India Must Work on a ‘Common Strategy’ in Afghanistan: Germany on Delhi’s Alleged Backing of Daesh
By Dhairya Maheshwari – Sputnik – 31.08.2021
India, which had been backing a democratic government in Afghanistan before the fall of Kabul to the Taliban, is now following a “wait and watch” approach in the nation. One of Afghanistan’s largest regional donors since 2001, the nation’s takeover by the Taliban has led to India significantly scaling down its diplomatic presence.
German Foreign Minister Heiko Maas on Wednesday urged India to work on a “common strategy” with other regional nations on the security situation in Afghanistan.
The minister was responding to a question whether he would take up the issue of Delhi’s alleged backing of Daesh-K with other regional governments.
“For the broader region and also for India, it is important to discuss and develop a common strategy as far as developments in Afghanistan are concerned. We need international unity. We need to stand united. And the fact that the United Nations Security Council passed a resolution is an important step in that direction”, said the top German diplomat.
Maas was addressing a press conference with his Pakistani counterpart Shah Mahmood Qureshi in Islamabad. He is on a five-nation visit to Turkey, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Pakistan, and Qatar, as per the German Foreign Ministry.
The remarks come days after a suicide bombing at Kabul’s international airport, claimed by Daesh-K, left 13 US troops and 169 Afghans dead.
Speaking about the question of India’s purported backing of the group, Qureshi stated that he has been consistently warning the global community about the role of “spoilers” in the Afghan peace process.
“Beware. We have been constantly warning the international community about the roles of spoilers within and beyond Afghanistan. The international objective is peace and stability. The international community has to discern between those who are standing on the side of peace and stability and has to differentiate between those who, for self-interest, are taking steps that won’t be helpful in promoting peace and stability”, said Qureshi.
The Pakistani foreign minister added that he had been taking up the matter during his bilateral consultations with other governments.
Qureshi also blamed India for perpetrating a terrorist attack at a dam project in the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Province in July, which left nine Chinese engineers dead.
He also said in June of this year that Islamabad has “irrefutable evidence” about India running nearly 66 terrorist training camps inside Afghanistan for Pakistan-focused violent jihadi groups such as the Tehreek-e-Taliban (TTP) and the Balochistan Liberation Army (BLA).
In November of last year, Qureshi claimed that Indian agencies were also targeting infrastructure projects under the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), the flagship initiative of the Beijing-backed One Belt One Road (OBOR) initiative.
In February of this year, Pakistan’s Prime Minister Imran Khan accused Delhi of using Daesh (ISIS) to incite unrest within the country.
“This is the unanimous opinion of our government and our security agencies that India is backing ISIS”, Khan stated at the time.
Time and again, India has denied Pakistan’s allegations of backing terrorist groups against Islamabad.
Afghanistan: A Tragically Stupid War Comes to a Tragic End
By Ron Paul | August 30, 2021
Sunday’s news reports that the Biden Administration mistakenly killed nine members of one Afghan family, including six children, in “retaliation” for last week’s suicide attack which killed 13 US servicemembers, is a sad and sick epitaph on the 20 year Afghanistan war.
Promising to “get tough” on ISIS, which suddenly re-emerged to take responsibility for the suicide attack, the most expensive military and intelligence apparatus on earth appears to have gotten it wrong. Again.
Interventionists love to pretend they care about girls and women in Afghanistan, but it is in reality a desperate attempt to continue the 20-year US occupation. If we leave, they say, girls and women will be discriminated against by the Taliban.
It’s hard to imagine a discrimination worse than being incinerated by a drone strike, but these “collateral damage” attacks over the past 20 years have killed scores of civilians. Just like on Sunday.
That’s the worst part of this whole terrible war: day-after-day for twenty years civilians were killed because of the “noble” effort to re-make Afghanistan in the image of the United States. But the media and the warmongers who call the shots in government – and the “private” military-industrial sector – could not have cared less. Who recalls a single report on how many civilians were just “collateral damage” in the futile US war?
Sadly these children killed on Sunday, two of them reportedly just two years old, have been the ones forced to pay the price for a failed and bloody US foreign policy.
Yes, the whole exit from Afghanistan has been a debacle. Biden, but especially his military planners and incompetent advisors, deserves much of what has been piled onto him this past week or so about this incompetence.
Maybe if Biden’s Secretary of Defense and Joint Chiefs’ Chairman had spent a bit more time planning the Afghan exit and a lot less time obsessing on how to turn the US military into a laboratory for cultural Marxism, we might have actually had a workable plan.
We know that actual experts like Col. Douglas Macgregor did have a plan to get out that would have spared innocent lives. But because this decorated US Army veteran was “tainted” by his service in the previous administration – service that was solely focused on how to get out of Afghanistan safely – he would not be consulted by the Pentagon’s “woke” top military brass.
Trump also should share some of the blame currently being showered on Biden. He wanted to get out years ago, but never had the courage to stand up to the also incompetent generals and “experts” he foolishly hired to advise him.
Similarly, many conservatives (especially neoconservatives) are desperate to attack Biden not for how he got out of Afghanistan, but for the fact that he is getting us out of Afghanistan.
That tells you all you need to know about how profitable war is to the warmongers.
I’ve always said, “we just marched in, we can just march out,” and I stand by that view. Yes, you can “just march out” of these idiotic interventions…but you do need a map!
Copyright © 2021 by RonPaul Institute.
Spokesman: Taliban seeks political system approved by all Afghan people
Taliban spokesperson Zabihullah Mujahid is interviewed by a Press TV correspondent in Kabul, Afghanistan, on August 30, 2021.
Press TV – August 30, 2021
The spokesman for the Taliban group, which is now in control of most parts of Afghanistan and is planning to establish the new government once the occupying foreign forces leave, has told Press TV that the group seeks to build a political system in the country that would be approved by its people and accountable to the people.
“The Islamic Emirate is determined to have a [political] system that is approved by our people and our people [would] feel comfortable under that system,” Zabihullah Mujahid told Press TV in an exclusive interview on Monday.
He added that such a political system will be accountable to the country’s people, saying, “[We want] a system that is accountable to the people; is accountable and meets the needs of the people.”
Asked about allegations that the group is focused on one ethnic group in Afghanistan at the cost of other ethnic groups, Mujahid said the Taliban has never acted on the basis of an ethnic mentality.
“The Taliban do not have an ethnic mentality. We have all gathered under one mentality or mindset. In Afghanistan, the people who are with us have fought, sacrificed and come together. We do not have tribes and we do not believe in it,” he said, adding that it would be enough for Afghans to come together and become a single mass and a single force.
The Taliban spokesman emphasized, “Ethnic issues were fueled here by the occupiers” because they wanted to divide the Afghan people and pursue their own goals.
“We, the people of Afghanistan, are brothers. All our people live here and they have the right to live, and that is enough… In Afghanistan, we do not give anyone the right to divide us on the basis of ethnicity. Here… we respect [all ethnic groups] and all the ethnic groups of our country will live together and we will live together as one.”
Mujahid: Americans prepared ground for Kabul attack
Asked whether the Kabul airport attack by the Daesh Takfiri terrorist group had dashed Afghan people’s hope in the ability of the Taliban to guarantee the security of the country, Mujahid responded negatively and said, “We assure you that the most recent explosion that took place is still being investigated to find out the main causes.”
The Taliban spokesman added, “The ground was prepared for this explosion. Unfortunately, the American forces deliberately wanted to gather the people in a place and cause disorder for this incident to happen. Several other incidents occurred and the American forces themselves fired and as a result, people were killed and trampled. Our investigation into the main cause of this incident has begun.”
Mujahid stressed that, “We can prevent the recurrence of such attacks. In 33 provinces of Afghanistan, people feel safe. People are safe and the property and dignity of the people are preserved. We will increase our monitoring to find out if there are other small problems in some other place.”
“No group can act independently once Islamic govt. established”
The Taliban spokesman also told Press TV correspondent that after the occupiers left Afghanistan and Afghanistan is liberated and an Islamic government is established, there would be no excuse for anyone or any group to operate under the name of Daesh and another group.
“We will ensure the security of the country and our message to those who act under the name of Daesh is to consider [the fact] that Afghanistan is no longer a war zone,” Mujahid said.
“What is true is that an Islamic system is being established here. Foreign forces are leaving Afghanistan and there is no excuse left for us not to bring an end to the war and we make sure that such a thing will not happen again and we can stop it,” he added.
“We want good relations with entire world”
Asked about the main concerns of Taliban regarding their position in and acceptance by the international community and whether the group will take over Afghanistan’s seat in the United Nations, Mujahid said, “We are currently in a situation where other countries must have trust and understanding with us. We, on our part, assure the whole world that we want to have good relations with everyone.”
“The worries and concerns that some countries have can be resolved through diplomacy, through the embassy and through legal channels. Putting pressure [on the new Afghan government] is not the solution [for their concerns],” he said.
Mujahid added, “We send our messages to all countries, especially Western states like the United States and Europe, not to stand in our way. If there are concerns, there are diplomatic ways for us to resolve our differences.”
“On Israel, Taliban follows same path of rest of Islamic world”
Commenting on the issue of Israel and the stance of Islamic countries on the acts of aggression by the occupying regime, Mujahid told Press TV that the group follows the same path on Israel as the rest of the Islamic world.
“Our opinion is the same as the rest of the Islamic world. Israel should be recognized as an aggressor and occupier entity, and … should be dealt with [as such]. This is an inter-Islamic issue and all nations and the Islamic world suffer from it. This is also our pain. This is our complaint and we are on the same path with the rest of the Islamic world,” Mujahid said.
“We have no problem for running Kabul airport once Americans leave”
Elsewhere in his remarks, the Taliban spokesman said the groups will have no problem taking charge of the international airport in the capital Kabul once the occupying forces leave.
“God willing, we do not have any problem in that field. Once the Americans are completely out and everything is handed over to us, we will have no problem. From the technical point of view, we won’t have any problem either because the previously-trained workforce in this field remains in place and continue their work.”
The Taliban are poised to run Afghanistan again 20 years after they were removed from power by American forces following the September 11, 2001 attacks on the United States.
The militants intensified their offensive and rapidly overran major Afghan cities in recent weeks, as the US-led foreign forces enforced what has been criticized as a hasty and ill-planned withdrawal. The Taliban laid siege to Kabul on August 15, forcing the then Afghan President Ashraf Ghani to flee the country on the same day.
Since then, Kabul’s airport has been the scene of chaos and sporadic violence, with panicked Afghan and foreign nationals desperately trying to catch evacuation flights out of the country, prompting officials there to enforce restrictions.
US Drone Strike in Kabul Kills Nine Members of Single Family, Including 6 Kids
by Asya Geydarova – Sputnik – 30.08.2021
The death toll from a US airstrike that targeted a vehicle in the Afghan capital of Kabul on Sunday has gone up to nine, all members of the same family, a relative of those killed told CNN.
A brother of one of the dead told a journalist working with CNN on Sunday that they were “an ordinary family,” not affiliated with Daesh.
There are six children, including his four-year-old sister Armin, 3-year-old brother Benyamin, and two two-year-old sisters Ayat and Sumaya among those killed, the man said, as he reportedly cried.
Earlier, US central command spokesman Capt. Bill Urban said that a drone strike was carried out on Sunday on a vehicle in Kabul, eliminating a Daesh-K threat to the airport.
“We are still assessing the results of this strike,” Urban said, adding that “it is unclear what may have happened,” and the US military is investigating further.
Afghan media reported on Sunday that at least four children were killed in the airstrike that destroyed two vehicles and part of a residential building. CBS said that the size of the secondary explosion suggests that the US strike destroyed a fully loaded car bomb, and did not just kill a suicide bomber riding in the car.
On Saturday, US Army Maj. Gen. William Taylor said that two Daesh-K leaders were killed and another was injured in a US airstrike in the Nangarhar province of Afghanistan.
On Friday, the White House admitted a breakdown in the security process that allowed the Thursday suicide bombing at the Kabul airport, which reportedly killed at least 182, including 13 US troops. The attack, claimed by Daesh-K, comes amid a chaotic US evacuation from Afghanistan following the Taliban’s* takeover of Kabul on August 15.
While the Biden administration has come under fire from both Democrats and Republicans over the evacuation of American forces and Afghans from Kabul, netizens have slammed US media for hypocritical reporting on the situation in Afghanistan.
This comes amid allegations by the media, citing locals, that Afghans killed in the attack on August 26 were shot dead by American soldiers in the panic following the explosion.
US drone operations targeting terrorists in countries have been deemed highly controversial due to reported civilian deaths, which military chiefs define as “collateral damage”. Casualties among civilians became publicly known due to independent investigations and information disclosed by whistleblowers. Last month, ex-US Air Force analyst Daniel Hale was given a prison sentence after leaking classified intel on US drone strikes from his deployment to Afghanistan that reportedly killed innocent people, including children.
Some are horrified the Taliban seized biometric devices. The real scandal is the extent of US’ data collection.
US soldier scans an Afghan resident with an Automated Biometric Identification System (ABIS) during a mission © AFP / TAUSEEF MUSTAFA
By Kit Klarenberg | RT | August 28, 2021
A huge amount of opprobrium was heaped on the Americans for allowing this sensitive data to fall ‘into the wrong hands’. However, surely a better question is why had they gathered all this deeply personal data in the first place?
It’s been reported that the Taliban has seized US military biometric devices in the wake of Washington’s flight from Afghanistan, which could put civilians who assisted coalition forces at significant risk.
The devices, known as HIIDE, for Handheld Interagency Identity Detection Equipment, contain identifying biometric data such as iris scans and fingerprints, as well as biographical information – while their primary stated purpose is to track insurgents, biometric data was also collected and stored on Afghans who assisted the US occupation forces.
The story sparked outcry, widely invoked by both opponents and advocates of the 20-year war as yet another deplorable example of Washington leaving its allies high and dry. While it seems clear there was no consideration given to what could happen if the technology fell into the ‘wrong’ hands, critics have nonetheless overwhelmingly failed to consider the terrifying ramifications of this data being in the right hands, and how the US came into possession of it in the first place.
When precisely the practice of collecting Afghans’ biometric data began isn’t certain, although at a 2010 conference in Kabul, US military officials laid out the terms of Afghan 1,000, a program which sought to collate information on 80% of the country’s population, around 25 million people. It was framed in extremely positive terms, not merely as a means to identify terrorists and criminals, but “enable progress in society” due to its “countless applications for the provision of services” to citizens.
It’s uncertain if that target was reached before Washington’s withdrawal, but the strategy remained in operation for over a decade. The next year, it was reported that Washington ultimately sought to gather biometric data on all living Afghans.
To achieve the lofty goal, a policy of mandatory data collection was imposed for every traveler entering the country via any means, and a dedicated Population Registration Department was created, with offices throughout the country. Even foreign journalists covering the war were fingerprinted, and their irises scanned. Moreover, occupation forces conducted innumerable “enrolment missions”, entering towns and villages and forcing locals to hand over their biometric data at literal gunpoint.
A US Army guide states emphatically that “all combat outposts and checkpoints throughout Afghanistan make it a priority to collect biometric data from as many local nationals as possible.” In the aftermath of a bombing or skirmish, soldiers are told to “enroll everyone”, including the dead, their DNA to be collected using buccal swabs to capture cells lining the mouth. The “payoff” for coalition forces was said to be so great, “commanders must be creative and persistent in their efforts to enroll as many Afghans as possible.”
In a section disturbingly titled “Population Management”, the guide recommends that everyone who lives within an operational area “should be identified and fully biometrically enrolled with facial photos, iris scans, and all ten fingerprints (if present).” Soldiers must also record “good contextual data” about individuals, such as “where they live, what they do, and to which tribe or clan they belong.” Citizens were to be told the collection protected them from potentially violent elements and troublemakers.
A lengthy article in the January 2014 edition of Military journal Joint Forces Quarterly offers a glowing appraisal of the “biometric-enabled intelligence” system rolled out in Kabul, declaring it to be a “key enabling factor” in US counterinsurgency efforts, and “an invaluable part of the campaign that has even greater potential in the future.” It documents how enrolment was often carried out using colorful trucks with jingling bells, in the manner of an ice cream van, in order to make the process “more culturally appealing” – particularly in respect of children, presumably.
Also included are several alleged “success stories”, such as one instance in which two Afghan police officers, neither of whom could read or write, spotted an individual on a “biometrically developed insurgent watch list” approaching their checkpoint.
One of the officers is said to have taken the man – identified as having been involved in “multiple IED events” – into custody “with a broad smile,” and the anecdote ends on an upbeat note, hailing how the officers’ illiteracy was no barrier to them removing a dangerous insurgent from the battlefield due to the miracle of biometric intelligence. Cheery stuff, although journalist Annie Jacobsen has exposed in chilling detail just how fallible biometric evidence can be.
In July 2012, US Army First Lieutenant Clint Lorance ordered his platoon to shoot three unarmed motorcycle riders in Kandahar province. The next year, a court martial found him guilty of two counts of second-degree murder, attempted murder, wrongfully communicating a threat, reckless endangerment, soliciting a false statement, and obstructing justice, sentencing him to 20 years in prison. However, in November 2019, he received a pardon from Donald Trump.
The then-president released Lorance after he was shown fingerprints and DNA data that purportedly indicated the Afghan men killed were Taliban bomb makers, not civilians. However, after some determined digging, Jacobsen found that one set of fingerprints allegedly found on an exploded IED said to prove one of the dead men was a bomber actually belonged to a police officer, who was likely to have contaminated the evidence in the line of duty. The other set did indeed belong to a bomber – who was still alive.
Lorance isn’t an isolated example either. Staff Sergeant Robert Bales is serving life for killing 16 Afghan villagers in cold blood in March 2012. While he pleaded guilty to the charges and admitted his tours of Afghanistan and Iraq had instilled a loathing of the local population within him, he’s now appealing his sentence. The case rests on data provided by a biometrics expert who also worked on the Lorance case, which he claims proves witnesses to Bales’ crimes were Taliban bomb makers who left their fingerprints on bomb components.
Evidently though, Afghanistan was just an experiment – and Washington was enamored with the results. The White House’s proposed Army budget for 2022 seeks over $11 million to purchase 95 new biometric collection devices, meaning the policy will almost inevitably be rolled out again in whichever country is next in the US crosshairs.
Where that will be is unknown, but there’s also the question of what implications the Afghan test run has for the Western world. Governments, police forces, security services and even big business are increasingly using cutting-edge technology to amass, store and analyze vast reams of sensitive personal data – much of it was similarly trialed during the War on Terror, and sold to home audiences on the basis of convenience and security, just as the military’s biometric data harvest was sold to Afghans. Now the troops are finally home, has the fight been brought back with them?
Kit Klarenberg is an investigative journalist exploring the role of intelligence services in shaping politics and perceptions.
Afghanistan Withdrawal Is Hurting Its Profits. It’s Funding a Pro-War Think Tank.
BY SARAH LAZARE | IN THESE TIMES | AUGUST 25, 2021
On August 12, the military contractor CACI International Inc. told its investors that the U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan is hurting its profits. The same contractor is also funding a think tank that is concurrently arguing against the withdrawal. This case is worth examining both because it is routine, and because it highlights the venality of our “expert”-military contractor feedback loop, in which private companies use think tanks to rally support for wars they’ll profit from.
The contractor is notorious to those who have followed the scandal of U.S.-led torture in Iraq. CACI International was sued by three Iraqis formerly detained in Abu Ghraib prison who charge that the company’s employees are responsible for directing their torture, including sexual assault and electric shocks. (The suit was brought in 2008 and the case is still ongoing.)
In 2019, CACI International was awarded a nearly $907 million, five-year contract to provide “intelligence operations and analytic support” for the U.S. Army in Afghanistan.
During an August 12 earnings call, CACI International noted repeatedly that President Biden’s withdrawal from the 20-year Afghanistan War harmed the company’s profits. John Mengucci, president and CEO of CACI International, said, “we have about a 2 percent headwind coming into FY 2022 because of Afghanistan.” A “headwind” refers to negative impacts on profits.
Afghanistan was mentioned 16 times throughout the call — either in reference to the dent in profits, or to assure investors that other areas of growth were offsetting the losses. For example, Mengucci said, “We’re seeing positive growth in technology and expect it to continue to outpace expertise growth, collectively offsetting the impact of the Afghanistan drawdown.”
Similar themes were repeated in an April 22 earnings call, where the company lamented the “headwinds” posed by the Afghanistan withdrawal. (Industry and defense publications have picked up on this theme, but framed it in the company’s terms, by emphasizing the offsets to its losses.)
Despite CACI International’s clear economic interest in continuing the war, on the August 12 call, company officials were careful not to editorialize about the Biden administration’s decision. The closest they came was a cautious statement from Mengucci: “At least as of today we’ve watched the administration make the decision to completely exit Afghanistan by 9 – 11 and all I can say is they’re executing on that decision.”
But CACI International does not have to broadcast its positions on the war: Instead, it is funding a think tank that has been actively urging the Biden administration not to leave Afghanistan.
CACI International is listed as a “corporate sponsor” of the Institute for Study of War, which describes itself as a “non-partisan, non-profit, public policy research organization.” Dr. Warren Phillips, lead director of CACI International, is on the board of the think tank. (Other funders include General Dynamics and Microsoft.)
When it comes to the U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan, however, the think tank is extremely partisan. In an August 20 paper, the think tank argued that “Russia, China, Iran, and Turkey are weighing how to take advantage of the United States’ hurried withdrawal.”
Jack Keane, a retired four star general and board member of the Institute for Study of War, meanwhile, has been on a cable news blitz arguing against the U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan, as reported by Ryan Grim, Sara Sirota, Lee Fang and Rose Adams for The Intercept. (The Intercept noted CACI’s International’s backing of the think tank.)
Kimberly Kagan, founder and president of the Institute for the Study of War, told Fox News on August 17 that the U.S. withdrawal could cause Afghanistan to become the “second school of jihadism.” She warned, “It is not clear that the Taliban, which seeks international recognition and legitimacy, is going to want to tolerate or encourage direct attacks on the U.S. from al Qaeda or other extremist groups based in Afghanistan.”
The think tank’s backing from a military contractor was not discussed in these media appearances.
The case of CACI International is not unique. The Intercept notes, “Among the other talking heads who took to cable news segments or op-ed pages without disclosing their defense industry ties were retired Gen. David Petraeus; Rebecca Grant, a former staffer for the Air Force secretary; Richard Haass, who worked as an adviser to then-Secretary of State Colin Powell; and former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice.”
This cacophony of voices matters because Biden is facing a media uproar over the withdrawal. Pundits and mainstream press outlets that have been ignoring civilian deaths for years are suddenly expressing moral outrage at their hardships now that the war is ending. While there are legitimate concerns about the fate of Afghans as the Taliban seizes control, the vast majority of the firestorm stems from a reflexively pro-war perspective, in favor of the indefinite extension of an occupation that has proven brutal and lethal for civilians. The overwhelming effect is to send the message to Biden, and any future presidents, that they should think twice before withdrawing from a war, lest they have a media revolt on their hands.
But this outcry didn’t materialize out of nowhere. Think tank “experts,” whose organizations are financed by the very companies profiting from the war, play a key part. They are trotted out in front of cameras and quoted in major media outlets, presented as above-the-fray observers. They are well-financed, polished and groomed precisely for moments like these. And the companies financing them get to launder their own objectives through institutions that are seen as respectable, academic and rigorous. It’s a grotesque system that is functioning as it was designed.
In its August 12 call, CACI International simply acknowledged the company’s economic interests out loud.
THE U.S. HAS SPENT $2.313 TRILLION ON WAR IN AFGHANISTAN SINCE 2001
Watson Institute | August 2021
Since invading Afghanistan in 2001, the United States has spent $2.313 trillion on the war, which includes operations in both Afghanistan and Pakistan. Note that this total does not include funds that the United States government is obligated to spend on lifetime care for American veterans of this war, nor does it include future interest payments on money borrowed to fund the war. This $2.313 trillion spent on Afghanistan is a portion of the total estimated cost of the post-9/11 wars.
The Costs of War Project also estimates that 241,000 people have died as a direct result of this war. These figures do not include deaths caused by disease, loss of access to food, water, infrastructure, and/or other indirect consequences of the war.
The figures for Afghanistan are part of the larger costs of the U.S. post-9/11 wars, which extend to Iraq, Syria, Yemen, Somalia and elsewhere. The numbers are approximations based on the reporting of several data sources.
Here Come the Terrorists. Again
By Philip Giraldi | Strategic Culture Foundation | August 26, 2021
President Joe Biden is being praised in some circles because he finally ended the war in Afghanistan that in all likelihood should never have begun. President George W. Bush initiated the conflict on a series of lies about 9/11 and the Taliban role in that attack and what followed. After bringing about regime change, he decided to remake the country into a western style democracy. President Barack Obama subsequently allowed a “surge” which actually increased the militarization of the conflict and made things worse. The joint effort produced no free elections but delivered instead tens of thousands of deaths and a huge hole in the US Treasury. Bush and Obama were followed by President Donald Trump who actually promised to end the war but lacked the conviction and political support to do so, handing the problem over to Biden, who has bungled the end game but finally done the right thing by ending the fiasco. Biden also has been right to accede to a withdrawal of the last US combat troops from Iraq by year’s end, a move that will considerably ease tension with the Baghdad government, which has been calling for such a move since last January.
But America’s war on those parts of the world that resist following its self-defined leadership is not about to go away. An interesting recent article in the foreign policy establishment The Hill written by a former senior CIA operations and staff officer Douglas London sees an Orwellian unending war against major adversaries Russia and China. Derived from his own experience, he concludes that sustained and enhanced clandestine actions should now replace conventional military forces confrontation, which has been somewhat outdated as an option due to the development of relatively cheap missile technologies that have undermined classic conventional weapons. Some of the clandestine activity he appears to recommend would undoubtedly fall under cover of classic espionage “plausible denial,” i.e. that the White House could disavow any knowledge of what had occurred, but sabotage and cyber-attacks, particularly if implemented aggressively, would quickly be recognized for what they are and would invite commensurate or even disproportionate retaliation. This would amount to an all-out semi-covert war against powerful adversaries which could easily escalate into a shooting war.
The London article is an interesting insight into the thinking of those in both the Democratic and Republican parties who continue to argue that the United States is threatened by largely asymmetrical warfare being conducted by what are regarded as “autocratic” regimes in Moscow and Beijing as well as by non-governmental terrorist groups that is seeking to undermine confidence in US policymakers, the “democratic” government system and the stability of its other institutions.
That the White House is listening to at least some of the complaints coming from the neoconservatives and neoliberals calling for more “democracy promotion” and “regime change” would appear to be the case as there have been renewed calls for greater engagement in various fora, to include NATO leadership now urging the alliance to stand up to Russian “aggression.” The US has meanwhile also called on “friends” in the Middle East to block any attempts by China to establish “military bases” in that region, with the State Department arguing that “The current assessment is that China has a global strategy of pursuing military installations all over, including in the Middle East.” The United States, by one estimate, has nearly 1100 military bases worldwide while China has only one in Djibouti.
Admittedly this time, the US will have to go about its usual school bully behavior without much in the way of allies. The Europeans will not show up as they are disgusted with American vacillation and inability to anticipate obvious developments, as was the case in Afghanistan. Israel and Saudi Arabia will likely line up, or pretend to, while also continuing their collaboration with radical groups that Washington would prefer to avoid.
To be sure there are many in Washington who would be quite happy to continue the US naval build up in the South China Sea while also sending ships to the Black Sea to cruise defiantly off the Russian coast. And then there is also Iran and its ally Syria, both of which continue to be targets of opportunity for sabotage, covert action and the Israeli Air Force, which last week again attacked Syria after penetrating Lebanese air space. So there are always wars and rumors of wars available, which is precisely what the US military-industrial-congressional complex wants to sustain. And in so doing they know that they will have the mainstream media on board, which has the same objective.
But still, it is important to have a plausible threatening enemy, and China is still somewhat over the horizon in that context. So, you turn to the one-size-fits-all option, which is “international terrorism,” preferably Islamic, to continue to empower the central government and fatten one’s friends in the national security industry. And it doesn’t hurt along the way to label some domestic opponents in the same fashion to guarantee one’s political supremacy for the foreseeable future. It’s a win-win.
So, the Biden Administration is either inadvertently or by design setting up the next chapter in its “America goes to war” narrative even as it has not yet figured out how to extricate the soldiers it has sent to assist in the evacuation of Kabul and who are now potential hostages at the airport surrounded by heavily armed Taliban.
But key figures in the Administration and elsewhere inside and outside the government are already looking beyond that, arguing that the new Afghan state will become a terrorist haven and those radicals will look to the United States for a target, as al-Qaeda reportedly did. Jamil Jaffer, founder and executive director of the National Security Institute at George Mason University argues that “There’s no question that the return of the Taliban opens up space in this new Islamic emirate for al Qaeda to return, rebuild a base, and for other groups associated or previously associated with al Qaeda, like ISIS, to return to the region. Jihadi fighters of all stripes will now once again make Afghanistan their home, as they did in the lead-up to 9/11.”
Indeed, some of those “experts” are seeing the twenty years spent in Afghanistan as a plus as it kept in check those extremists who might have been inclined to act in Europe and the US. That of course ignores the continued existence of many other unsettled parts of the world where terrorists of various kinds have been able to flourish successfully without feeling any need to bomb New York. Senators Lindsey Graham and Mark Warner have warned of a likely resurgence in terrorism, as have both General Mark Milley, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin. Graham laments that “The likelihood of an attack coming from Afghanistan now is through the roof.” The Department of Homeland Security has also done its bit, warning that possible Afghanistan-derived attacks from Islamic extremists on or near the 20th anniversary of the 9/11 event “could serve as a catalyst for acts of targeted violence.”
Anyway, you look at it, terrorism with be the national security flavor du jour over the next year or more. The only real question is, “Will it be domestic or foreign?” Either way the seemingly endless wars in Afghanistan and Iraq will be history but the search for new enemies will continue no matter who is president or which party dominates congress.
Withdrawal from Afghanistan to benefit Israel, says US official
MEMO | August 26, 2021
A US official has defended the withdrawal from Afghanistan by claiming that it will benefit Israel. Speaking at a briefing ahead of a meeting between the far-right Israeli Prime Minster Naftali Bennett and US President Joe Biden, the unnamed official said that Washington will be in a better position to direct resources and attention to its allies such as Israel, the Times of Israel has reported.
The newspaper claimed that Biden will use the meeting with Bennett to reinforce his commitment to the occupation state and other US allies in the region.
Washington is redirecting its resources towards the threat posed by China and Russia. However, US officials rejected a frequently reported claim by analysts that the Middle East is no longer a key priority for the US.
“Nothing could be further from the truth,” said a senior official. “If anything, in the Biden administration, we are not pursuing… unachievable goals.” This is believed to mean that Biden will not make demands on Israel.
“We’re not trying to transform the Middle East. We’re not trying to overthrow regimes. We are pursuing a very steady course, centred on achievable aims; alignment of ends and means; and, first and foremost, support for our partners and, of course, Israel being second to none,” the official added.
Despite early cautious optimism on the back of the Biden administration reversing some of the more controversial policies of former US President Donald Trump — Biden has reopened the Palestine Embassy in Washington, for example, and restored humanitarian aid to the Palestinians — there is a new realism within America over what is achievable. No new peace plan is expected to be unveiled, nor is there an expectation on Israel to return to the negotiation table with a view to ending its brutal military occupation of Palestine.
Bennett goes into today’s meeting having made a renewed pledge that there will be no independent Palestinian state under his watch. As a former settler leader who opposes the creation of such a state, Bennett said that there would be no resolution of the conflict with the Palestinians for the foreseeable future.
US relations with Iran and the so-called Abraham Accords, which saw four Arab countries (the UAE, Bahrain, Morocco and Sudan) normalise relations with the occupation state last year, are expected to be discussed during the Biden-Bennett meeting. Apparently, the US president will be looking to see how Israel feels about the US entering into a nuclear deal with Iran, and to find ways to expand the list of countries signed up to the accords.
America’s $800 Million Kabul Embassy To Be Abandoned – No Troops Will Guard It
By Tyler Durden | Zero Hedge | August 25, 2021
The initial Biden plan for the complete US troop draw down from Afghanistan was to authorize a security force of some 600 Marines to guard the massive US embassy compound in Kabul. This was announced last Spring – of course long before the chaotic botched evacuation events of this month, which has seen all diplomats and military retreat to the confines of Hamid Karzai international airport.
Plans have drastically changed as on Wednesday during a Pentagon press briefing a military spokesman confirmed that the embassy will be completely abandoned.
“After the US military leaves Kabul on Aug. 31, no Americans will guard the $800 million dollar US embassy in Kabul,” Fox’s Pentagon corresponded Lucas Tomlinson reports.
As Forbes has recently reviewed, US taxpayers have sunk a whopping $1.5 billion to erect and maintain it soon after the post 9/11 American invasion of Afghanistan in 2001, though most estimates commonly put it at $800 million in value (minus maintenance, upkeep, and security costs).
The publication recently went through 10 U.S. investments in Afghanistan that didn’t pan out (a bit of an understatement):
U.S. Embassy: $1.5 billion for the U.S. Embassy (security, construction and maintenance) plus $157 million for operations since 2001. Embassy officials lowered the American flag this week as the embassy was totally evacuated.
Since last week embassy operations have relocated to the airport, though it seems there may be a minimal US security force still guarding it and perhaps destroying any final sensitive equipment so it’s not left to Taliban hands.
Military helicopters have been airlifting personnel from the embassy since the collapse of the US-backed Afghan national government, and as the Taliban approached and took control of the capital city.
At the same time recent reports have indicated both Russia and China plan to keep their embassies in Afghanistan operational, with last week both countries confirming their intent, also as China has signaled it plans to formally ‘recognize’ the Taliban as the legitimate government of Afghanistan.
Featured Video
How The Nordic Countries Turned From Peace To War
or go to
Aletho News Archives – Video-Images
From the Archives
How Europe’s New Political Class Began Rejecting Reality
By Glenn Diesen | October 26, 2024
Russia considers NATO’s incursion into Ukraine to be an existential threat, and NATO has openly stated its intention to make Ukraine a member state after the war. Without a political settlement that restores Ukraine’s neutrality, Russia will therefore likely annex the strategic territories it cannot accept ending up under NATO control and then turn what remains of Ukraine into a dysfunctional rump state. As the war is being lost, the rational policy for the Europeans would therefore be to offer an agreement based on ending NATO’s eastward expansion to save Ukrainian lives, territory and the nation itself. Yet, no European leader has been able to even suggest such a solution publicly. Why? … continue
Blog Roll
Recent Comments
loongtip on The War On Free Speech In Aust… seversonebcfb985d9 on Scott Ritter Hiding the Domina… Richard Ong on Europe Economic Panic Kate on Bird Flu Outbreak 40 Miles Fro… loongtip on US announces Gaza ‘Board of Pe… Richard Jones on Peaceful Finland? Think Twice:… Richard Jones on Bird Flu Outbreak 40 Miles Fro… loongtip on Bird Flu Outbreak 40 Miles Fro… loongtip on Scott Ritter says he was … loongtip on Eilat port faces worst crisis… loongtip on British minister dreams of kid… loongtip on Kiev awards major mining proje…
Aletho News- Israeli agricultural export collapse amid Gaza genocide boycott
- Europe is ‘run by German war troika’ – Orban
- ‘Macron Is Trapped’: Double Standards in French President’s Davos Speech
- Ukraine aid critic quits as president of EU country
- What happens when START-3 expires, and US doesn’t want to prolong it?
- How did the EU get hooked on American gas?
- Why EU ‘Has No Alternative’ But to Return to Russian Gas Imports Sooner Than Later
- NATO without America: Europe’s trial run ends in a reality check
- US’ European Vassals Taught Bitter Lesson With Greenland Crisis
- Glenn Diesen: How the Nordic Countries abandoned the Pursuit of Peace and went Confrontational
- If Americans Knew
- Over 1,200 Israeli truce violations in Gaza – Not a ceasefire Day 102
- Trump has created a monster: Gaza Board of Peace – Not a ceasefire Day 101
- As world leaders squabble over controlling Gaza, another baby freezes to death – Not a ceasefire Day 100
- Trump “Board of Peace” for Gaza is stacked with Israel supporters – Not a ceasefire Day 99
- Iran Does Not Hate Americans… But It Has Legitimate Reasons to Do So
- How an Israeli Firm Spreads Lies and Chaos Around the World
- ADL ‘Helping’ Ted Cruz and Ben Shapiro ‘Take Down’ Tucker Carlson and Nick Fuentes, CEO Suggests
- Israel is Destroying Hope for the Future: Reproductive Violence in Gaza
- J Street is the new AIPAC in the Democratic Party
- The fate of Gaza’s disappeared remains unknown
- No Tricks Zone
- New Study: Brazil’s Relative Sea Level Was 2+ Meters Higher And SSTs 3-4°C Warmer 6000 Years Ago
- Philosopher Schopenhauer: Climate Science Certainty Stems From Stupidity, Ignorance
- New Study: Species Extinction Rates Declining Since 1980 – ‘Climate Change Is Not An Important Threat’
- Denmark Places Climate Protection Above Animal Welfare, Poisoning And Culling Cows
- New Study: Greenland Was 3-7°C Warmer And Far Less Glaciated Than Today 6000-8000 Years Ago
- German Media Report That Current Frigid Weather Can Be Explained By Arctic Warming!
- Berlin Blackout Shows Germany’s $5 Trillion Green Scheme Is “Left-Green Ideological Pipe Dream”
- Modeling Error In Estimating How Clouds Affect Climate Is 8700% Larger Than Alleged CO2 Forcing
- Berlin’s Terror-Blackout Enters 4th Day As Tens Of Thousands Suffer In Cold Without Heat!
- Expect Soon Another PIK Paper Claiming Warming Leads To Cold Snaps Over Europe
Aletho News 