Just Foreign Policy News
October 25, 2010
Just Foreign Policy News on the Web:
[To receive just the Summary and a link to the web version, you can use this webform:
https://www.justforeignpolicy.org/switchdailynews]
Video: IDF soldiers visit the University of Michigan
Last Wednesday, the University of Michigan campus was visited by two IDF soldiers in an event sponsored by "Stand With Us." One of the soldiers served in the Givati infantry brigade, which bombed a house full of civilians during the Gaza war, killing 21 members of the same family [http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/features/what-led-to-idf-bombing-house-full-of-civilians-during-gaza-war-1.320816.] About fifty protesters attended the event and revealed shirts bearing the names of Gaza children killed during the Israeli invasion.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VPDkq2JHfA0
Help Support Our Work
Your donation helps us educate Americans and create opportunities to advocate for a just foreign policy.
https://www.justforeignpolicy.org/donate
Summary:
U.S./Top News
1) The UN has called on President Obama to order a full investigation of US forces’ involvement in human rights abuses in Iraq after a massive leak of military documents that detail torture, summary executions and war crimes, the Guardian reports. Manfred Nowak, the UN’s chief investigator on torture, said a US failure to investigate would be a failure of the Obama Administration to recognize its obligations under international law. He said the principle of "non-refoulement" prohibited states from transferring detainees to other countries that could pose a risk to their personal safety.
2) The cholera outbreak, with 259 deaths and more than 3,300 confirmed cases counted as of Monday morning, has so far been contained to the rural areas around the Artibonite River, the New York Times reports. But Port-au-Prince is tensely preparing for its arrival in the densely populated slums and tent camps of earthquake survivors. No new cases have originated in the capital. But health experts cautioned that the danger remained high. A spokesman for the Pan American Health Organization said that in 75 percent of cholera cases, the carriers are asymptomatic. That would mean the number of people who have the microbe may be closer to 12,000.
3) Pakistani officials are expressing frustration they have not been included in recent overtures to the Taliban, warning that a sustainable peace agreement will not be possible without their support, the Washington Post reports. Army and intelligence officers also said they were skeptical of assertions by U.S. military leaders that coalition forces have turned the corner in their fight against the Taliban in Afghanistan. "The American government is hard-pressed to show the American public that they have achieved something" ahead of congressional elections and Obama’s war review in December, said a senior Pakistani intelligence official. "All this is primarily about that."
4) The end of 2014 is the "secret date" for the withdrawal of US forces from Afghanistan, writes Leslie Gelb in the Daily Beast. NATO diplomats say the plan is for NATO leaders to formally announce this date at their Lisbon summit on November 19-20.
5) Rep. Eric Cantor says a Republican Congress would seek to remove aid to Israel from the foreign aid budget so it can reject the foreign aid budget, the Jewish Telegraphic Agency reports. Some on the GOP right have suggested including Israel aid in the defense budget. "Pro-Israel" officials told JTA they would urge newly elected Republicans to back a "holistic" foreign assistance package.
6) The majority of Republicans running for House and Senate seats disagree with the facts that carbon released into the atmosphere raises average temperature and human activities are the biggest contributor to the release of carbon, NPR reports. If Republicans take control this November, there’s little hope for climate change policy, NPR says.
7) "Frago 242," a "fragmentary order" issued in June 2004, ordered coalition troops not to investigate any breach of the laws of armed conflict, such as the abuse of detainees, unless it directly involves members of the coalition, the Guardian reports. The result was that the beatings, burning, electrocution and rape by Iraqi security forces reported in the Wikileaks documents were never investigated.
8) The war logs contain a horrific dossier of cases where US troops killed innocent civilians at checkpoints, on Iraq’s roads and during raids on people’s homes, the Guardian reports. The US rarely admitted their deaths publicly. The killings mainly figure as "escalation of force incidents." A change in western military doctrine known since 2001 as "force protection" permits troops to bypass traditional methods of detecting friend from foe in favor of extreme pre-emptive action. The Guardian notes reasons why a civilian driver might not stop at a NATO checkpoint, such as uncertainty whether the checkpoint is in fact a roadblock manned by bandits or militias.
9) The war logs reveal numerous claims of assaults on detainees by US troops, particularly by marines, the Guardian reports. A woman reports being pulled by the hair and kicked in the face and displays injuries that tend to confirm her story; a man who was detained claims a US soldier kicked his legs and punched his chest and arms, and he is found to have multiple contusions and abrasions on his legs, arms, chest and face. One soldier describes a fellow soldier choking a detainee before pointing an unloaded shotgun at his belly and pulling the trigger.
10) US troops have killed several Iraqi journalists at checkpoints or near US bases, in most cases without accepting responsibility, the Guardian reports. Often they promised to hold investigations but never released their findings. The Guardian notes the example of two employees of the US-funded TV station al-Iraqiya, killed in 2004; NATO ostentatiously promised information; six years later, the Committee to Protect Journalists says NATO has never provided it.
Afghanistan
11) It’s a historic mistake to justify our huge military presence in Afghanistan as a bulwark to protect women, writes Nicholas Kristof from Kabul in the New York Times. Most women Kristof interviewed favored making a deal with the Taliban – simply because it would bring peace. Pari Gol prayed for the Taliban to be defeated in 2001; since then, her husband and daughter have been killed by US airstrikes. The road to emancipate Afghan women runs not through firepower but through schools and economic development – and, yes, a peace deal with the Taliban, Kristof argues.
Pakistan
12) The Obama administration says it will withhold training and equipment for about a half-dozen Pakistani Army units that are believed to have killed unarmed prisoners and civilians, complying with the Leahy Amendment, the New York Times reports. The Human Rights Commission of Pakistan, said in June that 282 extrajudicial killings had been committed in the Swat region in the previous year.
Iran
13) President Karzai acknowledged Monday that he regularly receives bags of cash from the Iranian government containing millions of dollars, the New York Times reports. Karzai implied that US officials had leaked information about Iran because of disagreements with the US over the role of private security companies.
Contents:
U.S./Top News
1) Iraq War Logs: UN Demands Obama Investigate Torture
Demand follows massive leak of military documents
David Batty and Jamie Doward, Guardian, Saturday 23 October 2010 13.41 BST http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/oct/23/united-nations-call-obama-investigation-abuses-iraq
The UN has called on Barack Obama to order a full investigation of US forces’ involvement in human rights abuses in Iraq after a massive leak of military documents that detail torture, summary executions and war crimes.
The call, by the UN’s chief investigator on torture, Manfred Nowak, came as Phil Shiner, human rights specialist at Public Interest Lawyers in the UK, warned that some of the deaths documented in the Iraq war logs could have involved British forces and would be pursued through the UK courts. He demanded a public inquiry into allegations that British troops were responsible for civilian deaths during the conflict.
The Guardian has analysed the 400,000 documents, the biggest leak in US military history, and found 15,000 previously unreported civilian deaths. The logs show how US authorities failed to investigate hundreds of reports of abuse, torture, rape and murder by Iraqi police and soldiers whose conduct appears to be systematic and generally unpunished.
Nowak said that if the files released through WikiLeaks pointed to clear violations of the UN Convention Against Torture the Obama administration had an obligation to investigate them.
The logs paint a disturbing picture of the relationship between US and Iraqi forces. Nowak said that UN human rights agreements obliged states to criminalise every form of torture, whether directly or indirectly, and to investigate any allegations of abuse.
[…] A failure to investigate, Nowak suggested, would be a failure of the Obama government to recognise its obligations under international law. He said the principle of "non-refoulement" prohibited states from transferring detainees to other countries that could pose a risk to their personal safety.
The documents, which cover the period in Iraq from 2004 onwards, have prompted claims that this principle has not been observed. The files contain evidence that US forces were ordered to turn a blind eye to abuses committed by the Iraqi authorities.
[…]
2) At Cholera Epicenter in Haiti, Fear and Misery
Deborah Sontag, New York Times, October 25, 2010
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/26/world/americas/26haiti.html
St. Marc, Haiti – Here at the epicenter of the cholera epidemic, about 60 miles north of the capital, scores of children and adults are doubled over in a hospital courtyard, stretched out on benches or cots, racked by convulsive stomach disorder or limp with dehydration. They have buckets by their sides and intravenous solutions dripping into their arms.
On Monday, Martila Joseph sat on one of the benches, tears cascading down her face as she held her all-too-still 4-year-old daughter in her arms. "I don’t know if my kid will survive," she moaned.
The cholera outbreak, with 259 deaths and more than 3,300 confirmed cases counted as of Monday morning, has so far been contained to the region around the epicenter – the central rural areas around the Artibonite River.
But the capital, Port-au-Prince, is tensely preparing for its arrival in the densely populated slums and tent camps of earthquake survivors. Treatment centers are being established, soap and water purification tablets being distributed and public safety announcements stressing hygiene.
[…] Officials emphasized that no new cases have originated in the capital, according to Associated Press. But health experts cautioned that the danger remained high. Daniel Epstein, a spokesman for the Pan American Health Organization, said Monday that in 75 percent of cholera cases, the carriers are asymptomatic. That would mean that the number of people who have the microbe – and could spread it – may be closer to 12,000.
[…]
3) Pakistani Security Officials Want Role In Afghan Talks
They question U.S. assertions of progress in war against Taliban
David Nakamura, Washington Post, October 25, 2010
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/10/24/AR2010102401676.html
Islamabad – Pakistani security officials are expressing frustration that they have not been included in Afghan President Hamid Karzai’s recent overtures to the Taliban, warning that a sustainable peace agreement will not be possible without their support.
In interviews, army and intelligence officers here also said they were skeptical of assertions by U.S. military leaders that coalition forces have turned the corner in their fight against the Taliban in Afghanistan and that reconciliation talks are at hand, calling that narrative a "desperate" attempt to convince the American public that there is progress in the war.
"The American government is hard-pressed to show the American public that they have achieved something" ahead of the midterm congressional elections next week and President Obama’s war review in December, said a senior Pakistani intelligence official. "All this is primarily about that."
Another high-ranking security official cautioned that the Americans must be careful that their "desperate push to produce results . . . does not become strategically unacceptable to our side. We cannot be insignificant in this war. If somebody is trying to keep us out and is striving for sustainable peace, good luck to them."
[…] The views expressed by Pakistani officials in recent days are in stark contrast to the increasingly upbeat assessments that U.S. officials have offered about the war. Gen. David H. Petraeus, the top U.S. and NATO commander in Afghanistan, said last week that a major operation in the Taliban stronghold of Kandahar is progressing faster than expected, and U.S. Ambassador Karl W. Eikenberry said there have been "positive trends emerging."
[…]
4) Four More Years Of War
Leslie H. Gelb, Daily Beast, October 24, 2010
NATO leaders will soon reveal the actual date of U.S. withdrawal in Afghanistan: not the much ballyhooed July 2011 date but the end of 2014. Leslie H. Gelb on the devastating truth.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2010-10-24/war-in-afghanistan-actual-end-date-is-2014/
The secret date for the withdrawal of U.S. forces from Afghanistan has been hiding in plain sight for months. It’s certainly not the much ballyhooed July 2011 date, which will only begin withdrawals. It’s not even July 2012 to smooth President Obama’s reelection campaign. It’s the end of 2014. The plan, NATO diplomats say, is for NATO leaders to formally announce this date at their Lisbon summit on November 19-20. Their thinking is to do this soon to reassure worried, friendly Afghans, to signal resolution to the Taliban, and to use their allied unity for political cushioning at home. NATO emissaries are still bargaining over exactly how many troops will remain after departure day and for what purposes. Details aside, the devastating truth is that U.S. forces will be fighting in Afghanistan for at least four more years.
[…]
5) Cantor: Take Israel out of foreign aid
Jewish Telegraphic Agency, October 24, 2010
http://www.jta.org/news/article/2010/10/24/2741415/cantor-take-israel-out-of-foreign-aid
Washington – A Republican Congress would seek to remove funding for Israel from the foreign operations budget, a GOP leader said.
U.S. Rep. Eric Cantor, the Republican whip and the only Jewish Republican in the House of Representatives, told JTA that a GOP-led House would seek to defund nations that do not share U.S. interests, even if it meant rejecting the president’s foreign operations budget.
Cantor, of Virginia, said he wants to protect funding for Israel should that situation arise. "Part of the dilemma is that Israel has been put in the overall foreign aid looping," he said when asked about the increasing tendency of Republicans in recent years to vote against foreign operations appropriations. "I’m hoping we can see some kind of separation in terms of tax dollars going to Israel."
Cantor’s statement was a sign that the Republican leadership was ready to defer to the party’s right wing on this matter. Some on the GOP right have suggested including Israel aid in the defense budget, and a number of Tea Party-backed candidates have said they would vote against what is known in Congress as "foreign ops."
[…] The pro-Israel community has always backed the president’s final foreign aid budget as a whole and strongly resisted proposals to separate funding for Israel for a number of reasons.
Among them, pro-Israel activists see aid for Israel as inextricably bound with the broader interest of countering isolationism; elevating Israel above other nations might be counterproductive in an American electorate still made up of diverse ethnic groups; and such a designation would make Israel more beholden to U.S. policy and erode its independence.
Pro-Israel officials before the interview with Cantor had told JTA that the priority in January would be making the case to newly elected Republicans for backing a holistic foreign assistance package.
6) GOP Victory May Be Defeat For Climate Change Policy
NPR, October 23, 2010
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=130776747
The more carbon that gets released into the atmosphere, the higher the average temperature rises. That’s a scientific fact. Human activities, such as driving, flying, building and even turning on the lights, are the biggest contributor to the release of carbon. That too, is a fact.
And yet the majority of Republicans running for House and Senate seats this year disagree.
Ken Buck, the GOP senate candidate in Colorado admits he’s a climate change denier. Ron Johnson, who leads in the polls of Wisconsin’s senatorial race, has said that "it is far more likely that [climate change] is just sunspot activity or something just in the geologic eons of time where we have changes in the climate."
And when Christine O’Donnell, the Republican candidate for Senate in Delaware, was asked whether human activity contributes to global warming, she said, "I don’t have an opinion on that."
Conservatives in Congress are turning against the science behind climate change. That means if Republicans take control this November, there’s little hope for climate change policy.
[…] It’s a big deal for Republicans in Congress to say they believe that humans are heating the planet. "People look at you like you’ve grown an extra head or something," says Rep. Bob Inglis, a Republican from South Carolina.
Inglis has represented South Carolina’s 4th District for the last 12 years, but this one will be his last. In June, Inglis lost the primary bid to Tea Party-backed Republican candidate Trey Gowdy, who accused him of not being conservative enough.
[…]
7) Iraq war logs: Secret order that let US ignore abuse
Mistreatment of helpless prisoners by Iraqi security forces included beatings, burning, electrocution and rape
Nick Davies, Guardian, Friday 22 October 2010 21.30 BST
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/oct/22/iraq-detainee-abuse-torture-saddam
A prisoner was kneeling on the ground, blindfolded and handcuffed, when an Iraqi soldier walked over to him and kicked him in the neck. A US marine sergeant was watching and reported the incident, which was duly recorded and judged to be valid. The outcome: "No investigation required."
That was a relatively minor assault. Another of the leaked Iraqi war logs records the case of a man who was arrested by police on suspicion of preparing a suicide bomb. In the station, an officer shot him in the leg and then, the log continues, this detainee "suffered abuse which amounted to cracked ribs, multiple lacerations and welts and bruises from being whipped with a large rod and hose across his back". This was all recorded and judged to amount to "reasonable suspicion of abuse". The outcome: "No further investigation."
Other logs record not merely assaults but systematic torture. A man who was detained by Iraqi soldiers in an underground bunker reported that he had been subjected to the notoriously painful strappado position: with his hands tied behind his back, he was suspended from the ceiling by his wrists. The soldiers had then whipped him with plastic piping and used electric drills on him. The log records that the man was treated by US medics; the paperwork was sent through the necessary channels; but yet again, no investigation was required.
This is the impact of Frago 242. A frago is a "fragmentary order" which summarises a complex requirement. This one, issued in June 2004, about a year after the invasion of Iraq, orders coalition troops not to investigate any breach of the laws of armed conflict, such as the abuse of detainees, unless it directly involves members of the coalition. Where the alleged abuse is committed by Iraqi on Iraqi, "only an initial report will be made … No further investigation will be required unless directed by HQ".
[…]
8) Iraq war logs: Civilians gunned down at checkpoints
Fear of suicide bombers means troops have shot drivers and passengers who were simply too scared or confused to stop
Jonathan Steele, Guardian, Friday 22 October 2010 21.30 BST http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/oct/22/iraq-checkpoint-killings-american-troops
Patrolling a main road near Musayyib, south of Baghdad, one evening in September 2005, two US soldiers saw a vehicle approaching in the dark. They waved their arms and flashed lights that were meant to indicate it should stop. When the car continued to advance the troops fired warning shots. They then raised their M249 squad automatic weapons, a light machine gun that sprays bullets at colossal speed. Each man fired as many as 100 rounds at the car.
The predictable result was that the people in the front, a man and a woman, were killed. In the back their nine- and six-year-old children were lucky to survive with injuries in the thighs and legs.
This Iraqi family’s fate was by no means unique. The war logs, seen by the Guardian, contain a horrific dossier of cases where US troops killed innocent civilians at checkpoints, on Iraq’s roads and during raids on people’s homes. The victims include dozens of women and children. The US rarely admitted their deaths publicly.
In the secret logs the killings mainly figure as "escalation of force incidents". Commanders send in reports outlining how soldiers faithfully followed the rules of engagement: first signals, then warning shots, and as a last resort direct fire to disable a vehicle or its driver.
[…] The second difference is a change in western military doctrine, common to other Nato armies during counter-insurgencies.
Known since 2001 as force protection, it puts a high premium on minimising all conceivable risk by permitting troops to bypass traditional methods of detecting friend from foe in favour of extreme pre-emptive action.
It may be argued that drivers should be more careful to obey troops’ orders, but in the dark civilians can be as jumpy as soldiers. Unlike troops they have no training or prior experience. They may not be sure who the people with flashing lights are on the road ahead. If it is an unofficial roadblock manned by bandits or militias it may be safer to try to race past. They may think they are being ordered to prepare to stop when they reach the checkpoint, not slow down or halt immediately They may fear that if they do a U-turn or retreat this will be considered suspicious.
[…]
9) Iraq war logs: Detainees abused by coalition troops
US and Iraqi troops blamed for broken bones, cuts, bruises and humiliation tactics in catalogue of everyday abuses
Nick Davies, Guardian, Friday 22 October 2010 21.30 BST
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/oct/22/iraq-prisoner-abuse-cases
The war logs contain multiple reports of the abuse of detainees by coalition soldiers although they are neither as clear nor as alarming as the evidence of abuse by Iraqi forces.
[…] In relation to US troops the logs reveal numerous claims of assaults on detainees, particularly by marines. A woman reports being pulled by the hair and kicked in the face and displays injuries that tend to confirm her story; a man who was detained claims a US soldier kicked his legs and punched his chest and arms, and he is found to have multiple contusions and abrasions on his legs, arms, chest and face.
On several occasions US soldiers report their colleagues. One reveals that the driver of his Stryker armoured vehicle habitually calls out an English-language warning to soldiers in the rear and then brakes heavily to send detainees flying forward, and that those in the back take it in turns to hit their prisoners. Another describes a fellow soldier choking a detainee before pointing an unloaded shotgun at his belly and pulling the trigger.
[…]
10) Iraq war logs: US fails to answer for deaths of journalists
Highest toll among Iraqi reporters caught in crossfire, mistaken for insurgents or murdered by countrymen in sectarian violence
Jonathan Steele, Guardian, Friday 22 October 2010 21.30 BST http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/oct/22/iraq-war-logs-deaths-journalists
Iraq has been one of the most dangerous recent wars for the media. Fifty-two journalists have died in crossfire or other combat situations and 89 have been murdered. Almost all of the murdered journalists were Iraqis, usually as victims of the sectarian violence that began three years after the US invasion.
[…] Covering US military activities was especially dangerous. US troops killed several Iraqi journalists at checkpoints or near US bases, in most cases without accepting responsibility. Often they promised to hold investigations but never released their findings.
One of the most notorious incidents was the killing of Asaad Kadhim and his driver, Hussein Saleh, who worked for the US-funded TV station al-Iraqiya. They were shot by US troops outside a base at Samarra, 80 miles north of Baghdad, on 20 April 2004. At a press conference Brigadier General Mark Kimmitt, the deputy director of operations for coalition forces in Iraq, said there were signs banning filming or stopping near the base. US forces at the entrance warned the driver to stop by firing several shots. When they were ignored, Kimmitt said, forces fired at the car.
[…] Angry Iraqi journalists questioned Brigadier General Kimmitt and the coalition’s civilian spokesman, Dan Senor, the following day. Senor told them: "Let me say this. First of all you will get answers. There will be accountability. In a free and democratic society, which is what we are building here, authorities are held accountable. And we will provide information. You will be able to assess that information independently. That is part of our commitment to you, it’s part of our commitment to the Iraqi people."
So far there have been no answers, according to the New York-based Committee to Protect Journalists. In an email to the Guardian, Mohamed Abdel Dayem, the CPJ’s programme co-ordinator for the Middle East and North Africa, said: "They have not come back with results, not to CPJ, and as far as I know not to the families either."
The CPJ has called on Barack Obama and his defence secretary, Robert Gates, to relaunch a number of investigations into US troop killings of journalists in Iraq, including this case.
Afghanistan
11) What About Afghan Women?
Nicholas D. Kristof, New York Times, October 23, 2010
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/24/opinion/24kristof.html
Kabul – For those of us who favor a sharp reduction in American troops in Afghanistan and a peace deal with the Taliban, the most vexing question is: What about Afghan women?
[…] Women are fearful, no question. Here in Kabul, far fewer women wear the burqa today than on my previous visits. But several women told me that they were keeping burqas at home – just in case. The gnawing fear is that even if the Taliban do not regain control in Kabul, fundamentalist values and laws will gain ground.
Still, it seems to me a historic mistake to justify our huge military presence in Afghanistan as a bulwark to protect the women. In fact, most women I interviewed favored making a deal with the Taliban – simply because it would bring peace. For them, the Taliban regime was awful, but a perpetual war may be worse.
Take Pari Gol, a woman from Helmand Province whom I met here in Kabul. She despises the Taliban and told me on this trip that back in 2001, "I prayed that the Taliban would be defeated, and God listened to my prayers."
Yet in the fighting since then, she said, her home was destroyed and her husband and daughter were both killed by American airstrikes. She is now living in a mud hut here – fuming at the Taliban, the Americans and the Afghan government. "I hate all of them," she told me.
Remember also that while women in Kabul benefit from new freedoms, that is not true of an Afghan woman in a village in the South. For such women there, life before 2001 was oppressive – and so is life today.
One man from Helmand Province, Wali Khan, told me that there would be no difference for women in his village, whether the Taliban rule or not, because in either case women would be locked up in the home. He approvingly cited an expression in Pashto that translates to: "a wife should be in the home – or in the grave."
In other words, oppression is rooted not only in the Taliban but also in the culture. The severing of a woman’s nose and ears occurs not only in Taliban areas but also in secure parts of Pakistan. Indeed, I’ve come across such disfigurement more in Punjab, the most powerful and populous province of Pakistan, than in Afghanistan – yet I haven’t heard anybody say we should occupy Pakistan to transform it.
The best way to end oppression isn’t firepower but rather education and economic empowerment, for men and women alike, in ways that don’t create a backlash. As I wrote in my last column, schooling is possible even in Taliban-controlled areas, as long as implementation is undertaken in close consultation with elders and doesn’t involve Westerners on the ground.
[…] Fatima Akbari is now expanding her women’s businesses and literacy classes in Taliban-controlled areas, always working closely with mullahs and elders to gain their support and protection. "When you go and win their hearts, you can do anything," she said.
"I’m not threatened by negotiations with the Taliban," she added. "In fact, it would be good for the Taliban to be involved in the country, to see that there’s nothing wrong with women leaving the house. And once there’s a deal with the Taliban, security will be better."
So let’s not fool ourselves by thinking that we’re doing favors for Afghan women by investing American blood and treasure in an unsustainable war here. The road to emancipate Afghan women will be arduous, but it runs through schools and economic development – and, yes, a peace deal with the Taliban, if that’s possible.
Pakistan
12) Pakistani Troops Linked To Abuses Will Lose U.S. Aid
Eric Schmitt and David E. Sanger, New York Times, October 21, 2010
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/22/world/asia/22policy.html
Washington – The Obama administration will withhold training and equipment for about a half-dozen Pakistani Army units that are believed to have killed unarmed prisoners and civilians during recent offensives against the Taliban, according to senior administration and Congressional officials.
The cutoff of funds is an unusual rebuke to a wartime ally, and it illustrates the growing tensions with a country that is seen as a pivotal partner, and sometimes impediment, in a campaign to root out Al Qaeda and other militant groups.
The White House has not told Pakistan of the decision, even though senior Pakistani military and civilian leaders are here for a series of meetings, according to officials from both countries.
It has privately briefed a few senior members of Congress, but it has not given them details about which Pakistani units will be affected by the suspension. One senior administration official said there was "a lot of concern about not embarrassing" the Pakistani military, especially during a week in which officials are here for the third "Strategic Dialogue" in a year.
[…] The officials who described the decision said it would affect the Pakistani Army and special operations troops supported by the United States that have conducted offensives against Taliban fighters in the Swat Valley and South Waziristan in the past year, the officials said. But the process is not over: some additional Pakistani units may yet be denied American aid, officials say.
The Leahy Amendment, a law that stretches back more than a decade, requires the United States to cut off aid to foreign militaries that are found to have committed gross violations of human rights. It has been applied in the past to Indonesia and Colombia, but never to a country of such strategic importance to the United States as Pakistan.
"I told the White House that I have real concerns about the Pakistani military’s actions, and I’m not going to close my eyes to it because of our national interests in Pakistan," Senator Patrick J. Leahy, the author of the amendment, said Wednesday from his home in Vermont. "If the law is going to have teeth, it has to be taken seriously. Pakistan’s military leaders have made encouraging statements about addressing these issues, but this requires more than statements."
[…] Much of the administration’s review has been overseen by Adm. Mike Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, who has also been one of the administration’s direct contacts with General Kayani. Admiral Mullen has spoken to senior lawmakers, including Senator Leahy and Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts, the chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, and assured them that the law would be followed, a senior military said.
[…] The Pakistani military has been accused of hundreds of extrajudicial killings. The Human Rights Commission of Pakistan, a nongovernmental organization, said in June that 282 had been committed in the Swat region in the previous year.
[…]
Iran
13) Afghan Leader Admits His Office Gets Cash From Iran,
Dexter Filkins and Alissa J. Rubin, New York Times, October 25, 2010
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/26/world/asia/26afghan.html
Kabul, Afghanistan – President Hamid Karzai acknowledged Monday that he regularly receives bags of cash from the Iranian government containing millions of dollars, saying he uses the off-the-books fund to pay expenses incurred in the course of doing his job.
Mr. Karzai made his remarks during a rambling, sometimes incoherent appearance at a news conference during which he accused the United States of funding the "killing" of Afghans by paying thousands of gunmen at private security contractors to guard buildings and convoys here. It was the latest outburst in a bitter dispute with the United States and its NATO allies that has taken on an increasingly anti-Western tone. The Iranian payments are intended to drive a wedge between Mr. Karzai and his American and NATO benefactors, Afghan officials have said.
Duing the news conference, Mr. Karzai confirmed a report in The New York Times on Sunday that said his chief of staff, Umer Daudzai, was covertly receiving as much as $6 million in cash – often stuffed in bags – from Iranian officials. "They do give us bags of money – yes, yes, it is done," Mr. Karzai said. "We are grateful to the Iranians for this."
[…] The Times article quoted several Afghan officials close to Mr. Karzai as saying that Mr. Karzai and Mr. Daudzai used the money to buy the allegiance of Afghan elected officials, tribal leaders and insurgent commanders. Estimates varied, but some officials put the size of individual payments at $6 million.
Western officials say they are disturbed by Mr. Karzai’s close relationship with Iran’s leaders, in part because of mounting evidence that the country’s intelligence services are aggressively trying to undermine the American-led mission here. NATO officials say Iran is funding, arming and training Taliban fighters, as well as financing political candidates in the parliamentary elections.
At the news conference, Mr. Karzai lashed out at The Times and the United States military, implying that American officials had leaked information about Iran because of disagreements over the private security companies.
[…]
–
Robert Naiman
Just Foreign Policy
www.justforeignpolicy.org
Just Foreign Policy is a membership organization devoted to reforming US foreign policy so it reflects the values and interests of the majority of Americans.