Mediaboss Marketing

To the Editor:

In Time to Get Out of Afghanistan (Op-Ed, Jan. 2), Robert D. Kaplan refers to the diplomatic expertise of Richard Holbrooke. Mr. Holbrooke famously remarked, after becoming familiar with Afghan affairs, We may be fighting the wrong enemy in the wrong country. He recognized that Pakistan was the true enemy.

It was Pakistan that helped create the Taliban in the early 1990s and has supported them ever since. In order to bring peace to Afghanistan, the influence of Pakistan must be terminated. This is particularly urgent because of Pakistans position as a leading nuclear power. In 2009 the American ambassador to Pakistan, Anne W. Patterson, noted that enriched uranium being produced in Pakistan might be acquired by terrorists to produce their own bomb. Ten years later, that danger still exists.

Pakistan must be confronted to prevent the Afghan-Pakistan region from becoming a haven for nuclear-armed terrorists.

Edward A. FriedmanHoboken, N.J.The writer teaches courses on nuclear weapons and energy at Stevens Institute of Technology. He represented Stevens in an international development program in Afghanistan from 1965 to 1967 and 1970 to 1973.

To the Editor:

Robert D. Kaplan contradicts himself by describing the horrific situation in Afghanistan as the triumph of deterministic forces, and then almost immediately says, It did not have to be like this. Well, which is it: Is the fault in our stars or in ourselves?

During the Cold War, foreign policy realists lauded Americas morally indefensible alliances with regimes in Saudi Arabia and Pakistan that fostered Islamic extremism at home and exported it abroad as a necessity in the struggle with Communism, especially during the Soviet-Afghan War.

When this strategically reckless policy resulted in a tragic reversal for our nation on 9/11, not only the realists but writers of all stripes refused to face the fact that this catastrophe had a long, tragic prelude. Among the worst results of this denial was the resumption of American military aid to Pakistan, which it used to continue backing the Taliban and defeat our war aims.

What we owe to the Afghan people and ourselves is a brave recognition of our own role as protagonists in this drama and a sea change in our policies, not least because walking away from clear and present danger will not make it go away.

Vanni CappelliPoughkeepsie, N.Y.The writer is president of the Afghanistan Foreign Press Association.

To the Editor:

Bravo to Robert D. Kaplan for his opinion regarding our military presence in Afghanistan: Indeed, it may soon be time for the United States to get out of the country altogether. Having been a Marine officer in the Vietnam era, I was pleased when President Richard M. Nixon began pulling troops out of Vietnam. We had been there for a number of years, and it was clear there was no light at the end of the tunnel. We now face a similar dilemma in Afghanistan.

A close friend of mine was killed in Vietnam on Feb. 22, 1969. What a shame our leaders did not respond to the futility of that war earlier and spare the lives of thousands of troops. Lets hope that President Trump will keep us out of stupid wars.

As Mr. Kaplan points out, even if a terrorist group finds refuge in Afghanistan and plans a 9/11-scale attack, Yemen, Somalia and a number of other places could also provide the setting for that. Dont lose lives just to save embarrassment.

David NelsonHouston

To the Editor:

Time to get out of Afghanistan? Past time. There are places where we shouldnt interfere, shouldnt try to impose our values, shouldnt think that we can succeed where others have failed, and Afghanistan is one of them.

Sandra SizerBoston

Go here to see the original:
Opinion | Should the U.S. Leave Afghanistan?

It was not clear why the shaft collapsed, say officials. (Representational)

At least 30 people were killed when a gold mine collapsed in northeastern Afghanistan on Sunday, officials said, in the latest tragedy to strike the war-torn country.

Another seven were injured in the incident in Kohistan district of Badakhshan province, district governor Mohammad Rustam Raghi told AFP.

Villagers had dug a 60-metre deep shaft in a river bed to search for gold. They were inside when the walls fell in. "The people were using an excavator to dig a big hole in the river when it collapsed, trapping dozens of workers," Raghi said.

"At least 30 people have been killed and seven wounded."

It was not clear why the shaft collapsed, but the provincial governor's spokesman Nik Mohammad Nazari told AFP the miners were not professionals.

"The villagers have been involved in this business for decades with no government control over them," Nazari said.

"We have sent a rescue team to the area, but villagers have already started removing bodies from the site."

Badakhshan is a remote, mountainous province in northeast Afghanistan bordering Tajikistan, China and Pakistan.

The impoverished region is prone to landslides, particularly in the colder months when heavy snow blankets the province.

Illegal mining is common in resource-rich Afghanistan, with the Taliban relying on the sector for much of its revenue.

But most of the country's minerals remain untapped as the raging conflict and lack of regulation deter international miners from exploiting the huge reserves.

Read this article:
At Least 30 Killed After Gold Mine Collapses In Afghanistan ...

The Afghan government has tried to regulate the mining sector by offering new contracts in an effort to improve oversight, but even those deals have been marred by charges of corruption and irregularity.

Last year, the government in Kabul signed two contracts for exploration of copper and gold in the north. But watchdog groups criticized the agreements, saying they may violate conflict-of-interest laws and allow questionable practices that have marred the mining sector for years to continue.

Part of the river in Badakhshan where the deadly episode occurred is controlled by the Taliban, who get a cut from the gold panned there, said Mr. Talat, the provincial council member.

Separately, in the south of the country, the Taliban seem to have increased their attacks in recent weeks, officials said, and the official toll from an assault on Friday in Kandahar Province more than doubled by Sunday.

After the Taliban attacked a border police outpost in the district of Spinboldak on Friday, the local government put the number of soldiers killed at seven. But on Sunday, Nimatullah Wafa, a member of provincial council, confirmed reports attributed to local officials that 16 soldiers had died.

It was the latest in a series of attacks on police checkpoints in Spinboldak, which borders Pakistan. The district was also home to the former powerful police chief of Kandahar, Gen. Abdul Raziq, who was assassinated in a daring Taliban attack in October, barely missing Gen. Austin S. Miller, the top American commander in Afghanistan.

Officials have expressed fear that the Taliban will make a stronger push for Kandahar Province. Mr. Wafa, the provincial council member, said the insurgents had gained more influence in districts along the border with Pakistan and had launched more frequent attacks in areas that were once peaceful.

The security situation in some Kandahar districts is getting worse, Mr. Wafa said. They have more courage to attack a peaceful district like Spinboldak that rarely happened when General Raziq was alive.

Read more:
Afghan Villagers Panning for Gold Die as Tunnels Collapse ...

By Durdana Najam

In his usual style, Donald Trump, mocking Modis desire to build libraries in Afghanistan, asked the regional stakeholders to play a more active role in resolving the Afghan crisis. He said that countries close to Afghanistan, and not the one 6,000 kilometres away (the US), should be helping the war-torn country in its rehabilitation.

Trumps jibe at Modi, for his desire to build libraries in Afghanistan, perhaps stems from the presidents continuous allegation on the allies for draining US treasury on fighting lost wars, of which the Afghan war takes the cake because of being the longest and the costliest in history. This jibe might also have stemmed from the US desire to see the wisdom of books played out on ground in the form of a shareholding solution to the Afghan crisis, with India accepting each partner wholeheartedly. Overall, the mood in Washington is that of allowing Afghanistan to move in the direction proposed by its stakeholders, rather than to what the US deems fit.

A few days back, in a sudden foreign policy shift, Trump announced on December 20, 2018, to withdraw 7,000 troops from Afghanistan. The decision was preceded by a series of meetings held between the US officials and the Taliban. This sudden departure, from being the sole scriptwriter of the Afghan conflict to allowing other actors both at home and in the region to find solution to the conflict, has staggered India.

Not that India does not want peace in Afghanistan, in fact, India has invested heavily in economic and development projects in the war-torn country. What irritates India is the prospect of Taliban taking the centre stage in a new set-up. India worries that the return of the hardliners could also mean a return of post-Soviet Union Afghanistan, when the county was allegedly used to plan insurgency in Kashmir. Indias another fear emanates from Pakistan regaining a strong position in Afghanistan.

Indias fear of Taliban is based on the received wisdom that the group has not changed over the past two decades. It also feeds on Indias refusal to accept its mishandling of the Kashmir issue. At a time when Russia and China have accepted the Taliban, despite apprehensions about their Islamist demeanour, India is stuck with viewing Taliban only as an enemy.

Indian right wings obsession with preserving the so-called holiness of the cow, which is in turn spreading hatred for people eating beef has earned the country a bad name both at home and abroad. The former Chairman of Press Council of India and retired Supreme Court judge, Justice Markandey Katju voiced a similar view in a TV interview. He reprimanded Modis government for making India a laughing stock world over for allowing killing of Muslims on eating beef.

Moreover, the recent banning of Namaz in open by the Yogi government in UP, said Katju, was unconstitutional. He said that Article 19 of the Constitution of India gave full rights to any community for a peaceful gathering. To support his argument, he mentioned the daily gathering called Shahkhaas of Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sanghs stalwarts held in parks for an hour at anytime of the day. These gatherings, according to Katju, were never stopped.

Indias fear of the Kashmir insurgency getting worse in future because of the Taliban backed freedom fighters is deceptive, to say the least. Indias self-destructive Kashmir policy is enough to breed freedom fighters. Taliban or Pakistan, as the allegation goes, does not have to export them. Each Kashmiri is resisting Indias brutal campaign to hunt down freedom fighters.

In the first week of December 2018, seven civilians lost their lives, when they intervened between freedom fighters and advancing officers. Sheikh Showkat Husain, an international law professor, while talking to the New York Times, has called it a new phenomenon. He said Civilians have always supported militants, but never with such conviction. According to human rights groups, around 148 civilians were killed in 2018 alone, with most of them being teenagers.

Instead of taking a cue to improve its way of handling the Kashmir conflict, India has hardened its position. The Indian Chief of Army Staff, Bipin Rawat, was found saying that all those people obstructing our operation would be treated as over-ground workers, or collaborators.

According to the Kashmiri police, of the 250 known freedom fighters, only 50 or so are from Pakistan. The rest, they said, neither had ever left Kashmir nor trained for insurgency. Even the abnormal ratio of 1,000 army officer to one insurgent has not dissuaded the Kashmiris from joining what is now being called an indigenous fight to free Kashmir of Indian atrocities.

Rather than fearing the Taliban or Pakistans growing role in Afghanistan, India should fear its polices in Kashmir. The world has changed manifold since the Soviet Union left Afghanistan. Its time for India to seek an antidote for its fear in the implementation of real secularism in Kashmir and the rest of India.

In the emerging scenario, following the US involvement in Afghanistan receding considerably, India or any other country, including Pakistan, should only play a facilitative role in building peace in Afghanistan. The country has a long history of breaking apart under the weight of its tribal and ethnic skirmishes. With each ethnic group having relations to the bordering countries, be it Tajik or Uzbek or Pashtuns or Hazaras, it has been easy to loop in those ethnic groups in the conflict. This geographic reality cannot be ignored and could revive in todays milieu of popular politics. The solution lies in regional countries abandoning any policies that might foment ethnic sentiments and should therefore play a role towards rebuilding Afghanistan.

The writer is a freelance journalist based in Lahore (durdananajam1@gmail.com)

Like Loading...

Related

See the article here:
The Indian fear of Taliban returning to power in Afghanistan

On January 1, Kazakhstan concluded its two-year term on the United Nations Security Council as a non-permanent member.

We have accomplished a lot during these two years, Kazakhstans Permanent Representative to the UN in New York Kairat Umarov said while meeting with the NGO Working Group on the United Nations Security Council in December.

We are open to dialogue with you and are ready to continue close contacts and partnership on all key issues on the global and regional agenda, Umarov said according to a report by Egemen.

Kazakhstan was the first Central Asian country to be elected to a two-year term on the Security Council the high-profile and permanent UN body that investigates international disputes and situations.

Over the last two years, Kazakhstani diplomats assigned to the countrys mission to the UN in New York City focused their efforts on issues prioritized by the countrys president, Nursultan Nazarbayev. Topics covered included countering nuclear proliferation and the use of nuclear weapons and finding political solutions to the conflicts in Afghanistan and Syria. Their efforts have not gone unnoticed by high-ranking officials in Washington, such as the United States Secretary of State.

Kazakhstan has assumed a key role on the global stage as a partner in ensuring peace and stability, and in promoting economic development and connectivity in Central Asia and beyond, Mike Pompeo said in a statement issued on the occasion of Kazakhstans Independence Day, celebrated on December 16.

Within the span of Kazakhstans two-year term on the Security Council, diplomats arranged a working trip to Afghanistan, a country that does not share a border with Kazakhstan but is in close proximity to it. Thanks to their efforts, for the first time in seven years a Security Council delegation visited the landlocked Central Asian country, where the security situation remains perilous.

Kazakhstan has also acted as a mediator for parties to the Syrian conflict. Eleven rounds of meetings have been held in Astana, Kazakhstans capital city, since January 2017, which have brought together representatives from the Syrian government, armed opposition groups, and officials from the three guarantor countries of the current ceasefire agreement, namely Iran, Russia and Turkey. By late 2017, the parties to the conflict had agreed to set up de-escalation zones in Syria for six months, although subsequent talks have not yielded much progress.

Eritrea, the northeast African country sanctioned by the UN after being accused of having ties to Al-Shabaab militants in Somalia and refusing to withdraw from border disputes with its neighbor, Djibouti, also received attention during Kazakhstans tenure. As a result of multilateral diplomatic efforts at the UN, including Kazakhstan chairing the UNs Somalia and Eritrea Sanctions Committee, Eritrea and neighboring Ethiopia signed a deal to end a decades-old war and lift 9-year-old sanctions.

We worked closely with Kazakhstans office in New York, and as a result, the sanctions from Eritrea were lifted, Amanuel Giorgio, the Deputy Permanent Representative at Eritreas mission in New York, told 24Khabar. This is a significant result of Kazakhstans activities in the UN Security Council, Giorgio said.

In addition, Kazakhstan sent troops to Lebanon late last year to support the UN peacekeeping mission stationed there. The rotational deployment includes 120 servicemen who, together with 128 Indian peacekeepers, patrol a UN-drawn border between Israel and Lebanon.

Kazakhstan was elected to a two-year, non-permanent position on the UN Security Council on June 28, 2016. The UN body is comprised of five permanent members (China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom and the United States) and 10 non-permanent members, which are elected in groups of five every year to two-year terms. Non-permanent members do not have veto power over resolutions tabled for a vote, while the permanent five do.

See more here:
Syria, Afghanistan & Africa Efforts Remembered As Kazakhstan ...