afghanistan is split into 398 districts).

Karzai worked closely with U.S. officials when he was president of Afghanistan. He took office in 2001, and remained in power until 2014, governing throughout the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan. For years he welcomed American efforts to try and rid his country of the Taliban.

But his relationship with Washington became increasingly tense and he eventually accused the U.S. of sharing a common goal with the Taliban to destabilize Afghanistan. In 2014, he refused to meet with then-President Barack Obama at a Bagram military base during a surprise visit with troops.

Now, Karzai seems to be lending his support to another country: Russia. During his VOA interview, he brushed away claimsmade by the U.S. and rights groupsthat Russia has been assisting the Taliban in Afghanistan. Moscow, which supports including the militants in peace talks, says it has never armed the group, but it has communicated with them.

[Russia] talk[s] to the Taliban, the U.S. also talks to the Taliban. Norway, Germany and other countries also talk to them, Karzai said. Russia has the right to hold talks with the Taliban.

Karzai was also scathing of the U.S. refusal to attend Moscow-brokered talks last week on the future of Afghanistan, telling VOA that Washington is not sincere about bringing peace to the country. The U.S. had declined to attend the summit, the third of its kind, saying that Russias motives were unclear.

Here is the original post:
War in Afghanistan: Former President Hamid Karzai Claims There Is No Difference Between ISIS and America - Newsweek