Mediaboss Marketing

Indian Ambassador Manpreet Vohra says some countries in the region are sabotaging attempts at peace.

Hinting indirectly at Pakistan, the Indian ambassador in Kabul, Manpreet Vohra, said some countries in the region have damaged all peace efforts and are following destructive policies. Sadly, in our immediate neighborhood, there are some who deliberately sabotage all attempts for peace and greater regional cooperation and connectivity, he said. India hopes that better sense will prevail on them one day and their self-destructive policies will change. Marking the 70th Independence Day of India at the Indian Embassy in Kabul, the ambassador said New Delhi will stand beside Afghans in the fight against terrorism. We champion Afghanistans cause and stand with it shoulder to shoulder as it faces serious challenges and strives to build a peaceful, secure and prosperous nation, he stated. At the same event, Second Vice President Mohammad Sarwar Danish said a number of countries in the region were trying to change their security centric policies to an economic centric policy and to regional cooperation. Though Afghanistan is living in an imposed war and is on the frontline of the fight against insurgency and terrorism, and our civilians and forces are being sacrificed in barbaric terrorist attacks every day ... the policy of the Afghan government is based on an economic-centric policy not security-centric, he said.

Regional countries particularly our neighbors should pay attention to this important matter that our politics and policy should not be ordered as security-centric. India has invested $2.5 billion USD in infrastructure in Afghanistan and has pledged an additional one billion dollars in aid.

See more here:
Terrorist Activities In Afghanistan A Threat To India: Envoy - TOLOnews

British Royal Marines commandos in Afghanistan. Photo: Wikimedia Commons.

As President Trump wrestles with Americas role in Afghanistan, he should first decide what our objectives are today, compared to what we wanted immediately after September 11, 2001.

Initially, the United States overthrew the Taliban regime; but we failed to destroy it completely. Regime supporters, allied tribal forces and opportunistic warlords escaped (or returned) to Pakistans frontier regions to establish sanctuaries.

Similarly, while the Talibans ouster also forced Al Qaedainto exile in Pakistan and elsewhere, the terror groupnonetheless continued and expanded its terrorist activities. In Iraq and Syria, Al Qaeda morphed into the even more virulent ISIS, which is now gaining strength in Afghanistan.

In short, Americas Afghan victories were significant, but incomplete. Subsequently, we failed to revise and update our Afghan strategic objectives, leading many to argue that the war had gone on too long and that we should withdraw. This criticism is superficially appealing, recalling anti-Vietnam War activist Allard Lowensteins cutting remarks about Richard Nixons policies. While Lowenstein acknowledged that he understood those, like SenatorGeorge Aiken, who said we should win and get out, Lowensteinsaid that he couldnt understand Nixons strategy of lose and stay in.

August 16, 2017 12:08 pm

Today in Afghanistan, the pertinent question is what we seek to prevent, not what we seek to achieve. Making Afghanistan serene and peaceful does not constitute a legitimate American geopolitical interest. Instead, we face two principal threats.

First, the Talibans return to power throughout Afghanistan would re-create the prospect of the country being used as a base of operations for international terrorism. It is simply unacceptable to allow the pre-2001 status quo to re-emerge.

Second, a post-9/11 goal (at least one better understood today) is preventing a Taliban victory in Afghanistan that would enable the Pakistani Taliban or other terrorist groups to seize control in Islamabad. Not only would such a takeover make all of Pakistan yet another terrorist sanctuary, but if its large nuclear arsenal fell to terrorists, we would immediately face the equivalent of Iran and North Korea on nuclear steroids. Worryingly, Pakistans military especially its intelligence armis already thought to be controlled by radical Islamists.

Given terrorisms global spread since 9/11 and the risk of a perfect storm the confluence of terrorism and the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction the continuing threats we face in the Afghan arena are even graver than those posed before9/11. Accordingly, abandoning the field in Afghanistan is simply not a tenable strategy.

On the other hand, accomplishing Americas goals does not require remaking Afghanistans government, economy or military in our image. Believing that only nation building in Afghanistan could ultimately guard against the terrorist threat was mistaken. For too long, it distracted Washington and materially contributed to the decline in American public support for a continuing military presence there, despite the manifest need for it.

There is no chance that the Trump administration will pursue nation building in Afghanistan, as the president has repeatedly made clear. Speaking as a Reagan administration alumnus of USAID, I concur. We should certainly continue bilateral economic assistance to Afghanistan, which, strategically applied, served America well in countless circumstances during the Cold War and thereafter. But we should not conflate it with the diaphanous prospect of nation building.

Nor should we assume that the military component in Afghanistan must be a repetition or expansion of the boots-on-the-ground approach that the US hasfollowed since the initial assault on the Taliban. Other alternatives appear available and should be seriously considered, including possibly larger USmilitary commitments of the right sort.

Even more important, there must be far greater focus on Pakistan.

Pakistan a nuclear weapons state thathas been politically unstable since British Indias 1947 partition, and is increasingly under Chinese influence because of the hostility with Indiais a volatile and lethal mix ultimately more important than Afghanistan itself. Until and unless Pakistan becomes convinced that interfering in Afghanistan is too dangerous and too costly, no realistic USmilitary scenario in Afghanistan can succeed.

The stakes are high on the subcontinent, not just because of the Af-Pak problems, but because Pakistan, India and China are all nuclear powers. The Trump administration should not be mesmerized only by US troop levels. It must concentrate urgently on the bigger strategic picture. The size and nature of Americas military commitment in Afghanistan will more likely emerge from that analysis rather than the other way around. And time is growing short.

John Bolton, a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, was the US permanent representative to the United Nations and, previously, the undersecretary of state for arms control and international security.

This article was originally published by the Pittsburgh Tribune Review.

Read more from the original source:
Time Is Ticking for Trump in Afghanistan - Algemeiner

The CEO of the National Unity Government (NUG) Abdullah Abdullah visited Minsk, the capital of Belarus, on Tuesday while on an official trip and met with Andrei Vladimirovich Kobyakov, the Belarusian Prime Minister.

Abdullah will hold talks with Kobyakov and it is expected that a package of international agreements will be signed, including one on industrial cooperation and the simplification of visa formalities.

Abdullah also met with Alexander Lukashenko, President of Belarus, and discussed bilateral economic and trade opportunities.

He visited Belarusian Great Patriotic War Museum in Minsk on Wednesday and laid a wreath at the Monument of Victory.

He also visited the Minsk car, construction and electricity companies with the Afghan delegation where officials from the motor manufacturer promised to cooperate with Afghanistan.

In the meantime, the CEO's office in a statement said that Officials of Belarus and Afghanistan will sign agreements over economic, business, legislation and justice.

The commodity exchange value between Belarus and Afghanistan totaled more than $25 million USD in 2016, which is 60 percent more than in 2015, according to Belarusian media reports.

We are to sign two documents on activation of industrial cooperation and simplification of visa regime. In my opinion it will contribute to business communication,Jawed Faisal, a spokesman for Abdullah, told TOLOnews.

This is the first official visit to Belarus in the history of bilateral relations between Minsk and Kabul.

Read more:
Belarus, Afghanistan Forge New Strategy for Cooperation - TOLOnews

Iranian officials on Wednesday accused the State Department of issuing a "biased" report condemning the regime's restrictions on religious freedom.

"The Islamic Republic of Iran considers the report as unrealistic, unfounded and biased which has been compiled only for specific political objectives," Foreign Ministry Spokesman Bahram Qassemi said on Wednesday, according to the semi-official FARS media outlet.

Iranian officials buttressed that claim by noting that Judaism is "a recognized minority" in the country. But the Secretary of State Rex Tillerson's team noted that Iran "promote[s] Holocaust denial," and, more broadly, restricts freedom of worship and bans religious minorities from trying to win converts in the Muslim community.

"Iran continues to sentence individuals to death under vague apostasy laws 20 individuals were executed in 2016 on charges that included, quote, waging war against God,'" Tillerson said Tuesday when releasing the report. "Members of the Baha'i community are in prison today simply for abiding by their beliefs."

The State Department's report on religious liberty under the Shia Muslim regime elaborated on that theme. "The government continued to harass, interrogate, and arrest Bahais, Christians, Sunni Muslims, and other religious minorities and regulated Christian religious practices closely to enforce the prohibition on proselytizing," the report said.

An American pastor with dual Iranian citizenship, for instance, was arrested and then beaten in prison on charges that his evangelization efforts "threatened the national security of Iran." He was released in the context of the implementation of the Iran nuclear deal and the Obama administration's agreement to release money that the regime claimed it had been owed in relation to a decades-old dispute over a blocked arms deal.

But the Iranians maintained that they respect religious freedom, while accusing President Trump of trying to curtail the liberties of American Muslims.

"The U.S. administration is expected to take legal and practical measures more rapidly to support the freedom of religion, specially regarding the Muslims' rights in the U.S., instead of judgment about the situation of freedom of religion in other countries," Qassemi said.

Go here to see the original:
Iran: US religious freedom report 'unfounded and biased' - Washington Examiner

Thousand of Basij soldiers stage mock seige of Temple Mount in Iran. (photo credit:FARS)

Syrias Baniyas on the Mediterranean sea between Latakia and Tartus is the site of a large oil refinery. Before the civil war broke out in 2011 travel guides suggested tourists visit the Crusader fortress of Qalaat Marqab nearby. Today visitors can add to that list a mysterious military construction project stretching several kilometers along Wadi Jahannam, which is 8 km. from Baniyas.

A report on Channel 2 on August 15 provided images of the site from an Israeli satellite. The report said this is likely a factory to build long-range missiles. The area the factory is constructed in near the border of the Tartus and Latakia governorates is one that is closely linked to other military facilities of the Syrian regime and its allies. These include a Russian naval base at Tartus and Khmeimim air force base to the north, which is also allegedly used by Russia and the Iranians.

According to an August 14 report in Die Welt, in June, aircraft from Iran were flown directly to Khmeimim airport... in order to bring military goods to Russia. The military goods were taken by truck to the Mediterranean port in Tartus.

The report of the Iranian missile factory in Syria comes in the context of Israels recent warnings in June and July that Iran was attempting to establish bases in Lebanon and Syria.

Irans parliament also approved a bill on August 13 to increase spending on ballistic missiles by $260 million. In May, US lawmakers Peter Roskam and Ted Deutch expressed concern about a permanent Iranian military base in Syria in a May 25 letter to Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and Secretary of Defense James Mattis.

The Islamic Republic seeks to solidify its access to the Mediterranean Sea by building a permanent seaport and constructing numerous military installations throughout the country.

Knowledge and rumors of the existence of the new missile base has existed for months. On June 28, the Syrian opposition website zamanalwsl.net provided aerial photos and a report on the base. In a piece translated by MEMRI, the website noted that President Bashar Assad had made a visit for Id al-Fitr to Hama as cover for a secret visit to one of the most sensitive military facilities of the regime and its ally Iran.

This was a new secret research facility whose construction began last year in a fortified area east of Baniyas in a rugged valley called Wadi Jahannam. Assad met Iranians at the site and viewed the progress of construction of a facility for developing and manufacturing weapons.

Prof. Eyal Zisser, an expert on Syria and Lebanon at Tel Aviv University says the new reports are interesting and represent a significant phenomenon and development.

Because it has been Israels policy to interdict the flow of weapons from Iran to Hezbollah, a factory would provide another route for Iran to aid its allies. This is uneasy for Israel and a dilemma. We need to confirm it is true and wait and see.

Jonathan Schanzer, vice president of research at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, also sees this as a significant development. It increasingly appears as if Iran is gearing up for a significant battle against Israel.

The building of missile production factories and underground facilities in Lebanon and Syria is part of a larger Iranian goal of extending its land bridge from Iran to Lebanon via Iraq and Syria, he said.

So we are seeing the execution of a long term strategy and this is one that puts Israel in a bind because Israel is fearful of provoking a war in Lebanon or entering the fray in Syria and is reticent to engage Iran directly. That means Israel must weigh its next moves carefully, Schanzer said.

Iran has found a strategy that puts Israel in check for the moment.

Share on facebook

See the original post here:
'Iran building missile factory in Syria' - The Jerusalem Post