An Afghan offering tea to a US soldier. Online Photo

The UN report says 2009 was the deadliest year for Afghan civilians since 2001 and Taliban are responsible for majority of civilian casualties. The report by UNAMA says 2,412 civilians were killed in 2009 and 3,566 wounded, showing an increase of 14 per cent compared to last year. The report finds that Taliban IED and suicide attacks killed three times more civilians than the victims of the US, NATO and Afghan National Security Forces operations.

It has been the course during the last eight years of conflict in Afghanistan that most of the civilian casualties are caused by insurgents, but their media propaganda is so effective that almost all blame goes to foreign and Afghan troops. During this year there were most brutal incidents including the beheadings of over 20 labors by Taliban on the way between Qandhar to Herat.

But the “public” attitude was totally different towards the incidents of civilian casualties caused by foreign or Afghan troops’ operations and those hundreds butchered by Taliban attacks. It’s obvious that most of civilian casualties by troops are suspicious due to no free media reporting from the place of incident. Taliban killed in any insurgent stronghold are people of the same village, thus considered local and labeled civilian. There have been many such cases. Most of the time, its Taliban that use civilians as shelter in combats with foreign and Afghan troops. They do so intentionally to cause civilian deaths thus create hatred among local populations against foreign troops. Militants have been quite successful in their “civilian casualty” strategy with a successful media war. The firsthand reports that get published on national and international print and electronic media about any incident in Afghanistan are based on statements of militants with huge exaggerations and mostly fake. While troops have a proper process of investigations, by then media commentaries make it easy for militants to win the psychological battle among public.

Most of the times people are even afraid to raise fingers against militants. There have been several protest demonstrations on controversial cases of civilian deaths, but not a single rally against Taliban asking them to stop butchering people! Our national media is not playing its due role in highlighting the atrocities of Taliban. In order to win hearts and minds, awareness has to be created about the atrocities that Taliban is committing, including for the countless civilians that have died in their suicide-attacks.

After more than a month of political crisis following the controversial Presidential elections, a new political chaos is underway. Karzai after bargaining and meetings with his allies, announced the nominees for cabinet. Majority of them were heavily rejected on second slate of nominations. Parliament’s winter break was canceled for the reason to finalize the cabinet and set up a full functioning Government before the President leaves for London Conference. But now it seems things are going to the edge of nowhere.

What is going on? Nobody understands. The public is confused with a sudden wake-up of our MPs, who have to go again to people for vote soon in the coming Parliamentary elections, which is yet unknown if it will be conducted on time.  Nobody understands how a disorganized, divided, rubber-stamp and weak house of ragtags are reacting this unexpected? Members who were not seen once during the entire year in any session of the parliament were in line to vote for the cabinet nominations. The stories of bribery to MPs for buying up their votes is on every tongue across the country. They have spent too much for their campaigns. Now there must be some preparation for the next round. Many, who are assured of their fate in public, see this as the last chance, so all are trying their best!

The parliamentary elections are coming soon and MPs have to go back to public for votes. A parliament that during the last many years could only have a hot discussion on drafting a law to ban makeup, jeans, long hair and couples talking in public, is now overreacting to hide its inefficient performance during this term. They could only approve shameful drafts like the “Rape Law”—the so-called “Shiite Personal Status Law”—which allowed marital rape of women. Or we still remember how majority of MPs were getting emotional on the move against private TV channels broadcasting Indian serials. Taliban are not only the insurgents killing innocent civilians, but also those inside the parliament who tried to take the country back into a situation similar to the dark years of Taliban. “Taliban” is actually a term for all religious tugs and extremist fanatics, who can be anywhere, by any label. We have seen many live-broadcasting of punching-moments among MPs. We saw how shamefully a woman MP was beaten inside the parliament. Once there was a report that a journalist (cameraman), who had caught footage of an MP sleeping inside the parliament, was badly beaten.

I don’t see, at all, any single positive achievement of the parliament during this term. The Rape Law was blindly approved by majority. There could be no success on Media Law. Thanks to public awareness, media and civil society that reacted effectively and compelled the executive to quash and send back the draft of “Rape Law” for amendments.

Now this overreaction of rejecting cabinet members is to compensate the inefficiency of last many years. The apparent reasons are said to be standard, qualification and experience. The only cabinet nominee who had a Ph.D degree (In Urban Development), Sultan Hussain Hisari nominated for Ministry of Urban Development was heavily rejected. Some of those who were earlier called “inefficient repeated faces” got approved. Is this standard and criteria?

Besides the political behind-the-scenes game, the behavior of parliament is extremely shameful. There is not a recognized standard they are rejecting some of capable nominees, but rather for political reasons. It’s obvious that Afghanistan lacks capacity and high-qualified technocrats are very few, but rejection of, for instance, the only Ph.D nominee seem out of any logic and reason. How long will this cat and mouse game go on? Time is getting over so fast. The country is passing from a crucial time of decision-making on many issues.

There is not a running government at the moment. Many ministries are idle. The President seems to leave for London Conference before completing the cabinet. Though competence and qualification are mentioned as the reasons for rejection of cabinet nominees, but it’s more political rather than technical. Behind-the-scene game is being played by big-shots including the President himself. Ethnicity, regionalism, horse-trading and favoritism were the actual factors for a desperate parliament largely divided on important national issues to reject some of the very capable nominees.

Again, it’s curious how didn’t the President have a proper homework inside the Parliament to get his nominations approved for the second slate? Why each time some “special guys” are approved while some others, including the real capable, are rejected?

The long-term solution to the current crisis is amendments in electoral laws. The infamous Single Non-Transferable Voting (SNTV) has prevented the real spirit of democracy, emergence of political parties with agendas to go to public. At the beginning years of its establishment, Afghan Parliament needs strong foundations for political stability in a multi-ethnic country. Continuous rejection of cabinet members from particular ethnic minorities would take the country into deep future existential crisis. Nobody is bothering to be alarmed for the future fire-backs of current political crisis. It’s very obvious that some nominees, regardless of their political affiliations, from ethnic minorities are being rejected consecutively. It is urging a rebellion political mindset among the desperate people of the country. The irresponsible behavior of the parliament, besides its inefficiency, is raising questions on the so-called national unity in the minds of many.

Also published on Atlantic-community.org

The Taliban and al-Qaeda are achieving their goal of asserting a false sense of their strength, and are increasingly finding wider-outlets to disseminate their message. Furthermore, the US intelligence apparatus is failing to handle the situation. A strong local media campaign to counter that of the terrorists is urgently needed.

The attack on the CIA Station in the Khost Province of Afghanistan last week, in which seven agents were killed, is the worst in the agency’s history since the Beirut Attacks. American intelligence officials have confirmed that the suicide bomber was a double agent. The 36-year old Jordanian doctor, Humam Balawi was recruited as an informant who claimed to provide information about top Al-Qaeda leadership. Soon after the incident, the Taliban claimed responsibility for the attack. In a media statement, they claimed the bomber was a “loyal” officer of the Afghan Army.

The bloody attack, besides proving the presence of Al-Qaeda operatives in Afghanistan, also shows how militants use strategic communication as part of their psychological war-tactic. Identifying the bomber as an Afghan Army soldier was a strategic move. Before it was confirmed the bomber was a Jordanian, media outlets quickly leaped to the conclusion that henceforth the Afghan Army and foreign troops would become more hesitant to cooperate, particularly in the field of intelligence sharing. This was exactly what the Taliban was hoping for: by identifying the bomber as an Afghan soldier the terrorists wanted to create an atmosphere of doubt between the Afghan Forces and the foreign troops. The Taliban’s false claim was also aimed at terrifying the locals by showing how strong they are.

Terrorists have been effectively using the media as part of their strategic communication. In addition, Al-Qaeda and the Taliban have also been using other means of communication to propagate their message among their target-audience, categorized as Muslims and the western world. Following the 9/11 attacks and wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, terrorist groups have increasingly used online publication, with video footage of attacks now being common place. Top Al-Qaeda leaders have been emphasizing that the media war is no less important than the military war against the “infidels.” In a letter to former Iraqi Al-Qaeda leader Abu Musab Al-Zarqawi, Ayman Al-Zawahiri, second in command after Bin Ladin, wrote: “We are in a battle and more than half of this battle is taking place in the battlefield of the media…we are in a media battle in a race for the hearts and minds of our people.”

A couple of months ago, the Taliban released their first video message in Urdu, with English subtitles, which indicates they are now trying to reach an even wider audience. The same is happening in Afghanistan where militants release their statements in different national languages. They also often present their messages in the pretext of Qura’ani verses and jurisprudence, to capture the hearts and minds of the illiterate mass population by portraying their terrorist activities as legitimate.

Initially, Al-Jazeera was the only channel that aired militant messages and footages of terrorist attacks; but the competitive nature of the media spectrum, both print and electronic, has made it easy for terrorists to find outlets for their messages. Media organizations are now even competing to get hold of such videos or messages that are guaranteed to attract a large viewership. But terrorists are also perfectly able to release their videos and online magazines themselves, and often possess knowledge of the latest technologies.

Sometimes terrorists intentionally claim responsibility for an attack they have not carried out. A couple of months ago, Baitullah Mehsood — the Pakistani Taliban leader who was killed in a US drone attack — claimed his men were behind the attack in an immigration center in New York. Security officials rejected the claim saying a Vietnamese man had carried out the attack. Such fake claims aim to, and are often successful at terrorizing the local people.

Today Al-Qaeda and Taliban leadership are almost continuously on the run. The Al-Qaeda leadership is now devoting more of its time to escape attacks, than to releasing new video message on the internet or Al-Jazeera. In fact, the so called success of the insurgency in Afghanistan is often exaggerated largely due to the militants’ flourishing media war.

To counter the strategic communication of militants, a mass media campaign among a common audience in Afghanistan and Pakistan is needed. In order to win hearts and minds, awareness has to be created about the atrocities the Taliban is committing, including the countless civilians that have died in their suicide-attacks.

The attack on the CIA station shows the lack of intelligence proficiency of the US and NATO in Afghanistan and the success of terrorists’ psychological warfare. How could a former Al-Qaeda agent, who was even jailed in Jordan, go without screening before becoming an informant for the CIA? In a recent report, Major General Michael Flynn, Deputy Chief of Staff for Intelligence in Afghanistan for the US forces, said “The US intelligence community [in Afghanistan] is ignorant of local economics and landowners, hazy about who the powerbrokers are and how they might be influenced, incurious about the correlations between various development projects and levels of cooperation among villagers, and disengaged from people in the best position to find answers.”

The lack of active intelligence gathering on the ground has been one of the major reasons behind the failure to capture Al-Qaeda kingpins who are still roaming around the border between Pakistan and Afghanistan. How could the CIA and MI6, with their extensive involvement in Afghanistan during the “Jihad Era” against the Soviet Union, be so inefficient in Afghanistan in the post-9/11 era?

Ideological Taliban can only be defeated and crashed.

A recent survey by an aid organization in Afghanistan said majority of Afghans believe poverty and government corruption are the main reasons behind the conflict. As a general assumption, it’s true that majority Afghans are of the view that all their problems are rooted in poverty.  The Oxfam report “The Cost of War, Afghan Experiences of Conflict, 1978—2009”  gives a surface understanding of the outlook of common masses in Afghanistan, which, as the report says, has always been absent from the mainstream media reporting and analysis on Afghanistan conflict. But the survey, as it says, does not depict view of majority Afghans across the country. It was conducted in 14, out of 34, provinces of Afghanistan interviewing 704 people . It gives a good understanding of common public outlook towards their problems in Afghanistan, but an in-depth study of public opinion on domestic issues of Afghanistan needs a more detailed research and field work with broader geographical extent across all parts of Afghanistan considering the ethnic behaviors, regional attitude and areas more acute to Taliban insurgency—South and southeast.

As far as some common foot-soldiers of Taliban are concerned, poverty and government corruption could be main reasons for them taking up arms, but this is not the case with ideological fighters of Jihad, the suicide bombers and the lower, middle and higher level leadership of Taliban. If it was so, then most suicide bombers would have come from Daikundi province as it isthe most isolated province where above 80% of the population live below poverty line.

These militants are neither poverty-hit, nor they have taken up arms against civilians and government due to corruption and other reasons. They are the ideological fighters of the “holy war”. Such people are called Takfiris, who believe they are fighting a holy war of Islam against all the Kafirs (infidels).  The word Takfir is derived from Kafir which means impiety of all non believers of Islam.  Takfiris declare all Muslims as infidels, who keep mum against a non-Islamic government. They believe killing of such Muslims are legitimate. It’s therefore that most suicide bombers in Afghanistan and Pakistan blow themselves in public places killing hundreds of civilians. These people are mostly followers of the Salafi Takfiris, who consider all acts of violence as legitimate move for the right cause. They are also of the view that when a person blows himself in Jihad (suicide bomber), he is martyred.

The Takfiri movement of belief came to Afghanistan and the tribal regions of Pakistan with the arrival of Arab members of Al-Qaeda. Before the influence of Al-Qaeda in this region, there was no suicide bombing. During the Afghan resistance against Soviet forces, Mujahideen, who were fighting with stronger faith and belief compared to today’s Taliban or Al-Qaeda members, never used suicide bombing against Soviet forces. For the first time in Afghanistan, Al-Qaeda trainers during the last years of Taliban rule recruited international and Taliban suicide bombers in their camps in Afghanistan.

After the ouster of Taliban and arrival of the US forces in Afghanistan, there was no insurgency or any major incident of suicide bombing till 2003, when in Feb 2003 Osama Bin Ladin called for suicide bombings in Afghanistan and Iraq.

When the birthplace of Taliban, Kandhar city fell on December, 07 2001 and Mullah Omer along with Al-Qaeda leadership escaped, it was the time when leadership decided to halt resistance and go underground. The comeback of Taliban was only possible with strenuous efforts of Al-Qaeda leaders like Ayman-al-Zawahiri and Tahir Yeldosh, who trained the defeated Taliban and Al-Qaeda fighters in the tribal regions of Pakistan. By 2006, Taliban fighters with their Al-Qaeda trainers and masterminds were fully prepared for a fierce insurgency to start. On 17 January 2006 a ruthless Taliban commander Mullah Dadullah announced “Hundreds of Afghan Taliban mujahedin are ready for suicide attacks.” Then gradually insurgency went on rise with deadliest attacks. Taliban comeback was only possible with Al-Qaeda support and training.

In the discussions about separating Taliban and Al-Qaeda, the efforts can be effective till the foot-soldiers of Taliban, as many Afghans according to Oxfam survey believe, who have taken up arms due to poverty, government corruption and other non-ideological reasons. But one should keep in mind that during the last eight years, Al-Qaeda has extensively invested on Taliban ideologically brainwashing the youth from bordering areas of Afghanistan and Pakistan. Al-Qaeda and Taliban have brainwashed thousands of youth for this “holy war”. All of them are not poverty-stricken, but ideologically motivated people who are ready to die for the target, and who believe that violence is a legitimate way for a “holy purpose”.

Recently about 50 people were killed in a suicide attack on a Mosque in Rawalpindi city of Pakistan. For the first time Taliban publicly claimed responsibility for targeting a Mosque. Though previously there had been many attacks on Mosques in Pakistan and Afghanistan, but militants were reluctant to take responsibility due to the sacredness of Mosque. Amir of South Waziristan Taliban, Waliur Rehman Mehsood taking responsibility for the attack said the Mosque in Parade Line area of Rawalpindi city was a Mosque of hypocrites and it was Masjie-e-Zarar—reference to the Zarar Mosque, which Prophet Muhammad had ordered to demolish.

Under the new strategy for Afghanistan President Obama has emphasized about negotiations with Taliban who are ready to give up. It will be an effective approach towards the common foot-soldiers who are yet not brainwashed ideologically with Al-Qaeda. But it’s a fact that a large number of Taliban militants are inseparable from Al-Qaeda ideologically. These are the people whom, as President Obama says, can only be defeated and crashed because they don’t believe on negotiations and peaceful ways of preaching their thoughts, rather think violence is the only way.

Band-e-Amir, Bamiyan Afghanistan. Photo by Ali Asghar

UNWTO should prefer Bamyan as Host to 2010 World Tourism Day under the theme of “Peace and Prosperity through Tourism”

World Tourism Day is celebrated each year on 27 September. The United Nations World Tourism Organization marked the day in 1970, aimed at generating awareness about tourism and its importance to economy and culture of communities. Every year the day is celebrated by a host country.

There has been no effort at all, by the Government of Afghanistan to promote tourism in the country. Beside the Government inefficiency, insurgency has been another reason. Afghanistan is always on western headlines for insurgency, bomb blasts and suicide attacks but the other side of Afghanistan is less shown to the world.There are many tourist sites in safe parts of Afghanistan. The western media generally reports “Insurgency in Afghanistan” for incidents in South or Southeast. This negative and exaggerating reporting makes the western tourists think of entire Afghanistan as insurgency-hit. Thus many international tourists avoid coming to Afghanistan.

Before the civil war Bamyan was one of the most famous tourist sites in Afghanistan. Tourism was the only source of income for this isolated, yet safest province. Famous as roof of the world, heart of Asia and crossroad of the Western and Eastern ancient civilizations, the beautiful valley lies amidst the mountainous highlands of Hindu Kush and Pamir. Center of the ancient Kushan Empire. Bamyan centuries ago used to be an intersection where Eastern and Western civilizations met and co-existed. Thus the land was the center of trade between East and West. Bamyan has rich history of civilizations and tragic memories of brutality. Beauty of this valley had not only impressed Marco Polo, but also Alexander the Great. Bamyan is at the altitude of 9200 (feet), making it roof of the world. Its geographical location highlights the mountainous valley as heart of Asia.

During the brutal Taliban era, Bamyan was a symbol of resistance and sacrifice. It suffered the most. But today it’s the safest province of Afghanistan. There has ot been a single incident of insecurity in the province during the last eight years. The Kiwi forces of Provincial Reconstruction Team enjoy wrestling with local Hazaras.

Bamyan gained international attention in 2001 when Taliban destroyed the giant Buddhas that stood there since centuries. The brutal forces of evil deemed the Buddhas as non-Islamic. They not only committed the worst genocidal war crimes in the history of human beings, but also destroyed the centuries old Buddhas which was the only source of income for the downtrodden economy of the isolated mountainous province. According to some reports, one of the reasons behind the destruction of Bamyan Buddhas was to destroy the economic resources of the province. After the ouster of Taliban and during the last seven years of international efforts in Afghanistan, Bamyan has been neglected both by the Government and the international community.

There is only two kilometers of paved road in the entire province. Billions of dollars has been poured in Afghanistan for development. All these have been going to insurgency-hit areas. The roads from Kabul to Bamyan are risky due to insecurity on the way from Maidan Province, and the long uncomfortable way from Shiber Pass. Many tourists and travelers prefer traveling by air. There are no proper flights because Bamyan is yet deprived of a proper Airport. Some private flights of UN and PACTEC operate for INGOs, diplomats and journalists. Thanks to Laura Bush, whose visit of Bamyan last year in June blessed the province with 2 kilometer road from Governor House to the Runway. Many international tourists avoid traveling to Bamyan because of the deplorable way and unavailability of an Airport.

Governor Sarabi and UN Envoy Kai Eide boating in Band-e-Amir. Photo by A. Daiyar

After Buddhas, Band-e-Amir, the world famous group of lakes, is the second attractive site for international tourists. Govt. declared Band-e-Amir as the First National Park of Afghanistan. How can tourists visit the world-famous group of lakes with no airport in Bamyan? USAID is working on project of developing Band-e-Amir, the National Park. But a paved road from the center of the province to the lakes is needed. The road from Kabul to Bamyan should also be built to improve local tourists coming to Bamyan.

Bamyan Eco-Tourism, a project being run under the Agha Khan Development Network, is working for improving the tourism industry of Bamyan. Their office right in front of the giant Buddha statues are not only training professional tour guides, but also have been organizing trainings for local hoteliers. The 1.2 million aid by the Government of New Zealand is for the three-year project. Bamyan Eco-Tourism is doing all the best to revitalize the dead industry. It has organized many international events, including the recent Silk Road Festival held at Band-e-Amir.

The international community should focus to the peaceful areas of Afghanistan too. All the development aid has been going to insurgency-hit areas due to which places like Bamyan have remained neglected. If tourism industry in Bamyan is improved, it will not only be a good income for the province, but the entire economy of the country. It will create hundreds of jobs for local population.

To highlight this issue, the UN Envoy for Afghansitan Mr. Kai Eidie recently visited Bamyan province to bring the attention of international community to this peaceful, but neglected province.

Bamyan is the most peaceful province of Afghanistan, thus international tourists should flock without any security fear. The United Nations World Tourism Organization is requested to prefer Afghanistan’s Bamyan province as the 2010 host of the World Tourism Day under the theme of “Peace and Prosperity through Tourism”.

Also Posted on Atlantic-community.org

Comparisons between the Afghanistan conflict and the Vietnam war are completely unfounded as they have little in common. Obama has no choice but to agree to General McChrystal’s request of sending more troops into Afghanistan.

The US entered Afghanistan under the guise of “Operation Enduring Freedom” on October 8, 2001 following 9/11. This means it is more than 8 years since the war began. As a friend of mine noted, “it took the US less time to defeat Japan and Germany in World War II than it has so far taken to subdue the Taliban in Afghanistan.” As we pass the eighth anniversary of the war, there seems to be clear differences of opinion within the US government over the strategy to use whilst responding to the increasingly sophisticated Taliban insurgency. The initial aims of the war were to remove the Taliban from power and destroy their organization, which both supported and facilitated Al-Qaeda’s attacks on New York and the Pentagon. But the reality is that this is taking longer than the entire length of World War II.

Although the war started with overwhelming public support in the US, favor has slowly ebbed away. With surging casualties some American pundits and media sources have started calling the campaign in Afghanistan ‘Obama’s Vietnam,’ US military commanders on the ground are demanding more troops, as in the late 60’s and early 70’s in Vietnam, whilst public approval is waning. However, there is one huge difference: Afghanistan is not Vietnam. This time the US military leadership and strategy is better and the cause is very different. Vietnam was more of an ideological war caught up in the context of the Cold War but Afghanistan is a war of necessity against those who have terrorized innocent people. By calling it ‘Obama’s Vietnam,’ Western pundits fail to recognize the successes of the last eight years. Although Osama Bin Laden and Mullah Omer have not yet been arrested, the Al-Qaeda network has been dismantled fairly effectively with many of its senior members killed. Despite Al-Qaeda’s stated desire to launch a major attack, it has not not struck against the West in four years.

Critics are also increasingly drawing similarities between the current situation and the action the USSR took in Afghanistan during the 80’s. For those reading the headlines thousands of miles away it seems terrible. However, for those Afghan’s with dreadful memories of three decades of war – the bloody Soviet occupation followed by the brutal era of the Taliban – it is far better now. Over 1 million Afghans were killed by the Soviet forces whilst around 5 million fled the country. Afghans became the largest refugee diaspora in the world during the 1980s with over 1.2 million people, including children and women, displaced. Initially, the entire population resisted the invasion, but today the resistance is led by a small ethnic minorities who lack mass support. These small groups fight against a UN-mandated International Security Assistance Force (ISAF), composed of troops from 42 different countries including 28 NATO members. Also it must be considered that during the Soviet invasion the entire infrastructure was destroyed but over the last 8 years Afghanistan has had the kind of development in its economy, infrastructure and governance that it has lacked over the last two centuries. The country has never experienced a peaceful transition of power but today we have a democratic government selected by popular vote and an elected parliament. We also have an Afghan army of 90,000 troops and a similar number of police. Right after the Soviet withdrawal these were totally destroyed.

Today, the war in Afghanistan is at a historic juncture. At this crucial stage President Obama is set to take a risky decision. He has to decide between sending more troops in line with General McChrystal’s demand or to reduce forces in accordance with an exit strategy. With the controversial election situation in Kabul, the White House is now re-evaluating its strategy and Obama is stuck with a dilemma. As Henry Kissinger says “if he refuses the recommendation and General McChrystal’s argument that his forces are inadequate for the mission, Obama will be blamed for the dramatic consequences. If he accepts the recommendation, his opponents may come to describe it, at least in part, as Obama’s war.”

President Obama has no other policy option than to acquiesce to Gen. McChrystal’s request. With a range of voices all calling for different priorities, such as a focused targeting of Al-Qaeda leadership or negotiating with the Taliban, many forget that a sophisticated comeback will only be possible with Al-Qaeda funding. Tahir Yaldosh and the many other leaders killed in the tribal areas of Pakistan were the ones who made the Taliban revival possible through a considerable increase in the insurgency. Negotiating with the Taliban will never be a viable policy option. Any separation between the Taliban and Al-Qaeda is only temporary and the West must quickly realize that Afghanistan could easily become the home for international terrorists once again.

The bill of financial assistance for Pakistan presented in the US congress by Senators John Kerry and Richard Lugar has fueled a heated debate in Pakistani media, parliament and political parties. Newspaper columnists, television anchor persons and opposition political leaders are blasting the bill for, what they call it “the controversial conditions that embarrasses Pakistan’s sovereignty and security”.

Pakistan Army in its public statement after a Corps Commanders meeting announced strong concerns over the bill and “its impacts on the national security of Pakistan”. The military statement said “army has strong concerns over this bill and the parliament representing the people of Pakistan can decide on this issue and help the Government to prepare a national reaction to the bill”. The Chief of Pakistan Army, General Ashfaq Kiyani in a meeting with General Stanley McChrystal, the top US commander in Afghanistan has expressed his concerns over the conditions of the bill.

On the other hand, the Government of Pakistan People’s Party—that has a history of rift with military rulers—under President Asif Zardari has been defending the bill in media and parliament. The Information Minister after the military reaction said “all those opposing the bill should read it”.

The military statement on the US aid legalization was public rather than sending message to the Government through a proper channel. It shows that the army high commands are intensely unhappy with the bill.

The conditions of Kerry-Lugar Bill—The Enhancement Partnership with Pakistan Act of 2009—that has raised the temperature of anti-Americanism in Pakistani media and opposition political circles are;

There is no condition on the development aid to Pakistan through this bill, but for military the Bill asks the Secretary of State to certify to the Congress that;

Pakistan is continuing its cooperation with the US and its efforts to dismantle supplier networks relating to the acquisition of nuclear weapons-related materials, such as proving relevant information from or direct access to Pakistani nationals associated with such networks.

Pakistan is trying to eliminate the extremists and control on the elements within the Pakistan military or its intelligence agencies, which are suspected of rendering support to Al Qaeda, the Taliban and such groups as the Lashkar-i-Taiba and Jaish-i-Mohammed.

Pakistan is destroying the terrorists’ centers in its cities of Quetta and Muridke near Lahore which are serving as bases for terrorist operations.

Pakistan army is not trying to interfere in the political and judicial process of the country.

Other than these, the bill also asks Secretary of State to report about how much control is exercised by the government over all military matters, including its budget, chain of command, promotion process and involvement in civilian affairs.

Abovementioned are the conditions most criticized by media and opposition political circles in Pakistan. There are speculations about the countdown of President Zardari’s government following the strong opposition of army to the Kerry-Lugar bill. In the 60 years of Pakistan’s history, in which military has ruled for more than 25 years, whenever there has been any serious rift between the military decision makers and civilian government, the latter’s departure countdown has been started from that day. A similar fear is being expressed for the near future of President Zardari’s government.

The opposition from political parties is more political than rational. But the military opposition for the Kerry-Lugar bill is mostly due to the assessment and control on army promotion, its budget and as the bill says, “Elements within the Pakistan military or its intelligence agencies, which are suspected of rendering support to Al Qaeda, the Taliban and such groups as the Lashkar-i-Taiba and Jaish-i-Mohammed.” They consider it against the national security and sovereignty of Pakistan. It’s obvious that military which has ruled Pakistan more than about half its history would react to such words like “involvement in civilian affairs, or promotion and budget”.

Opposition political parties including Nawaz Sharif’s Pakistan Muslim League-N, the right wing extreme religious parties like Jamat e Islami and Tehrik e Insaaf—the non-beard extremists—are all aimed at midterm elections. Kerry-Lugar bill is the most suitable weapon for them against the government of President Zardari. The two other major political parties of Pakistan, allied with PPP in coalition are Mutahida Qawmi Movement and Awami National Party, who have kept mum on Kerry-Lugar so far. According to the joint Accord of Democracy between PPP and PML-N, both the parties had promised the people of Pakistan to avoid military involvement in the political affairs of the country, but now that the army in a public statement is asking the Government about army’s concerns, the political parties have kept mum.  Mr. Nawaz Sharif, chief of PML-N is out of the country, while his brother, the Governor of Punjab province  Shehbaz Sharif, and PML-N leader in Parliament Nisar Ali Khan have met army Chief General Ashfaq Pervez Kiyani secretly. Such meetings make the Zardari-countdown more speculated

After these concerns, an “explanotry” document has been attached to the Bill, now signed by President Obama. Apparently, the issue seems to be settled down. But the rift between military decision makers and civilian government is not ended. It takes Pakistan into a deeper political chaos, when security is already worst across the country.

The bill of financial assistance for Pakistan presented in the US congress by Senators John Kerry and Richard Lugar has fueled a heated debate in Pakistani media, parliament and political parties. Newspaper columnists, television anchor persons and opposition political leaders are blasting the bill for, what they call it “the controversial conditions that embarrasses Pakistan’s sovereignty and security”.

Pakistan Army in its public statement last week after a Corps Commanders meeting announced strong concerns over the bill and “its impacts on the national security of Pakistan”. The military statement said “army has strong concerns over this bill and the parliament representing the people of Pakistan can decide on this issue and help the Government to prepare a national reaction to the bill”. According to source, the Chief of Pakistan Army, General Ashfaq Kiyani in a meeting with General Stanley McChrystal, the top US commander in Afghanistan has expressed his concerns over the conditions of the bill.

On the other hand, the Government of Pakistan People’s Party—that has a history of rift with military rulers—under President Asif Zardari has been defending the bill in media and parliament. The Information Minister after the military reaction said “all those opposing the bill should read it”.

The military statement on the US aid legalization was public rather than sending message to the Government through a proper channel. It shows that the army high command are intensely unhappy with the bill and in an already-tempered public atmosphere such a public statement can be seen rarely in the past history of military-civilian government clash.

The conditions of Kerry-Lugar Bill—The Enhancement Partnership with Pakistan Act of 2009—that has raised the temperature of anti-Americanism in Pakistani media and opposition political circles are;

There is no condition on the development aid to Pakistan through this bill, but for military the Bill asks the Secretary of State to certify to the Congress that;

Pakistan is continuing its cooperation with the US and its efforts to dismantle supplier networks relating to the acquisition of nuclear weapons-related materials, such as proving relevant information from or direct access to Pakistani nationals associated with such networks.

Pakistan is trying to eliminate the extremists and control on the elements within the Pakistan military or its intelligence agencies, which are suspected of rendering support to Al Qaeda, the Taliban and such groups as the Lashkar-i-Taiba and Jaish-i-Mohammed.

Pakistan is destroying the terrorists’ centers in its cities of Quetta and Muridke near Lahore which are serving as bases for terrorist operations.

Pakistan army is not trying to interfere in the political and judicial process of the country.

Other than this, the bill also asks Secretary of State to report about how much control is exercised by the government over all military matters, including its budget, chain of command, promotion process and involvement in civilian affairs.

Abovementioned are the conditions most criticized by media and opposition political circles in Pakistan. There are speculations about the countdown of President Zardari’s government following the strong opposition of army high command to the Kerry-Lugar bill. The Pakistani Ambassador to Washington, Hussain Haqqani, who was a fierce supporter of the bill, is already said to be soon replaced with Ambassador Maliha Lodhi. In the 60 years of Pakistan’s history, in which military has ruled for more than 25 years, whenever there has been any serious rift between the military decision makers and civilian government, the latter’s departure countdown has been started from that day. A similar fear is being expressed for the near future of President Zardari’s government.

The opposition from political parties is more political than rational. But the military opposition for the Kerry-Lugar bill is mostly due to the assessment and control on army promotion, its budget and as the bill says, “Elements within the Pakistan military or its intelligence agencies, which are suspected of rendering support to Al Qaeda, the Taliban and such groups as the Lashkar-i-Taiba and Jaish-i-Mohammed.” They consider it against the national security and sovereignty of Pakistan. It’s obvious that military which has ruled Pakistan more about half its history would react to such words of invovlment in civilian affairs, or promotion and budget. But the Pakistani Ambassador to Washington, who might be replaced very soon, has said that why there should be opposition to terms like action against Jaish-e-Muhammad and Lashkar-e-Taiba, when Pakistan is against such groups?

Opposition political parties including Nawaz Sharif’s Pakistan Muslim League-N, the right wing extreme religious parties like Jamat e Islami and Tehrik e Insaaf—the non-beard extremists—are all aimed at midterm elections. Kerry-Lugar bill is the most suitable weapon for them against the government of President Zardari. The two other major political parties of Pakistan, allied with PPP in coalition are Mutahida Qawmi Movement and Awami National Party have kept mum on Kerry-Lugar so far. According to the joint Accord of Democracy between PPP and PML-N, both the parties had promised the people of Pakistan to avoid military involvement in the political affairs of the country, but now that the army in a public statement is asking the Government about army’s concerns, the political parties have kept mum.  Mr. Nawaz Sharif, chief of PML-N is out of the country, while his brother, the Governor of Punjab province  Shehbaz Sharif, and PML-N leader in Parliament Nisar Ali Khan have called on with army Chief General Ashfaq Pervez Kiyani. Such meetings make the Zardari-countdown clearer.

In such a situation the Government of President Zardari will have options to whether reject the US aid bill through parliament, or to ask the US for amendments, which seems very difficult after it has been already passed from both the houses in the States. If it approves the bill through parliament, which is possible due to the majority that the coalition parties have, the countdown of President Zardari would get faster.

In case the bill is rejected and there is no amendment, the US-Pak relationship, vital for the war on terror in Afghanistan, would get the efforts to a less affective sway. It will badly affect the very own efforts of Pakistan army in tribal areas against Pakistani Taliban, who are now capable of attacking the very heart of military—Generals Headquarters. The military operation in South Waziristan has been started right a day after the audacious Taliban attack on the Headquarters of Pak Army.  It’s obvious that Pakistan cannot bear the heavy expenses of the war against extremists and terrorists.

Such a huge multibillion dollar aid legislation has been passed unanimously from the US congress, was not expected to spark such controversies. The bill would give Pakistan $1.5 billion annually over the next five years for economic and social development programs. It will triple the US civilian aid for Pakistan. The Government of Pakistan and US administration needs to bring about a midway on this controversial bill and resolve the issue under a common agreement. It’s in the best interest of Pakistan and the US war on terror.

According to the United Nations office on Drugs and Crime, Afghanistan produced 93% of world poppy cultivation last year. The insurgency-hit country is the biggest world producer of opium. Most poppy crops are cultivated in five southern militancy-hit provinces where Taliban have been challenging the writ of the Afghan Government making a strong comeback after they were ousted by the US-led forces. Over 50% of the total production is just cultivated in Helmand province, the heartland of Taliban militancy stronghold where a major military offensive—Operation Khanjar, the largest since the ouster of Taliban in 2001—with 4000 US Marines and over 600 Afghan troops, is underway. If Taliban are completely cleared from Helmand province, half of Afghanistan’s opium production can be controlled. Besides the recent deployment of 4000 US Marines for the military operation, there has been 8000 British troops stationed in Helmand.  Despite this, there are more than 50 drug processing labs in this province. There was an increased record of 160% in poppy production in Helmand last year. Before the massive military operation was launched in Helmand, Taliban insurgents controlled five of total 14 districts of this province during the last three years.

Infiltration of militants from the other side of border fills the safe havens of insurgents in Helmand that borders Pakistan. Taliban spread across the country from there. Most of their recruitment, training and planning is carried out in this province. Helmand is strategic for the terrorists not only from the economical point of view, but also human resource. The poor farmers are not to directly benefit from the cultivation. These landless peasants grow opium for landlords and druglords linked with Taliban. Before the crop is ready for cultivation, militants and paid “insurgents” are recruited for safeguard of the crops. The operation cost is paid by the big shots that have influence in both sides—among militants, and with Government institutions. After harvest and processing, Taliban are responsible for transportation. The 90% of the world heroin that’s produced in Afghanistan are being smuggled to other parts of the world through neighboring countries.  Mostly illicit drugs of Afghanistan are being smuggled across the world through neighboring countries of Iran and Pakistan.

In the past, there have been several military operations in Helmand, but in none, the forces stayed longer once clearing some districts. Even many times, the military has applied “negotiating” approach with insurgents. It has been a tactic by the Taliban druglords to make ground for their business.

Financing Taliban Insurgency

According to statistics, today Taliban receives over 63% of its financial assistance from the $ 4billion opium industry—53% of the GDP of Afghanistan. NATO forces have been trying to eradicate the financial supply line of Taliban, the drug trade. Officials calculate that Taliban earned $140 million from opium in 2007. Insurgents are involved in different ways, through direct cultivation to safeguarding and transportation of the production. According to officials, about 20 times more area has been brought under cultivation during the last eight years. In 2001, it was 7,606 hectares while last year cultivation was recorded at 1,57,000 hectares.

“US Anti-Drug Policy Ineffective”

International community is worried about the intensifying poppy production in Afghanistan, despite billions of dollars are spent on efforts to eradicate the illicit drugs from the war-torn country. Recently, the US Envoy Mr. Richard Holbrooke admitted the US anti-drug policy has been ineffective. “The US anti-drug campaign has been the most wasteful and ineffective program”, said Mr. Holbrooke while talking to media recently in the Brussels Forum in Belgium. The US spends annual $800 million on counter-narcotics program in Afghanistan. Mr. Holbrooke said the US “has nothing out of the counter-narcotics program.”

Different Approaches

There have been different approaches in counter-narcotics in Afghanistan during the last eight years. A couple of months ago, NATO had allowed its forces to target “insurgency related poppy networks”. Prior to this, the forces did not directly involve against the drug networks. The US wanted to spray herbicides on the vast poppy farmlands, but the Afghan Government has been opposing the idea. Last year, there was a US plan of spraying herbicides on heroin and poppy fields which were disallowed by President Karzai saying it would harm the fields and would drive poor farmers into Taliban insurgency. It’s doubtful to me. A former US expert in an article on NYTimes had said Government officials are involved in the big business of poppy. Unverified sources say Karzai’s brother is the tycoon of this business.

The Afghan Ministry of Counter-Narcotics has been launching livelihood programs for poor farmers in the southern provinces to encourage them grow other crops and give up poppy cultivation. But poverty is not the main reason behind this all. Bigwigs in power are involved.

A couple of months ago, a Triangular Joint Anti-Narcotics Operation was conducted by the anti-drugs police of Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iran on the joint borders.  This was the first joint counter-narcotics initiative by the neighboring countries to control drug smuggling on their borders. The joint operation was the initial action plan of the gradual task to reduce drug smuggling. The respective countries have declared the focal points to implement the joint operations against drug trafficking. A Joint Planning Cell has already been set up in Tehran in February of the current year.

New Strategy

The US envoy Richard Holbrooke talking to media after the G-8 Conference said the new US Administration under President Obama will change drug efforts from poppy eradication to ban on drug shipments and supplies. He admitted that the anti-drug efforts in Afghanistan have resulted in failure. Under the new strategy, the US will not support poppy eradication, but its movement and interception of chemicals and drug transportation while going after drug lords. Though Afghan Government had welcomed the new strategy, but British officials said they would continue eradication efforts. It shows a split which is concerning since British forces have been controlling the highest-poppy producing province Helmand—the Empire of Poppy.

Strategic communication has been one of the significant priorities for the international Jihadi terrorists. Al-Qaeda and Taliban have been using media and other means of communication to propagate among the mass of their aimed audience categorized as Muslims and the western world. Following the 9/11 attacks and wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, terrorists have been increasingly dependent on strategic communication and propagation in mass media. Al-Qaeda even established its broadcasting unit under the brand name of Al-Hasab, which aired regular statements of top Al-Qaeda leaders, attacks on foreign forces in Iraq and Afghanistan. Suicide bombers used to tape their “message” before leaving to the “divine mission”. Top Al-Qaeda leaders have been emphasizing that media war is not less important than the military war against the “infidels”.

With the passage of time, experience and knowledge of the latest technology, terrorists started releasing video tapes including statements and footages of attacks on their “missions”. Initially they used to communicate their videos and messages through media, print and electronic broadcasting. But with the pace of time, they used to more depend upon online resources. Internet once became on the most significant mean of propagation and “expression” for Jihadi terrorists. For the first time in around 2005 an online Jihadi terrorist magazine was published. Following this, many Jihadi groups other than Al-Qaeda and Taliban, started using media as part of their strategic mean for an effective propaganda.

Whenever there is a civilian causality, terrorists use such incidents as a tool for their propagation among masses to legitimize their activities and recruit human resource.  There are five Jihadi websites. Taliban have their own website operating in five languages. Al-Qaeda has its own. They release messages and videos. In a recent move, Taliban terrorists have published large copies of a booklet “Code of Ethics for Mujahideen” which includes guidlines for Taliban fighters.

The recent video of the kidnapped US soldier, in which he was asking his fellow Americans to pressurize the Government for withdrawal of forces was an example of terrorists’ propagation to influence their western targeted audience.

In response, there is not much efforts from the Afghan Government, or other forces fighting in Afghanistan. They should have run a media campaign to show masses the brutality of Taliban. It can influence the mindset of people and win hearts and minds.

A recent poll shows a sharp increase in the public opinion against Taliban in Pakistan. The polling project by the University of Maryland says 81 percent of common Pakistanis view militants as a serious threat to their country. In response to questions regarding Afghanistan and Taliban, 87 percent thought Taliban fighting against the Afghan Government should not be allowed to establish camps and bases.

The NATO and Afghan Government should highlight the propagation of Taliban and there should be a stronger counter media attack.  People should know the fact that Taliban have killed larger number of civilians. The U-turn  in Pakistani public opinion is due to the extensive media support of the military offensive. TV channels’ anchor persons and programmers repeatedly talked about the atrocities of Taliban, thus the vast perception of the mass population about the war was totally changed against Taliban. A similar effort is needed for Afghan media outlets, TV channels and newspapers. Such sources should educate Afghans about the brutality of Taliban and their devilish aims.

Obama’s War is started in Afghanistan. The military offensive—Operation Khanjar, the largest since the ouster of Taliban in 2001—with 4000 US Marines and over 600 Afghan troops, was launched in southern province of Helmand—the heartland stronghold of Taliban insurgency where 8000 British soldiers are already deployed.

Unexpectedly, Taliban didn’t resist fiercely. Five districts that they controlled since last three years were regained in the first week of the operation. But, about a dozen British troops have been killed in Helmand during last week only. With the success of the Operation Khanjar, Afghan media is critical of the British role in Helmand questioning what the troops have been doing there while Taliban controlled five districts in the Empire of Poppy Cultivation, as Daily Guardian says.

Its likely Taliban will attempt to make a comeback in Helmand. With guerrilla tactics, they will try suicide attacks and roadside bombings.  Polling day will be their easy and broad target.

The Operation Khanjar—Strike of the Sword—is the largest and most important under the new US strategy by Obama Administration, who announced an extra 21000 troops for Afghanistan, changing the focus of the war against terrorism from Iraq to Afghanistan.

What makes this operation different from the ones in past is its long-term objectivity.  In the last three years, British forces had been launching small-level military operations in these districts for several times. They would not station there once clearing the districts controlled by Taliban. Thus insurgents would make a comeback later.

The largest military offensive is aimed at clearing the province from insurgents to lay the ground for peaceful and transparent presidential and provincial council elections to take place on August 20. For long-term, the US military say the forces would station in the districts not to give a chance of comeback to insurgents. Seeing the heavy deployment of  forces, its likely the troops will stay there longer to maintain the control and improve security in the province. Officials of the Afghan Ministry of Defense have been saying, forces once clearing the area from Taliban, would stay there to maintain good governance and speed up development programs.

Helmand Operation is also very strategic and importance because the province borders Pakistan, where insurgents used to cross easily in the past, whenever any military assault was launched. With a comprehensive operation at the Pakistani side of the border in tribal areas, its now much difficult for Taliban to easily make cross-border penetration. The Operation Khanjar would also decide the effectiveness of the new strategy.