Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

[ramana]

There are some reports in Google of Karzai-Taliban talks in KSA.

[Prem]

There are some reports in Google of Karzai-Taliban talks in KSA.

http://thinkprogress.org/security/2012/ ... ?mobile=nc

National Security Brief: January 30, 2012

Afghan President Hamid Karzai plans to meet Taliban representatives in Saudi Arabia, a move designed to put Karzai in the lead role in peace negotiations. Meanwhile, the French announcement that it would accelerate its troops’ departure timeline “cast a harsh light on potential cracks in the U.S.-led military coalition in the country.” – American and Taliban negotiators are reportedly “edging closer to a deal for the release of five Taliban leaders from Guantanamo prison – the precondition for peace talks it is hoped will end the Western forces’ decade-long war in Afghanistan.” – In a possible sign of trying to ratchet down tensions, Iran’s foreign minister Ali Akbar Salehi invited a group of U.N. nuclear inspectors arriving there to extend their visit to three days, but there are few hopes of any conclusive breakthroughs resulting from the inspections.
– Pentagon war planners have concluded that their 30,000 pound “bunker-buster” bomb isn’t yet capable of destroying Iran’s most heavily fortified underground nuclear facilities and are ramping up efforts to make it more powerful

.

[Prem]

http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2012/01/ ... .html?_r=1
Afghan Hazara Leader Sceptical of Taliban Peace

KABUL (Reuters) - Scepticism is growing inside Afghanistan's ethnic communities that a peace deal can be struck with the Taliban, under whose rule they were brutalised and persecuted, with many fearing a return to civil war, a prominent Hazara minority leader says.Mohammad Mohaqiq said he was deeply worried about NATO plans to pull out combat troops by end-2014, and a French government proposal to leave a year earlier, by 2013. "It is silly to say al Qaeda and Taliban can come together with Afghans, or (with) our allies who have come to this country," Mohaqiq told Reuters late Sunday in an interview at his heavily-guarded Kabul mansion. "I don't believe in a miracle occurring, that the Taliban will change their way of thought, accept the Afghan constitution, believe in democracy and the vote of the people." Afghan officials plan to hold initial talks with Taliban representatives in Saudi Arabia in coming weeks in parallel to secret contacts underway between the United States and the insurgency since 2010.

Afghan officials also hope to press Pakistan's foreign minister Hina Rabbani Khar during a visit to Kabul this week for access to Taliban leaders in Pakistan, including jailed co-founder of the movement Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar. Mohaqiq, head of the opposition Shi'ite Hezb-e-Wahdat (Unity Party) and a member of parliament, fought the Soviets in the 1980s and was part of the anti-Taliban Northern Alliance, which splintered amid political dealmaking under Afghan President Hamid Karzai. But alliance members are now coalescing again, bringing ethnic Tajiks, Uzbeks and Hazaras into a common front to oppose the blueprint for Taliban peace negotiations masterminded by the United States, and now being re-cast again by an Afghan government nervous of being sidelined by Washington. Other ethnic group members such as Tajik leader and Afghan National Front chief Ahmad Zia Masood, whose brother once led opposition commanders fighting the Taliban, said this month that he also did not believe a deal could be reached with the Taliban, calling for more involvement in peace negotiations. Mohaqiq, whose predecessor Abdul Ali Mazari was stripped naked, mutilated and dropped to his death from a helicopter by the Taliban in 1995, said he believed thousands of insurgents had been trained across the porous mountain border in Pakistan during a decade of war with NATO and Afghan forces

[CRamS]

What I find quite extraordinary is the level of supportit gets from its pipsqueak white brothers in its AfPak adventure

http://news.yahoo.com/taliban-poised-re ... 52031.html

Close U.S. ally Australia said on Wednesday that its special forces could be in the country for years beyond the handover, with other western nations likely to take a similar stance.

Talk about white tribalism. I like the gall of ozzie pipsqueaks like their UK cousins to piggy back on their big brother US's back and asserting their self importance.

[Prem]

http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2012/02/ ... .html?_r=1
Afghan Taliban Deny Plans for Saudi Peace Talks

KABUL (Reuters) - The Afghan Taliban said on Wednesday that the hardline Islamist movement had no plans to hold preliminary peace talks with Afghanistan's government in Saudi Arabia. "We see Saudi Arabia with respect, because it is the centre of Islam. However, as it was reported in media that the representatives of the Islamic Emirate will meet with the Afghan government delegation, that is not true," Taliban spokesman Zabihullah Mujahid said in a statement, using the term the insurgency uses to describe itself. ources in the Saudi government told Reuters this week that the Kingdom was reluctant to host Taliban-Afghan government peace talks, reportedly planned for this year, unless the Islamist movement renounced ties to al Qaeda.

[Prem]

God, They Suck

After more than ten years at war, our press corps still doesn't grasp war. This story (Oops--link added, although the article seems different now) is just embarrassing, with the headline screaming disaster:
Taliban "poised to retake Afghanistan" after NATO pullout
The headline probably is what 90% of the eyeballs who glanced at the news page read. These people will think that our fight has been in vain as the Taliban are poised to win as soon as we are out.A hardy small percentage will check out the first paragraph to get the gist:
The U.S. military said in a secret report the Taliban, backed by Pakistan, are set to retake control of Afghanistan after NATO-led forces withdraw from the country, raising the prospect of a major failure of western policy after a costly war.These readers will add in that Pakistan is about to stab us in the back and brings up explicitly the idea of a lost war. Oh, and it is a US "secret" report--obviously secret to hide the looming disaster.How many read more to get this?Lieutenant Colonel Jimmie Cummings, a spokesman for the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force, confirmed the existence of the document, reported by Britain's Times newspaper and the BBC. But he said it was not a strategic study.
Ah, the first hint. It isn't a "strategic study." But so what? An official spokesman of ISAF confirmed the existence of the secret US report!Do go on:"The classified document in question is a compilation of Taliban detainee opinions," he said. "It's not an analysis, nor is it meant to be considered an analysis."Wait. What?Only now when the vast majority of readers are long gone you bring this up?Yes, a hardy few will discover that this report is a compilation of opinions expressed by captured Taliban. Captured Taliban jihadis believe that their trials and tribulations will be ended by a magical post-America offensive that sweeps them into power? They believe this and so this constitutes something newsworthy?
Apparently, yes:Nevertheless, it could be interpreted as a damning assessment of the war, now dragging into its eleventh year and aimed at blocking a Taliban return to power.

http://thedignifiedrant.blogspot.com/20 ... -suck.html

[pankajs]

Reality behind the changing Afghan mission (CNN)

While there are undoubtedly strong political (and financial) reasons for U.S. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta to set a firmer timetable for a change in mission of US forces in Afghanistan, they are probably not the whole story behind NATO’s evolving “end-game.”

French President Nicholas Sarkozy has already announced that his country's 3,600 troops deployed in Afghanistan will leave by the end of 2013 - a year early. That may have something to do with the fact that he is trailing badly in the polls ahead of presidential elections in April. But he is not alone. In Washington, London and Paris, Afghanistan is an unpopular war.

Panetta's suggestion that Afghan security forces can be capped now at just over 300,000 rather than the 350,000 target originally set is another indication of the prevailing mood. Money and popular support for the Afghan mission are in short supply. There's also an air of exasperation with Afghan President Hamid Karzai creeping in.
[...]
The United States wants many things out of these talks, not least a stable Afghanistan allowing an honorable exit for combat forces. But it also needs to set the conditions for what it was unable to agree to in Iraq - and that is to maintain a strategic regional foothold with large airbases and a troop presence. Iran is on one side of Afghanistan, Pakistan the other; and resource-hungry China also shares a border with Afghanistan.{Russia and India would also be covered by the airbase especially if a missile defense radar is deployed}

So talks with the Taliban are not just about ending the war, they are about recognizing the Taliban's future political influence. They are, if the right conditions are set, about accepting the Taliban as political representatives of at least part of Afghanistan's majority Pashtoon population.
[...]
Now Karzai appears set to pursue his "alternate" Taliban talks track - at the very least, to muddy the waters and slow the talks process, and at worse scupper it altogether. If he successfully sabotages U.S.-Taliban talks, Washington can forget long-term strategic bases. The Taliban will make them unviable.
[...]
When NATO's combat forces pull out, the Taliban will, by talks or by fighting, expand their influence. Without some sort of political understanding, the Taliban will be able to obstruct resupply and every other part of the remaining U.S. and NATO mission.
[...]
A western diplomat who talks directly to the Taliban told me recently "they [the Taliban] haven't made up their mind yet" whether to go for the "grand [political] bargain" or wait and "fight for control of the country." That view is echoed by Sherard Cowper Coles, the former British ambassador to Kabul.

The reason the Taliban may not want to fight for power could be pragmatic. When they took control of 95% of Afghanistan in the 90's they did it as much with Pakistani money - buying off enemy commanders - as they did in battle.

Mullah Omar's Taliban, the largest Taliban group also known as the Quetta Shura, the former Afghan government, the ones talking to the United States will not get that money now because Pakistan's military intelligence service, the ISI, does not trust them.

Sources say the ISI trusts and prefers to fund the much smaller Haqqani Taliban force. The Haqqanis have pledged allegiance to Mullah Omar publicly - but would likely be an adversary were he ever back in government.

Also the Taliban's ethnic foes in the North are far richer, better equipped and trained than the last time they fought, thanks to the North's close ties to the U.S. military. They pose a bigger challenge to Taliban (Pashton) hegemony than before.

So the question for these aging gray haired leaders who have been at war in some cases for up to 30 years is: Can they get better terms at the negotiating table?
[...]

[Prem]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/ ... story.html
The administration’s muddled message on Afghanistan

IT’S BECOMING increasingly difficult to reconcile the Obama administration’s military and diplomatic initiatives on Afghanistan. Last month, the State Department unveiled a “fight and talk” strategy that could involve the transfer of senior Taliban commanders from Guantanamo Bay to Qatar. The aim, officials said, was to induce Taliban leaders to accept what they have repeatedly rejected: talks with the Afghan government and a peace settlement based on the current Afghan constitution, including its protections for women.On Wednesday, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta floated an entirely different plan: an end to most U.S. and NATO combat operations in Afghanistan by the second half of 2013, a year earlier than expected, and a substantial cut in the previously planned size of the Afghan armed forces. So much for “fight.” Though Mr. Panetta didn’t say so, this strategy implies another big U.S. troop reduction in 2013, beyond the pullout of about one-third of troops already planned for this year. U.S. commanders have lobbied to keep the troop strength steady from this coming autumn until the end of 2014 — the current endpoint for the NATO military commitment. The new timetable may sound good to voters when Mr. Obama touts it on the presidential campaign trail. But how will the Taliban, and its backers in Pakistan, interpret it? Before negotiations even begin, the administration has unilaterally and radically reduced the opposing force the Taliban can expect to face 18 months from now. Will Taliban leader Mohammad Omar have reason to make significant concessions between now and then? More likely, the extremist Islamic movement and an increasingly hostile Pakistani military establishment will conclude that the United States is desperate to get its troops out of Afghanistan, as quickly as possible — whether or not the Afghan government and constitution survive.

[shyamd]

Be careful of psyops in this article. But it is no shock that TSP are going to conduct a coup in Afghanistan after pull out. We expected this hence why there is an effort to back ANA/ANP.

Taliban eat into Afghanistan's core

By Hamza Ameer and Ihsanullah Tipu Mehsud

ISLAMABAD - As the United States steps up efforts to engage the Taliban and al-Qaeda in a peace process for Afghanistan, elements of the Taliban have initiated their own plan focusing on regaining the power they lost in 2001 following the US-led invasion.

This involves hijacking the efforts and finances that the US is investing in training and equipping the Afghan National Army (ANA) and the Afghan National Police (ANP).

Well-placed sources in the Taliban who are based in the Pakistan tribal region on the border with Afghanistan have told Asia Times Online on the condition of anonymity that massive numbers from both the ANA and the ANP will switch and join the Taliban on the eve of the scheduled withdrawal of foreign forces from Afghanistan.
The US and North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) set a deadline for all security tasks to be transferred to Afghan forces by the end of 2014. However, this week, US Defense Secretary Leon Panetta said that US troops would phase out their combat role by mid-2013.

NATO plans to expand the size of Afghanistan's security forces from the current 310,000 to 350,000 soldiers and police while Washington currently has about 90,000 troops in Afghanistan, down from a high of just over 100,000 last summer. It plans to withdraw another 22,000 by the end of this summer. In all, the International Security Assistance Force numbers 130,000 with troops from 50 nations.

"As many as 32 policemen of the puppet Afghan army have already switched sides and joined the mujahideen of the Islamic Emirate in Wardaj, Badakhshan province [in the northeast of Afghanistan], handing their weapons over to the mujahideen and vowing to fight against the invading forces and their minions," a Taliban member told Asia Times Online.

The Taliban source claimed that leading commanders of both the ANA and the ANP had contacted Taliban leaders through tribal liaisons in southeastern, southwestern and northern Afghanistan and requested to join the Taliban unreservedly once the peace talks bore fruit and paved the way for the draw-down of foreign troops.

Those peace talks are already a source of controversy. This week, the Afghan Taliban denied planning to hold preliminary talks with representatives from the Afghan government in Saudi Arabia. Taliban spokesman Zabihullah Mujahid said this was "not true".

The talks would be separate from planned negotiations between the Taliban and the US in Qatar, where the Taliban aim to establish an office.

A top Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (Pakistan Taliban) commander, Mullah Nazeer Ahmad, independently confirmed the Taliban claims of planned defections from the ANA and the ANP. His militants hold sway in the South Waziristan tribal area and across the border in Afghanistan's Paktika, Zabul, Ghazni and Kandahar provinces.

The sources refused to reveal the names or positions of the ANA an ANP commanders who had expressed a willingness to defect due to security reasons and the likelihood of retribution against them from the authorities.

The sources said that they would join the Taliban with their arms caches. In light of this, the Taliban would stop attacking them as a sign of goodwill and focus on foreign troops.

After the end of the Taliban rule in late 2001, the new Afghan National Army was formed by NATO states. Billions of dollars worth of military equipment, facilities and other forms of aid has been provided to the ANA. Some of the weapons arrived from the US, including Humvees and other trucks, M-16 assault rifles, body armored jackets and other types of vehicles and military equipment. The support also included the building of a national military command center and training compounds in different parts of the country.

There were more than 4,000 American military trainers in late 2009 and additional numbers from other NATO member states, providing advanced warfare training to the Afghan armed forces and police.

The ANA is divided into six regional corps, with about 180,000 active troops as of December 2011, although others claim only 100,000 troops are active.

The current Afghan National Police was also established after the removal of the Taliban. It receives funding, training and equipment from NATO states. Various local and federal government employees from the US, Germany's Bundespolizei and the United Kingdom's Ministry of Defense Police provided most of the training.

The ANP - which serves as a single law enforcement agency across the country - had about 126,000 active members in May 2011, a number that is expected to reach 160,000 by 2014.

The reputation of the ANA and the ANP has already been tarnished by their members attacking the foreign soldiers training them. In the latest incident this week, man in an ANA uniform killed a NATO service member in southern Afghanistan.

In January, an Afghan soldier killed four French troops, and as a result French President Nicolas Sarkozy suspended all training operations and combat help. In December, another Afghan soldier killed two French soldiers serving in an engineers' regiment.

"The French army is not in Afghanistan to be shot at by Afghan soldiers," Sarkozy said after the January shooting, according to CNN.

France has 36,000 troops in Afghanistan, the second-largest number after the US. They mainly patrol rugged Kapisa province in central Afghanistan north of Kabul.

French forces were due to start handing over security to the ANA in March 2012 until their complete withdrawal by 2013.

A NATO analysis last year found that 52 US and allied soldiers had been killed in "green on blue" attacks between 2005 and June of 2011.

Hamza Ameer is a Pakistan-based journalist. He is a news correspondent for Press TV Iran & Egypt News. Ihsanullah Tipu Mehsud is a Pakistani-based correspondent.

[Prem]

http://gulfnews.com/opinions/columnists ... n-1.975516
Can America end the war in Afghanistan

There can be no peace in Kabul which ignores Pakistan's interests. On the other hand, the aspirations of Pashtun nationalism will have to be recognised by all partiesPeace with the Taliban is now on US President Barack Obama's agenda. He is evidently keen to end the war and extricate the US from a ten-year conflict, which has proved hugely costly in human and financial terms. Even with a scaled down US force of 100,000 men, operations in Afghanistan are costing the American tax-payer $130 billion (Dh477 billion) a year — quite apart from the substantial funds needed to keep President Hamid Karzai's administration afloat.
A start towards the goal of peace has now at last been made. American and Taliban representatives met recently in Qatar, where the Taliban have opened a political office. At this early stage, the negotiators have been concerned to test each other's good faith. Confidence-building measures are said to have been discussed such as freeing Taliban prisoners held at Guantanamo in exchange for a US soldier captured by the Taliban.

The US it is learnt wants to retain five bases in Afghanistan after 2014, but that could be a deal breaker. The Taliban would oppose it, and so would Pakistan and Iran. The last thing these two neighbouring countries want is an American military presence in their vicinity. Iran under punishing American sanctions is unlikely to help the US extricate itself from the Afghan quagmire. In Afghanistan and Pakistan, US drone attacks have already aroused fierce anti-American sentiment.

Nato forces are due to leave Afghanistan by the end of 2014, when President Hamid Karzai is set to step down at the end of his second term. A difficult problem for the US and its allies will be managing — and financing — the transition to a post-Karzai Afghanistan. The coalition would like to ensure the survival of a pro-western regime, if only to justify the great sacrifices of the war.

[svenkat]

Truth,lies and Afghanisthan

A bleak asesment by a seving US Army Colonel

[rajanb]

Fantastic article. Have a read:

http://armedforcesjournal.com/2012/02/8904030

Truth, lies and Afghanistan
How military leaders have let us down
By LT. COL. DANIEL L. DAVIS

[shiv]

Here are inspiring stories of how the US protects its citizens. I used to think that this was US propaganda that people just swallow. But really - the US has a strange and convoluted way of protecting its citizens

Not sure why this news appeared in 2012 but enjoy:
http://news.investors.com/Article/59740 ... OutBrainCP

n a desolate ravine in Afghanistan, Michael Murphy was running out of options.

For more than two hours in June 2005, the 29-year-old lieutenant and his three fellow Navy SEALs had battled 100 Taliban fighters in the Hindu Kush Mountains.

As his unit suffered injuries, low ammunition and lost communications — and with another wave of enemy militia closing in — Murphy made a desperate decision: somehow reach open ground to call headquarters for reinforcements.

Although he'd been shot in the stomach, Murphy stepped out from behind his cover and into the line of fire with his mobile phone.

Reaching a clearing, he sat on a rock and began pounding in the numbers to the base. He took a shot in the back and dropped the transmitter moments later, but picked it up and continued the call.

Then he took a shot to his head, said "thank you" and resumed firing until he collapsed and died.

And now in 2012 the US wants to talk to the Taliban with "Pakistani approval"

And as for Pakistan?

http://zeenews.india.com/news/world/us- ... 57052.html

Islamabad: The US on Monday delivered three F-16 aircraft to Pakistan, including a new jet and two that were returned after being refurbished.

The new F-16 D Block 52 jet and two F-16 Block 15 jets that had undergone a mid-life upgrade arrived at the Shahbaz airbase from the US, a Pakistan Air Force spokesman said.

The arrival of the F-16 D Block 52 jet marked the completion of delivery of 18 new aircraft ordered by Pakistan.

Exactly what is the US doing in the region?

[ramana]

Fantastic article. Have a read:

http://armedforcesjournal.com/2012/02/8904030

Truth, lies and Afghanistan
How military leaders have let us down
By LT. COL. DANIEL L. DAVIS

Nightwatch comments on above article

Afghanistan: Special comment. A candid eyewitness account of security conditions in Afghanistan by a US Army field grade officer who traveled the country for a year has caused a furor because his observations contradict more upbeat accounts from senior US and NATO commanders.


Lt. Colonel Davis summarized his observations in an article published in the Armed Forces Journal. In short, Davis confirmed judgments published by NightWatch during the past several years - that NATO forces control mainly the ground they physically occupy; Afghan forces will remain loyal until they must defend themselves at which time they plan to change sides, regardless of the ethical virtues of the central government and the quality of their training; and that Taliban and other anti-Kabul forces are biding time until NATO departs, at which time they will reclaim the land they own.


The temptation for analysts is to split the baby, assessing that the truth lies somewhere in between the official reports and the observations of Lt Col Davis. That would be a mistake. The provinces and districts that Davis states are the most under stress are those that independent reliable sources report to be precisely as Davis describes them. The limitations of security in districts also correspond to conditions reported by independent reliable sources, such as the UN Assistance Mission in Afghanistan.


NATO's Afghanistan adventure has exposed most of the country to the modern world and its influences, which are not uniformly welcome. It has enabled China to take advantage of Afghanistan's mineral resources. It has not altered the fundamental pre-modern clan culture of the population; ushered in secular democracy, respect for the rights of women or any assurance than ethnic civil war will not recur.

The true test of US intentions is if whether they bring Omar, Haqqanis to justice.
And close the TSP camps.

[Prem]

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/com ... 5672.story
Peter Tomsen is the author of the just-published "The Wars of Afghanistan." He was U.S. special envoy and ambassador on Afghanistan from 1989 to 1992.

1989, soon after I was appointed U.S. special envoy and ambassador on Afghanistan, the late mujahedin commander Abdul Haq conveyed a warning to me. Attempts by foreigners to organize the unruly, unpredictable and divided Afghan people would always fail, he said. He compared such efforts to a bazaar merchant trying to balance the weight of frogs on opposite trays of a produce scale. The merchant can load frogs on one tray. But as he begins to load the second tray, some of the frogs on the first one will inevitably jump off. And as he reloads them, frogs on the second tray will leap to the ground. Eventually, even the most determined merchant will give up.I have thought of that analogy often during the last year, as the United States and Germany have reached out to Mullah Mohammed Omar's Taliban in Pakistan. The diplomacy has been cloaked in secrecy, though occasional news of it has leaked out. And now, it has apparently produced a tentative agreement, yet to be implemented, to open a Taliban office in Qatar to begin more serious negotiations.

If the United States has any hope of a successful outcome in Afghanistan, these shaky steps to launch peace negotiations must be reinforced by two policy thrusts. First, though the U.S. should be encouraging and supportive, it should withdraw from direct involvement in the intra-Afghan negotiations. And second, Washington should adopt a tougher strategic posture toward Pakistani-supported terrorist groups — including the Al Qaeda-linked Quetta Shura and Haqqani network — which are fomenting terrorism in the region and globally from sanctuaries within Pakistan.

Pakistan's interests differ from those of Afghanistan, and the Afghans will be rightfully suspicious of Pakistani influence on any negotiations. Each time Pakistan's army andInter-Services Intelligence agency have inserted themselves in the intra-Afghan dialogue over the last two decades, it has been to subvert it. The U.S. needs to focus its influence on preventing that from happening this time

The confusing American "fight and talk" tactic toward the ISI-backed Quetta Shura and Haqqani network reflects the larger seesaw pattern of U.S. policy toward Pakistan. Last fall, tough talk from both Adm. Michael G. Mullen, then chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton suggested that the U.S. had lost patience with Pakistan's support for the Haqqani network and would put increasing pressure on Islamabad to close militant sanctuaries in Pakistan. But since then, the U.S. seems to have flinched, reverting to the failed policy of indulgence rather than pressing Pakistan's military to dismantle the well-documented terrorist infrastructure in Pakistan.

[ramana]

So even US opinion makers are also thinking like us on BR!

[Prem]

So even US opinion makers are also thinking like us on BR!

Some Soon, some latter but all thinking heads will come to the same conclusion. Poaq Must Go, Nowu.
Poaqaveri dont work like old days. I think military will stall the actual withdrawl till old power players reassert themselves.

[ramana]

Remember the Rolling Stone journalist who printed McChrystal's views that led to his departure? He has a book now!

Michael Hastings, "The Operators: The Wild and Terrifying Inside Story of America's War in Afghanistan"

Publisher: B..e Ri...r P..ss | ISBN: 0399159886 | January 5, 2012 | 432 pages |

General Stanley McChrystal, the innovative, forward-thinking commanding general of international and U.S. forces in Afghanistan, was living large. He was better known to some as Big Stan, M4, Stan, and his loyal staff liked to call him a "rock star." During a spring 2010 trip across Europe to garner additional allied help for the war effort, McChrystal was accompanied by journalist Michael Hastings of Rolling Stone. For days, Hastings looked on as McChrystal and his staff let off steam, partying and openly bashing the Obama administration for what they saw as a lack of leadership. When Hastings's piece appeared a few months later, it set off a political firestorm: McChrystal was ordered to Washington, where he was fired unceremoniously.

In The Operators, Hastings picks up where his Rolling Stone coup ended. He gives us a shocking behind-the-scenes portrait of our military commanders, their high-stakes maneuvers and often bitter bureaucratic infighting. Hastings takes us on patrol missions in the Afghan hinterlands, to late-night bull sessions of senior military advisors, to hotel bars where spies and expensive hookers participate in nation-building gone awry. And as he weighs the merits and failings of old-school generals and the so-called COINdinistas-the counterintelligence experts-Hastings draws back the curtain on a hellish complexity and, he fears, an unwinnable war.

Its a SNAFU.

Sorry I meant FUBAR.

[abhishek_sharma]

A Loss We Can Live With: The endgame in Afghanistan isn’t 2013 or 2014; it’s already happened. The only thing now is to make sure that the retreat is not a total disaster for those we leave behind.

[Prem]

http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.as ... 2012_pg1_2
Afghan forces raid Pakistani village, kill 2 ‘Taliban suspects’
Afghan forces raid house of tribal elder Sadullah in Badini area close to border

QUETTA: Afghan security forces raided a house inside Pakistan, kidnapped two suspected Taliban fighters and later shot them dead, sources said on Saturday.The incident took place in Badini area close to the Afghan border. “The Afghan forces raided the residence of tribal elder Sadullah Kakar and whisked away two Taliban suspects,” the sources said.The house is located more than a kilometre inside the Pakistani territory, they said, adding that the Afghan forces violated the borders, attacked the residence of Kakar and took with them two persons – Abdullah and Muhammad Sarwar Shabozai. Residents of the area confirmed the two people had been shot dead by Afghan forces. Officials said the Afghan authorities had not returned the bodies of the slain Pakistanis. The relatives of the victims said, however, that three people had been abducted and killed by Afghan forces. The third victim, according to them, was identified as Din Muhammad.

[shyamd]

Afghan NDS officials in Helmand tell BBC - Taliban are asking public to cultivate poppies . Serious cash problem for Taleban.

[abhishek_sharma]

Ghosts of Afghanistan

Divide and conquer negotiations

Free book on the Afghan war for you

Pentagon intel budget: $19.2 billion

[shyamd]

Members of the Kandahar peace council met with Quetta Shura in Quetta

[ramana]

For sake of clarity which witch is which?
QS is Mullah Omar faction.
Kandhar Peace council is who?

[shyamd]

I am not sure. I think KHPC is just another word for afghan high peace council . The meeting was confirmed by afghan national security council and reconciliation team etc. not clear who they met in Quetta, but if I was to guess it was some of the senior shura members. Doubt if mullah o met them. Let's see what trickles out in the press

[Satya_anveshi]

For sake of clarity which witch is which?
QS is Mullah Omar faction.
Kandhar Peace council is who?

Good reference..a bit dated..obviously need corrections such as Obaidullah akhund was recently tapkaod by pukis.
The Afghan Taliban's top leaders

[ramana]

G. Parthasarathy in Pioneer

Past imperfect, Future tense

....

The Americans are now sending confusing signals about their withdrawal strategy from Afghanistan and their ‘dialogue’ with the Taliban. Their Nato allies would like to pack up and leave immediately. The Russians appear concerned about American bases in Central Asia, even while keeping their northern supply route open for American forces in Afghanistan.

Accusing the Americans of involvement in espionage and destabilisation from Afghan soil, Iran is now making common cause with the Taliban, earlier regarded by it as an enemy. Pakistan, America’s ‘major non-Nato ally’ in the ‘war on terror’, now belatedly labelled a supporter of global terrorism, would love to see the Americans pack up and leave, never to return again to Afghanistan. India is working on a gas pipeline through the AfPak corridor for gas from Turkmenistan and is ready to invest billions of dollars in Afghanistan’s coal, iron ore, copper and gold deposits.

With US Vice-President Joe Biden proclaiming that the Taliban should not be regarded as a global terrorist group like Al Qaeda, the Americans have commenced a ‘dialogue’ with the former, which has left Afghan President Hamid Karzai dumbfounded and the Pakistanis mystified. The Obama Administration has let it be known that Mullah Omar sent a message last summer, indicating a readiness for dialogue. The earlier American conditions that the Taliban should renounce violence and accept the Afghan Constitution have been dropped. Moreover, eyebrows have been raised at their readiness to remove hardcore Taliban leaders from the list of international terrorists.

The Taliban’s conditions for participating in a ‘dialogue’ with the Americans have been revealed by the highly respected Pakistani analyst Khalid Aziz. The Taliban have reportedly insisted that the talks will not be held in any country neighbouring Afghanistan, or in any country that has troops in Afghanistan. The talks have to be in a country that has not been hostile to the Taliban over the past decade. The Taliban have also insisted that they will not accept any condition contrary to shari’ah and will pull out from the talks when considered necessary.
{The Taliban are acting like they won the war by imposing conditions and the US is acting as the defeated entity by accepting the conditions!}

American Defence Secretary Leon Panetta announced on February 1 that 2013 would be a “critical year” as the Americans would “make a critical transition from a combat role to a train, advice and assist role” by the middle or latter part of 2013 — one year ahead of what US President Barack Obama had earlier announced. He added that 2014 would become a year of consolidating the transition and “moving towards a more enduring presence beyond 2014”. Mr Panetta envisaged that the period beyond 2014 would be one focussed on “counter-terrorism operations”, combined with training and equipping the Afghan National Army and continuing a large-scale aid programme.

American officials have, in private, also indicated that they intend to retain a massive CIA presence beyond 2014. It is, however, evident that in the US there is a measure of weariness of bank-rolling Afghanistan for a long period and an expectation that with many of their Nato allies facing bankruptcy, the oil-rich Arab Gulf states, Japan and South Korea will step in with funds. Past experience suggests that this may not be a realistic expectation.

Mr Bruce Reidel, a former CIA operative who has shaped the Obama Administration’s approach to Afghanistan, recently acknowledged that success in the peace talks with the Taliban “is a long shot at best” and that “the Taliban regard the Karzai Government as illegitimate and a stooge of the West”. He added that the Taliban has always believed that time is on its side and talk of a withdrawal schedule (by Mr Obama) has only reinforced this belief. Mr Karzai, in turn, regards negotiations with the Taliban in Qatar “with unease and uncertainty”.

Mr Reidel adds that while Republican candidate Mitt Romney is strongly opposed to talks with the Taliban, Afghanistan is not an issue of great significance in this year’s presidential election. It is evident that given Mr Obama’s political compulsions, his commanders in Afghanistan will avoid operations which could result in casualties, even as their troop levels come down significantly this year.

In these circumstances, it is evident that there is going to be considerable uncertainty on the developments in Afghanistan in the coming years. This is especially so as the Afghan National Army has not shown the necessary cohesion to take on the Taliban in tracts of southern Afghanistan bordering Pakistan’s tribal areas. One possible and indeed plausible scenario is that even with an American presence, the Taliban will take over vast tracts of southern Afghanistan, while operating from safe havens across the Durand Line.

The Americans will have the choice of either repeating the Vietnam scenario of leaving those who backed them to their fate, or putting the squeeze on Pakistan with an effective counter-insurgency strategy. In the meantime, India and others with vital stakes in Afghanistan will have to carefully weigh their options and formulate strategies to ensure that Afghanistan does not once again become a haven for jihadi terrorism.

New Delhi is evidently keeping its options open to face varying outcomes of developments in Afghanistan. An agreement has recently been reached with Pakistan on royalties payable for delivery of gas through the 1,680 km Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan-India pipeline. The TAPI Pipeline will traverse through Herat, Lashkar Gah and Kandahar in Afghanistan. While it is expected to be commissioned in 2017-2018, much will depend on the then prevailing security situation in southern Afghanistan and the border regions of Pakistan.

A consortium of Indian companies was recently awarded a contract for iron ore extraction at Hajikak, in north-western Afghanistan, where the country’s largest iron ore deposits, estimated at 1.8 billion tonnes, are located. Negotiations are underway to build Afghanistan’s first steel mill, together with a power plant, in the same region. India is also committed to building a 900 km rail line for transporting iron ore to Zabul, and thereafter to the Iranian port of Chabahar.

Iran will play a crucial role in our access to Afghanistan and Central Asia. It would only be prudent to associate Iran and even Japan and Russia in projects we undertake for minerals, coal, gold, steel and rare earth materials in Afghanistan. But all this will depend on whether Pakistan is prepared to give up jihadi terrorism as an instrument of state policy in Afghanistan and India. Sadly, such a change in the Pakistani military mindset appears unlikely at present.

[Philip]

Failure again! As if anyone expected anything better,especially when the Yanquis are in full retreat,asinine to expect the Talibnan to go soft.

The wars in Iarq,Afghanistan and Libya show that all that the US can do is to destroy a nation,both its people and its infrastructure costing hundreds of billions to restore,which has never been done ,sending it back into the stone age and leave it in the hands of fanatical warlords as we are seeing in LIbya now.It nwo having had the bitter experience of tasting defeat in Afghanistan apartf rom the lossess elsewhere,is now conspiring with Israel and other western nations to "tame Iran"! Since the sh*t from such a misadvanture will not directly hit the continent of the US of A,it couldn't care less.Screw the world,bring down the desert dicatorships and theocracies that are rich with oil, control their production assets after invading the country and then leave it to the "wolves".That sums up US foreign policy in a nutshell,devised by nutcases in the State Dept.!

Afghan peace talks in jeopardy as Pakistan fails to bring the Taliban on board

Afghan requests for Pakistan to bring senior Taliban officials to the negotiating table have been rejected as impossible during two days of talks in Islamabad, according to officials from each side.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... board.html

[shyamd]

Afghan MOD asks all ANA soldiers to ask their families to return from Pakistan and Iran as they are being used as hostages. Either ask family members to leave or leave the ANA.

[abhishek_sharma]

'The Juice Ain’t Worth the Squeeze': Lies, damn lies, and the war in Afghanistan.

[ramana]

Afghan MOD asks all ANA soldiers to ask their families to return from Pakistan and Iran as they are being used as hostages. Either ask family members to leave or leave the ANA.

Nowadays its standard practice in massa to ensure no ties for critical work.

[member_20617]

[quote="Philip"]Failure again! As if anyone expected anything better,especially when the Yanquis are in full retreat,asinine to expect the Talibnan to go soft.

The wars in Iarq,Afghanistan and Libya show that all that the US can do is to destroy a nation,both its people and its infrastructure costing hundreds of billions to restore,which has never been done ,sending it back into the stone age and leave it in the hands of fanatical warlords as we are seeing in LIbya now.It nwo having had the bitter experience of tasting defeat in Afghanistan apartf rom the lossess elsewhere,is now conspiring with Israel and other western nations to "tame Iran"! Since the sh*t from such a misadvanture will not directly hit the continent of the US of A,it couldn't care less.Screw the world,bring down the desert dicatorships and theocracies that are rich with oil, control their production assets after invading the country and then leave it to the "wolves".That sums up US foreign policy in a nutshell,devised by nutcases in the State Dept.!

US foreign policy evolves around one word: CONTROL

IMHO there are five major strands which underpin US foreign policy of controlling other nations:

(1)To defeat communism e.g. Long cold war against Soviet Union, Vietnam war and more recently by investing heavily in China to eventually change it from a communist country to a capitalist country.

(2)Control of oil through puppet regimes e.g. Saudi Arabia. The policy for SA is that ‘you give us uninterrupted oil and we will protect you’. Americans also sell arms to SA to keep its MIC going which earn them millions of dollars. This helps them pay for oil, keep many Americans employed and allow them to continue to make more advanced weapons to sell to SA in future!

(3)Compliant countries for geopolitical reasons e.g. Europe, Pakistan, South Korea, Japan, Philippines, Taiwan, Australia etc. WW2 finished in 1945 but US army has not closed its bases in Germany and Japan.

(4)Non - Compliant countries e.g. Iran, North Korea, Somalia, Cuba, Libya etc
The technique used here is to first portray these countries as ‘anti-world’ in the media. Once this pressure has been built up, USA would invoke sanctions. USA would also try to overthrow regimes overtly or covertly. The last step would be to go to war.

(5) Fight against Alqaeda/Islamists e.g. Afghanistan, Pakistan, Somalia etc

[shyamd]

For sake of clarity which witch is which?
QS is Mullah Omar faction.
Kandhar Peace council is who?

Turns out they were a fraud - with fake letters from Mullah O. They took $1million from Presidential palace to "fund negotiations".

-------------------------


Playing the waiting game: Karzai warns against plot to install puppets

By Kamran Yousaf
Published: February 20, 2012

Official says Islamabad does not harbour any ‘hidden agenda’ for Afghanistan. PHOTO: AFP/ FILE
ISLAMABAD:

When the Afghan president met with the Pakistani civil and military leadership last week, his main aim was to decipher Islamabad’s ‘real’ position on the Afghan endgame.

At the heart of discussions between the two neighbours was Hamid Karzai’s bold insistence that Pakistan come clean on what exactly it wants in Afghanistan.

During the talks described by Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar as “hard and candid”, the Afghan president asked Pakistan to stop “playing a waiting game”, it was revealed.

A senior Pakistani official familiar with the discussions said that Karzai believed that Islamabad was playing a “wait and see game” on Afghanistan.

“He (Karzai) thinks we are not forthcoming on the peace talks with the Taliban. He believes we are waiting to see the Americans leave the region before we play our cards,” said the official referring to the Afghan president’s latest interaction with the Pakistani leadership.

The official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, also said that Karzai suspected that the Pakistan’s security establishment would want to install a government of its ‘own choice’ in Kabul like it did during the ‘80s.

“If this is your ambition then forget about it. Let me tell you that neither would the Americans leave this region nor would you be able to manipulate the situation as you did in the past,” the official quoted Karzai as having said.

However, the official rejected the Afghan president’s assessment, saying Islamabad does not harbour any ‘hidden agenda’ for Afghanistan.

“Karzai’s remarks reflect his own failure and frustration to succeed and lead his country to peace and prosperity,” the official rebutted.

However, the foreign ministry spokesperson did not offer any comments on the discussions that took place between President Karzai and the Pakistani leadership.

Karzai visit – which began with expectations that it would bring the two neighbours closer to a joint strategy on the Afghan reconciliation process – is believed to have ended in a deadlock.

The contentious point appeared to be Kabul’s expectations that Islamabad must bring Afghan Taliban leaders, including Mullah Omar, to the negotiating table — with the presumption that the country’s military establishment still enjoys considerable clout over these insurgents.

But Pakistan was quick to reject the assessment in unusually harsh remarks by Foreign Minister Khar.

“Deliver Mullah Omar? If these are the expectations, then there are no reality checks … They are not only unrealistic, they are preposterous,” she said minutes after Karzai addressed a joint news conference with his Pakistani and Iranian counterparts.

‘No peace because of Pakistan’

An Afghan presidential adviser on Sunday accused Pakistan of playing a double game, promising to work for peace while using the Taliban and other groups as proxies to advance its interests in Afghanistan.

“They (Pakistan) say one thing and do another. There is no doubt that Taliban leadership and Mullah Omar are in Quetta. They recruit and fund people to create instability on this side,” Assadullah Wafa told Reuters.

“We have been deprived of peace in the country for the last 30 years and it is because of our neighbours.”

Afghan government efforts to bring the Taliban into peace talks are floundering and bold steps are needed to ensure that a council spearheading the reconciliation process can win the trust of insurgents, said Wafa.

(With additional input from Reuters)

Why is Karzai angry?
17 3



Afghan President Hamid Karzai, who was on a two-day visit to Islamabad last week, shocked everyone by his aggressive stance against Pakistan for its alleged support to the Taliban.

"Would you be willing to stop girls from going to schools and universities in Pakistan?" he asked Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar at one point.

Sources privy to his meeting with Pakistan's top military and political leaders say he asked Pakistan to produce the Quetta Shura and the Taliban leadership for the Afghan government to negotiate with them. "The meeting shocked everyone," said a senior Foreign Ministry official who was present at the talks. "We thought Karzai came to us to seek help."

"On one side of the table, there are mullahs, and on the other side, an American. Where are the Afghans?"

Pakistan acknowledged the existence of a Quetta Shura in a statement by Defence Minister Chaudhry Ahmed Mukhtar after repeated denials in December 2009. It is also true that Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar, Mullah Abdul Qayyum Zakir, Mullah Abdul Rauf, Mullah Muhammad Hassan, Mullah Ahmad Jan Akhundzada, Mullah Muhammad Younis - the elite Quetta Shura members -were all caught in Karachi and other urban areas of Pakistan in a series of joint raids in February 2010.

Mullah Mir Muhammad was caught from Faisalabad on January 26, 2010 in a joint raid by Pakistani and American intelligence officials when Americans intercepted a messenger and immediately asked Pakistanis to take action.

Also in Pakistani custody is Mullah Abdul Salam caught in January 2010, and Maulvi Abdul Kabir caught from Nowshehra on 20th February 2010 in similar raids by Pakistani and American teams.

Mullah Fazal is said to have been released from Guantanamo Bay to head the Taliban office in Qatar for talks with the Americans

Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar, the number two Quetta Shura and a confidant of Mullah Omar, was caught from Khudamul Qurun, a religious seminary located in Karachi.

Mullah Fazal is said to have been released from Guantanamo Bay to head the Taliban's Qatar office for talks with the Americans.

"Taliban are talking to the Americans directly, and that implies, for them, that the Karzai-led government has no legitimacy," says Afghan analyst Muhammad Ibrahim, who has been active in negotiations with the Taliban. "That is offending Karzai. He wants respect and acknowledgement from not just the Taliban but also Pakistan."

"We told them you need to clarify what it is that you want," Hina Rabbani Khar told reporters about the meeting with the Afghan delegation. "We also told them we will not block any process that leads to reconciliation."

"The problem is Pakistan," says former Afghan intelligence chief Amarullah Saleh. "The shelters are in Pakistan, and the war in Afghanistan is facilitated and run from Pakistan. What other clarifications do they want?"

"On one side of the table, there are mullahs, and on the other side, an American. Where are the Afghans?" he asks.

A former intelligence officials says it is possible Mullah Omar is in Pakistan, but a Pentagon official believes he is not "much of a problem". "It is the Haqqanis who, who are allies of Al Qaeda."

Joe Collins, who had been a special assistant to the US joint chief and now teaches at National War College, says: "Pakistan had begun to push the Taliban toward negotiations with the Karzai government and although Islamabad has never had better cooperation with the current Afghan regime, it is no doubt hedging its bets for the future worried about continuing instability, a vacuum left by a rapid departure of ISAF, and Indian gains in the country at the perceived expense of Pakistan's security."

Nato officials allege most of the Afghan Taliban leadership had for at least three years been sheltered in Karachi under an ultra-secret program run by the Pakistani security establishment, referred to as the "Karachi Project" by the Foreign Policy magazine.

The origins of the project, they allege, date back to 2003 when under intense US pressure, then president Pervez Musharraf closed down the "Forward Section 23", a combo of safehouses and camps in Indian-occupied Kashmir that had provided cover and refuge to top militants.

And the recent statement by former ISI chief Gen Zia Butt, that Osama bin Laden was given refuge by former IB chief Brig (r) Ijaz Shah, will only make Afghanistan and Nato more concerned.

Ali Chishti is a TFT reporter based in Karachi. He can be reached at [email protected]

[Prem]

Two Nato staff killed in Kabul shooting: Nato
http://www.dawn.com/2012/02/25/two-nato ... -nato.html

KABUL: Two American members of the Nato force in Afghanistan were shot dead within the interior ministry in Kabul Saturday, military and government sources said, as anti-US protests raged for a fifth day.“Initial reports indicate an individual turned his weapon against International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) service members in Kabul City today, killing two service members,” Nato said in a statement, without giving further details.A government source told AFP the two men were American advisors and that they were shot within the Afghan interior ministry in Kabul by a member of the Afghan police.“There was a shooting inside the command and control centre of the interior ministry and two Americans have been killed,” the source told AFP, requesting anonymity.Some reports said the shooting was a result of a “verbal clash”.The shooting came on the fifth day of anti-US protests across Afghanistan over the burning of Qurans at an American-run military base.The Afghan Taliban claimed responsibility for the killing of two Americans, believed to be a colonel and a major in the US military, in Afghanistan’s Interior Ministry on Saturday.The group said the shootings were in retaliation to the Quran burning incident.The US, which leads a 130,000-strong military force fighting an insurgency in Afghanistan, has advisors throughout the Afghan government.Two American troops were shot dead on Thursday when an Afghan soldier turned his weapon on them at their base in Khogyani in eastern Nangarhar province as demonstrators approached.n Saturday, at least four people were killed in violent protests, including an attack on a United Nations compound, taking the five day death toll from the protests to 28.

[Philip]

The sh*t has really hit the fan,with the burnings of the Korans by imbecilic ingnoramuses of the US military team in Af.The Taliban is now taking max. advantage over this dozens have been killed in daily protests and now the targets are members of the NATO forces.Even an apology from BO has been discarded by the afghans,enraged at American insensitivity after years of being in the country.The speed with which the NATO nation with the most experience in Af.,Britain is vamoosing from the scene indicates the severity of the situ.As predicted long,long,ago,the Yanquis would one day run helter-skelter from the region with their tails well tucked between their legs! US commentators today even wonder whether the O-team can organise a staged withdrawal from Afghanistan,in the manner in which they retreated from Vietnam and tried to save face pushing the ARVN to face the flak.How long Karzai's army can hold Kabul is a moot Q once the Yanquis and their baggage train of NATO nations flee from the scene of battle in disgrace.

Unfortunately,the one tactic that can turn perhaps the tide BO hasn't the guts to use; round the clock air strikes with B-52s at well known Taliban settlements all along the Af-Pak border.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... istry.html

British staff withdrawn from Afghan government after shootings in interior ministry
The British embassy in Kabul is temporarily withdrawing all civilian advisers from Afghan government institutions in the capital after two Americans were shot dead at a joint command centre.

Xcpt:

By Ben Farmer, Kabul
25 Feb 2012

Nato military advisers were also being withdrawn from Afghan government ministries last night in response to the attacks, the Foreign Office said.

The two US officers, reported to be a colonel and a major, were killed by an unknown gunman in the Afghan interior ministry in central Kabul.

The killings came as violent protests against the burning of holy texts including the Koran raged across the country for a fifth day.

Taliban militants claimed responsibility for the shootings, saying a fighter called Abdul Rahman had shot both men in revenge for the burning of Korans at Bagram airfield, north of Kabul.

Confusion surrounded the killings however as officials said the culprit was unknown and had not been caught.

Afghan officials first suggested the officers had been killed by a fellow foreigner, though Western military officials said initial reports indicated the killer was Afghan.

Gen John Allen, commander of Nato's coalition in Afghanistan, said: "I condemn today's attack at the Afghan Ministry of Interior that killed two of our coalition officers, and my thoughts and prayers are with the families and loved ones of the brave individuals lost today."

"We are investigating the crime and will pursue all leads to find the person responsible for this attack. The perpetrator of this attack is a coward whose actions will not go unanswered."

He continued: "For obvious force protection reasons, I have also taken immediate measures to recall all other [Nato coalition] personnel working in ministries in and around Kabul."

The ministry was cordoned off after the shootings on Saturday afternoon and officials said the grounds were being searched.

The Taliban have tried to capitalise on nationwide anger over the desecration of the Koran and have called on Afghan police and soldiers to attack their Nato counterparts.

On Thursday, an Afghan soldier apparently joined protesters attacking a US base in eastern Afghanistan and shot dead two Americans before fleeing.

Military advisers work closely with the Afghan forces as they try to build and train them to assume responsibility for securing the country by the end of 2014, as Nato forces withdraw.

Any lengthy withdrawal of advisers would risk significantly undermining the plan.

Profuse apologies from Gen Allen and from Barack Obama have failed to prevent days of protests since the first reports holy texts had been apparently inadvertently been incinerated.

A crowd of around 1,000 protesters gathered in the northern province of Kunduz and attacked a United Nations office, prompting police to open fire.

Local hospital officials said four protesters had been shot dead in the clash and up to 50 wounded. A total of around 30 people are believed to have died since the protests began on Tuesday.

[ramana]

Steve Coll in New Yorker

Hunt for Mullah Omar

[shiv]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... tinue.html

Shot in the back of the head: American troops flee Afghan government offices after two senior U.S. officers were executed by 'policeman' as crowds burn Obama effigies

Two unnamed US military advisers ranked colonel and major shot in the head at Interior Ministry. The killer is still on the loose
Taliban claim responsibility for the deaths in retaliation for burning of Korans
International advisers pulled from Afghan ministries
Death toll reaches 28 since protests began on Tuesday

[shyamd]

^^ the guy was high level and was instrumental in preventing plots against Karzai. Not sure what made him kill the US guys. He was a well respected officer.

The NDS has arrested his family.

[ramana]

Burning the Koran will make any pale green into hard green Qadri type zealot.

[Prem]

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2 ... _drone_war
My Drone War
American drones have changed everything for al Qaeda and its local allies in Pakistan, becoming a fact of life in a secret war that is far from over.

We don't even sit together to chat anymore," the Taliban fighter told me, his voice hoarse as he combed his beard with his fingers. We were talking in a safe house in Peshawar as the fighter and one of his comrades sketched a picture of life on the run in the borderlands of Waziristan. The deadly American drones buzzing overhead, the two men said, had changed everything for al Qaeda and its local allies.
The whitewashed two-story villa bristled with activity. Down the hall from my Taliban sources sat an aggrieved tribal elder and his son in one room and two officers from Pakistan's powerful Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) Directorate in another. I had gathered them all there to make sense of what had become the signature incident of the war in Afghanistan and Pakistan: an American drone strike, one of the first ordered on the watch of the new U.S. president, Barack Obama. The early 2009 strike had killed a local elder, along with his son, two nephews, and a guest in the South Waziristan town of Wana. Several sources had told me the family was innocent, with no connections to the Taliban or al Qaeda. But traveling to Waziristan had become too dangerous even for me, a reporter who had grown up there. So instead I had brought Waziristan to Peshawar, renting rooms for my sources in the guesthouse. I had just one night to try to figure out what had happened.
I spent the night running from room to room, assembling the story in pieces. On the first floor sat the dead elder's brother and nephew, who told me what little they knew of the incident. On the second floor, the ISI officers, over whiskey and lamb tikka, described their work helping U.S. intelligence agents sort out targets from among the images relayed back from the drones. Then there were the two Taliban fighters, whom I had first met in Waziristan in 2007. One had been a fixer for the Haqqani network, skilled at smuggling men and materiel from Pakistan into Afghanistan. The other drew a government salary as an employee of Pakistan's agriculture department but worked across the border as an explosives expert; he had lost a finger fighting the allied forces in Afghanistan. None of the men in the house knew the others were there.
( Yarri-Dosti/Pyar-Muhabbat)
On the other side of the Tochi River, in the village of Khatai, lived a famous Taliban commander whom the Pakistani military had once tried to kill. The operation had been a debacle; the military lost at least two senior officers, and hundreds of soldiers found themselves besieged not only by Taliban fighters but by the local villagers. But the small, lethal machine flying far overhead had accomplished what the Pakistani soldiers could not. "Nowadays he doesn't live here all the time," my host that night said as he pointed toward the commander's nearby compound. "There are drones in the air now."
In . Finally, Abdul Wali, the local Taliban leader, arrived and, satisfied that we were who we said we were, ordered our release. They had to be vigilant, he told us. "People come here under the guise of journalists and photographers, and they either take pictures of our locations and pass them on to the authorities or drop a SIM [card] to facilitate a drone strike," he said. "You never know who is a reporter and who is a spy."
AMONG WAZIRISTAN'S RESIDENTS, "I will drone you" has by now entered the vocabulary of day-to-day conversation as a morbid joke. The mysterious machines buzzing far overhead have become part of the local folklore. "I am looking for you like a drone, my love," goes a romantic Pashto verse I've often heard the locals recite. "You have become Osama; no one knows your whereabouts."

Even the brother of the elder I brought to the Peshawar guesthouse said as much, allowing that "in our case, it might be faulty intelligence or mischief by someone" that had caused the strike that killed his brother. Regardless, he said, "I would always go for the drones." Either way, they are now a fact of life in a secret war that is far from over. Once I called a source -- a Taliban commander in one of the tribal areas. His brother picked up the phone and told me that the commander was asleep. It was noon, and I remarked that it was an odd time for a nap. "There are drones in the sky," the brother laughingly replied, "so he is not feeling well."