American corporations doing business overseas are subject to certain limitations, like the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act.  And then, maybe restrictions like enabling mind-bogglingly sick sexual abuse of little boys.  Via Randazza and Bennett, courtesy of Wikileaks, security contractor DynCorp provides some insight into how it networks and genuinely engages:

Bacha boys are eight- to 15-years-old. They put on make-up, tie bells to their feet and slip into scanty women’s clothing, and then, to the whine of a harmonium and wailing vocals, they dance seductively to smoky roomfuls of leering older men.

After the show is over, their services are auctioned off to the highest bidder, who will sometimes purchase a boy outright. And by services, we mean anal sex: The State Department has called bacha bazi a “widespread, culturally accepted form of male rape.”

DynCorp, whose revenues are almost entirely paid by Uncle Sam, was contracted to recruit and train Afghanis to be police.  What better way to draw the right sort of folks than throw a party?  And obviously, half their training would already be accomplished with the proper inducement.

According to the cable published by the Guardian UK, the Minister of the Interior, Hanif Atmar, needed the United States' help in quashing any reporting of these bacha bazi parties.  It just wouldn't look good.

Beyond remedial actions taken, we still hope the matter will not be blown out of proportion, an outcome which would not be good for either the U.S. or Afghanistan. A widely-anticipated newspaper article on the Kunduz scandal has not appeared but, if there is too much noise that may prompt the journalist to publish.

Certainly the anal rape of young boys at a party thrown by an American contractor to recruit Afghan police would reflect poorly on somebody.  Then again, the concealment of this happening reflects poorly on everybody, but only once it becomes publicly known. 

Atmar said he insisted the journalist be told that publication would endanger lives. His request was that the U.S. quash the article and release of the video. Amb Mussomeli responded that going to the journalist would give her the sense that there is a more terrible story to report. Atmar then disclosed the arrest of two Afghan National Police (ANP) and nine other Afghans (including RTC language assistants) as part of an MoI investigation into Afghan "facilitators" of the event. The crime he was pursuing was "purchasing a service from a child," which in Afghanistan is illegal under both Sharia law and the civil code, and against the ANP Code of Conduct for police officers who might be involved. He said he would use the civil code and that, in this case, the institution of the ANP will be protected, but he worried about the image of foreign mentors.

As noted, this conduct violates both Sharia law as well as the Afghan civil code.  Nor, it appears, is it universally considered an acceptable thing to do.  But the fact remains that good ol' DynCorp, whose base of business operations in the United States is in Dallas/Fort Worth, threw a little party and then needed some political muscle to cover it up.  DynCorp denies any impropriety and says it's all a big misunderstanding.

According to a DynCorp's VP of communications, Ashley Vanarsdall Burke,

the company has beefed up its ethics in many ways including enhancing their code of ethics and business conduct; reviewing, revising and strengthening the company's business practices; hiring a chief compliance officer; and setting up a 24-hour hotline for whistleblowers and a training program that focuses "specifically on behaviors that support successful teams."

Burke granted that no "company can guarantee that their employees will behave perfectly at all times, under all conditions," but said that the company can guarantee that expectations will be clearly defined, employees will be trained to adhere to those expectations, and people will be held accountable. "We will also act swiftly and consistently if shortcomings are identified," which they did do in the wake of this traditional dance gone apparently awry.

So maybe then they won't have to ask the Afghan ministry of the interior or the State Department to cover it up under the guise that revealing parties where little boys are anally raped would "endanger lives" if disclosed? 

But you probably know all this, having heard all about it in the big exposé in the newspapers and on TV.

© 2010 Simple Justice NY LLC. This feed is for personal, non-commercial & Newstex use only. The use of this feed on other websites is a copyright violation. If this feed is not in your RSS reader or Newstex, it infringes the copyright.

Tuesday, 16 February 2010, 13:41
S E C R E T SECTION 01 OF 05 DUSHANBE 000173
SIPDIS
STATE DEPARTMENT FOR S/RAP
EO 12958 DECL: 2/16/2020
TAGS PREL, PGOV, PHUM, EAID, ECON, EINV, TI
SUBJECT: CORRECTED COPY - TAJIKISTAN SCENESETTER FOR VISIT OF SRAP
HOLBROOKE
CLASSIFIED BY: NECIA QUAST, CDA, EXEC, DOS. REASON: 1.4 (b), (d) 1. (C) Summary: U.S. interests in Tajikistan are a stable state on Afghanistan's northern border, support for our military efforts in Afghanistan, and for Tajikistan to be a stabilizing influence and contributor to economic development in the region. Tajikistan gives unrestricted over flight rights, and quickly agreed to NDN ground transit. In the medium term, it could play a more active role in regional development, because of its huge hydropower potential, relative (to Afghanistan) stability, and religiously moderate population. But to do so Tajikistan must overcome multiple political and economic problems which stymie its own development: poverty, bad relations with Uzbekistan, intense corruption, Soviet-era economic structures and planning, an undemocratic political system, chronic food insecurity, and dependence on migrant labor in Russia.

2. (C) U.S. assistance has shown mixed results in the development sphere. Recent steps to improve the business climate have been offset by the government's campaign to force its citizens to contribute to the construction of the Roghun hydroelectric dam. The government is not willing to reform its political process. Our security cooperation shows some promise. Regardless of our efforts, there is a limit to what Tajikistan can offer: it produces very little, is poor, and its government has minimal capacity. The Tajiks have some unrealistic ideas about what we can offer them -- mainly large infrastructure projects including questionable power plants, tunnels to Pakistan, and bridges to nowhere. There is some truth to the quip that Tajikistan's real contribution to our efforts in Afghanistan is to be stable, and to allow unfettered over flight and transit to our forces - which the Tajiks have done unfailingly. We try to promote Tajik polices which will ensure continued stability. End summary.

A DIFFICULT NEIGHBORHOOD

3. (C) Some of Tajikistan's difficulties are geographic. Chronic problems with Uzbekistan, fueled by personal animosity between the presidents of each country, has stymied Tajikistan's trade, energy self-sufficiency, and economic development. Afghan instability is a malign influence: traffic in drugs undermines rule of law in Tajikistan, Tajiks fear the spread of extremist ideas from Afghanistan, and militants in Afghanistan can threaten Tajik security across the long, porous border. Russian interference looms large in the Tajik consciousness. The Russians control one major hydropower dam in Tajikistan, a source of disagreements between the two countries. The Tajiks seek alternative partners, including the United States, China, and Iran, to balance Russian influence. China is a major infrastructure donor, with over $1 billion in low-interest loans to Tajikistan to build roads and power line projects. Iran funds tunnel and hydropower projects, but displays of Persian solidarity do not mask deep suspicions between the hard-drinking, Soviet-reared, Sunni elite in Dushanbe and religiously conservative Shiites in Tehran.

4. (C) The Tajik government presses us for greater benefits in return for support on Afghanistan. The Tajiks think Uzbekistan is keeping all NDN-related business for itself; they want more traffic to transit Tajikistan, more infrastructure to support that traffic, and the United States to purchase Tajik goods for forces in Afghanistan. We currently purchase small amounts of Tajik bottled water for ISAF. They have indicated they would be happy for the U.S. establish an air base in Tajikistan. They see U.S. involvement in the region as a bulwark against Afghan instability, and as a cash cow they want a piece of.

FEAR OF INTERNAL RIVALS, MILITANTS, AND RUSSIA

5. (C) The Tajik civil war ended in 1997 with a power sharing arrangement between President Rahmon's government and the leaders of the United Tajik Opposition (UTO). Since the end of

DUSHANBE 00000173 002 OF 005

the war, Rahmon gradually has reneged on this deal and forced nearly all oppositionists out of government -- some are in prison, some left the country, and others died mysteriously. In May 2009 an armed group led by a former UTO figure, Mullah Abdullo Rahimov, returned to Tajikistan from Afghanistan, reportedly with several foreign fighters. Tajik security forces neutralized this group without outside assistance. They have told us U.S. training enabled their security forces to win, and they are eager for more training.

6. (C) Russian-Tajik relations have deteriorated. Tajik officials believe the Russians supported Mullah Abdullo's group, to signal Tajikistan that they need Russian protection. The two governments could not agree on the terms of Russian involvement in the Roghun Dam, and they have other differences. In October 2009 the President downgraded the formal status of the Russian language in Tajikistan. His government broached charging Russia rent for its military bases in Tajikistan. In 2009 the Russian-controlled Sangtuda-1 hydroelectric plant cut production when the government of Tajikistan's failed to pay its bills on time.

ECONOMIC DIFFICULTIES

7. (C) Tajikistan is the poorest of the former Soviet republics. It is more mountainous than Afghanistan, with earthquakes, floods, droughts, locusts and extreme weather. Parts of the country are often cut off by snow and avalanches. External links pass through obstructive Uzbekistan, unstable Afghanistan, or over the rough, remote Pamir passes to western China. Its only industrial products are aluminum and hydroelectricity. The Tajik Aluminum Company (Talco) accounts for most of Tajikistan's exports. Though it is technically state-owned, most of its revenues end up in a secretive offshore company controlled by the President, and the state budget sees little of the income. Talco consumes up to half of Tajikistan's electricity, contributing to major seasonal shortages and suffering.

8. (C) President Rahmon's response to Tajikistan's chronic energy insecurity was in late 2009 to launch a massive campaign to fund and build the Roghun Hydroelectric Plant. Roghun would be the highest dam in the world, and double Tajikistan's electricity generation capacity. The government's fundraising efforts, however, have drawn serious concern from international donors. Individuals and organizations across all walks of life have been coerced into buying shares in the project. Many people have been told they will lose their jobs unless they contribute an amount equal to many months' salary. While the government claims all share sales are voluntary, there is ample evidence that officials are forcing the population to cough up funds. Apart from the human rights question, donors are concerned that the nearly $200 million in funds raised so far will not be accounted for and spent transparently. Considering Talco's share of electricity consumption, the Roghun campaign looks like a means to ensure Talco's continued profitability.

9. (C) Tajikistan's economy suffers from the global recession through major drops in exports, imports, and remittances from a million Tajiks working in Russia. The money they sent home was equal to over 50% of GDP in 2008, and literally keeps rural communities alive. Remittances dropped 34% in 2009. The greatest obstacle to improving the economy is resistance to reform. From the President down to the policeman on the street, government is characterized by cronyism and corruption. Rahmon and his family control the country's major businesses, including the largest bank, and they play hardball to protect their business interests, no matter the cost to the economy writ large. As one foreign ambassador summed up, President Rahmon prefers to control 90% of a ten-dollar pie rather than 30% of a hundred-dollar pie.

DUSHANBE 00000173 003 OF 005

ELECTIONS ARE COMING, BUT DEMOCRACY ISN'T

10. (C) The government has limited opposition party operations and rejected electoral law reforms for the February 28, 2010 parliamentary elections. The Embassy does not expect the elections to be free and fair. There has been almost no coverage of opposition political parties by state media, and most of the population is unaware of the purpose of the elections. Parliamentary opposition is weak -- only 15 of the 62 members are not in the ruling party, and some of these are independent in name only. The most prominent opposition party, the Islamic Renewal Party of Tajikistan (IRPT), has two seats in the outgoing parliament. IRPT leadership has supported the government on most issues and downplays the importance of Islam in the party's platform. Parliament acts as a rubber stamp.

11. (SBU) In 2009 Parliament passed a restrictive new law on religion, curbing the activities of religious groups, Islamic or otherwise. Our advice that this could radicalize many believers has fallen on deaf ears. Last year, the government arrested dozens of individuals, accusing them of membership in the banned "Salafiya" movement, but it has no evidence that there is an organized Salafiya movement. It also arrested 92 members of the Muslim fundamentalist missionary group, Jamaati Tabligh. Most mainstream Muslim religious leaders view the Tabligh members as harmless missionaries and have called for their release.

12. (SBU) Independent media is reeling after government officials recently filed lawsuits against five newspapers for reporting on public government reports and statements in open court which were critical of judges and government ministries. The newspapers will be forced to close if the lawsuits succeed. We and European partners have protested the lawsuits.

DIFFICULT RELATIONS WITH DONORS

13. (SBU) In 2007 Tajikistan's National Bank admitted it had hidden a billion dollars in loans and guarantees to politically-connected cotton investors (of which $600 million was never repaid), violating its IMF program. The IMF demanded early repayment of some debt, an audit of the National Bank, and other reforms before renewing assistance. In May 2009 the IMF voted to lend a further $116 million to Tajikistan to help it through the next three years; the U.S. was the only IMF member to vote against this, which infuriated the Tajik government. The IMF has so far disbursed $40 million. A team from Washington was recently in Dushanbe to assess government progress, establish new benchmarks for the next tranche of funds, and assess the impact of Roghun fundraising. The team's assessment should be available soon. Donors are concerned that the campaign to finance Roghun is exacerbating severe poverty, and violates the terms of the IMF's assistance. It raises questions about the government's frequent appeals to donors for financial aid and its willingness to enact economic reforms as a condition of that aid. Donors have expressed their concerns formally to the government and await a response. Donors are pushing regional energy market integration and the construction of power lines that will allow Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan to sell surplus summer electricity output to Afghanistan and Pakistan. A 220 kW line from Tajikistan to Afghanistan is under construction with Asian Development Bank financing, and will be finished in late 2010. The larger CASA-1000 power line project to link to Afghanistan and Pakistan has been delayed by financing problems.

U.S. ASSISTANCE

14. (U) U.S. assistance to Tajikistan will grow significantly to $45.3 million in FY 2010, from $27.8 million in FY 2009. The

DUSHANBE 00000173 004 OF 005

new money will go to agriculture, trade, and private sector initiatives to compensate for the loss of the much-needed food security programs. Until FY 2008 Tajikistan had a multi-year food aid program that had significant results reducing food insecurity in some of Tajikistan's most at-risk regions, followed by similar single-year programs in FY 2009 and 2010. A new Food Security Initiative is in development, but it remains unclear whether Tajikistan will receive any of those funds. New programs also will address chronic energy shortages by building a regional energy market and helping the Central Asian states address water and power issues. Tajikistan was awarded $9.9 million in FY 2008 1207 funds to address stability issues. The major threats to stability arise from the Tajikistan's poverty -- the World Bank estimates over 60% of the population lives below the poverty line -- and the government's demonstrated inability to respond to emergencies. The 1207 project works in 50 isolated communities in the Rasht and Fergana valleys, and along the Afghan frontier. Health and education deficiencies are so acute they imperil our progress in other areas. Our programs work to improve health policies, systems and services, teacher training, education finance, national curriculum, student assessment, and school governance.

SECURITY COOPERATION

15. (C) Security Cooperation remains a strong point in our relationship with Tajikistan. The Ministry of Defense volunteered last year for the first time to host CENTCOM's Exercise Regional Cooperation, including Afghanistan, Kyrgyzstan, and Kazakhstan, which concluded August 10. CENTCOM and the Tajik Armed Forces held Consultative Staff Talks in May and established the FY 2010 Security Cooperation Plan, which reflects Tajikistan's increased interest in demining and participation in the Global Peace Operations Initiative (GPOI). The U.S. Army Humanitarian Demining Research and Development Office will provide Tajikistan a mechanical demining machine for field evaluation in FY 2010 with a planned FMF purchase in FY 2011. Tajikistan reconfirmed its commitment to deploy a company-sized peacekeeping unit in 2011. Training begins this month with a National Policy White Paper Workshop that will help shape development in the Ministry of Defense and their Mobile Forces. A General Staff level workshop and actual unit training will take place next year.

16. (C) The Nizhny Pyanj Bridge and Point of Entry facilities have improved the links between Tajikistan and Afghanistan significantly. Though the bridge is not being used to its fullest capacity, traffic is much heavier than the old ferry system, and continues to grow. Counts vary between 40 and 200 containers and transport trucks per day. CENTCOM 2010funding at this facility will improve lighting, fences, and cameras, and parking areas. Tajikistan is eager to see us make greater use of our agreement on transit of non-lethal goods to Afghanistan through the Northern Distribution Network (NDN), and hopes for economic benefits to Tajikistan from this agreement. So far we have low rate truck traffic from Manas through Tajikistan to Bagram. Defense Logistics Agency is arranging to buy bottled water from a Tajik producer for forces in Afghanistan. The Tajiks are looking for any way to circumvent Uzbekistan's stranglehold on their trade.

US SOF ENGAGEMENT

17. (S) The U.S. Embassy plans to continue to build the capacity and capability of select Tajikistan security forces, in support of CENTCOM Joint Interagency Coordination Group for Counter Narcotics (JIACG-CN), and U.S. government strategic themes, goals and objectives for Tajikistan. Once SOCCENT forces have done an assessment and started organizing these groups into special units, the main goal is to sustain an increase in capabilities by U.S. Special Forces Joint Combined Exercise and Training (JCET) and Counter-narcotic training (CNT) missions.

DUSHANBE 00000173 005 OF 005

NARCOTICS

18. (C) Tajikistan is a major transit route for Afghan heroin going to Russia and Europe. According to UN Office of Drugs and Crime (UNODC) estimates, 40 tons of Afghan opiates enter Russia each year via Tajikistan. Less than 5% is seized before reaching Russia. Capabilities of Tajik law enforcement agencies are severely limited. Corruption is a major problem. Law enforcement agencies are reluctant to target well-connected traffickers, but are effective against low- and mid-level traffickers. The Drug Control Agency (DCA) is a ten-year-old, 400-officer agency developed through a UNODC project. Many countries are donors, but an INL-funded salary supplement program provides the primary funding. DCA's liaison officers in Taloquan in northern Afghanistan were key to seizures totaling over 100 kilos of heroin in the last four months. U.S Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) agents work with DCA to deepen operations.

19. (SBU) Until 2005, the Russians guarded the Tajik/Afghan border; after the Russians departed, the outposts were broken down lean-tos, unfit for human habitation. The Tajik Border Guard force is staffed largely by conscripts who are poorly trained, poorly paid, underequipped and often under-fed. INL rebuilt border posts, giving the Border Guards suitable and safe places to live, creating conditions for successful border patrol operations. Each new outpost costs about $500,000 and houses more than 100 guards. The outposts use low-maintenance energy-efficient prefab construction and alternative energy, including solar, wind and micro-hydro power. We are planning a pilot project of joint Tajik/Afghan border guard training in Khorog. If successful, it will be part of the regular training of guards assigned to the Afghan/Tajik border. We are exploring offering a popular Emergency First Responder course to a joint class of Tajik and Afghan border guards. INL has rebuilt the Tajik Border Guard academy. A U.S. Border Patrol team plans to visit to discuss and demonstrate patrolling techniques at the Academy and in the field; this might lead to an exchange of instructors.

20. (C) CENTCOM's Counter Narcotics program is making strong contributions to Tajikistan's security. This year, $16.9 million in funding, recently approved in the Supplemental Bill, will support construction of an interagency National Training Center, infrastructure at the Nizhny Pyanj Point of Entry, and communications equipment. The Training Center will be a multi-use facility for all ministries and serve as a venue for SOCCENT's bi-annual Counter Narco-Terrorism training. A recent end-use monitoring visit demonstrated the Tajiks are using previously provided communications equipment and maintaining the equipment. This year, we will begin establishing an interagency communications architecture at Nizhny Pyanj and the adjoining district. This will allow five government agencies to communicate using a compatible system. QUAST

...

The Iraq war has returned to public and media attention with the release on 22 October 2010 of another huge tranche of classified military communications by the WikiLeaks project. The documentary record of United States operations during the war - the Iraq War Logs - includes information about the coalition’s involvement in the torture and killing of Iraqi prisoners.

The most notorious case revealed in the voluminous new material (392,000 items) concerns the United States forces’ collaboration with an Iraqi military unit operating out of the country’s restored interior ministry - the 2nd commando battalion, or “wolf brigade”. Such examples, and there are many others, provide further evidence to counter the sole remaining justification for launching the war on Iraq that continues to have any plausibility: the replacement of Saddam Hussein’s brutal regime by a thriving democracy that respects human rights.

Alongside the understandable focus on particular incidents of abuse, the documents reveal details of the killing of thousands of civilians - many more than had previously been recorded. This is of great importance in contributing to an accurate assessment of the human cost of the war, a vital and sometimes controversial issue (see Michel Thieren, "Deaths in Iraq: how many, and why it matters" [18 October 2006] and "Deaths in Iraq: the numbers game, revisited" [11 January 2008]).

Iraq Body Count (IBC) is a project that from the start of the Iraq war in March 2003 has used a wide range of publicly available data to record as accurately as possible both the number of civilian deaths and the circumstances of each one. This small group with its network of dedicated volunteers had compiled meticulous records of 107,000 deaths. Now, IBC has completed an initial update in light of the material circulated by WikiLeaks, which records 15,000 civilian deaths not previously registered - thus raising the total to 122,000. More IBC analysis of the WikiLeaks logs may well confirm even more examples.

The work of IBC is a keen reminder of the legal, ethical and political issues that lie at the heart of the Iraq war (and by extension all wars). By its singular focus on a particular task - recording every civilian victim - it highlights the fact that the coalition forces which invaded Iraq failed in their legal responsiblity to maintain security in an occupied territory.

The trigger of death

The political context of the immediate post-invasion period in Iraq is important in shaping a casualty-count that was soon to rise so sharply. In particular, the George W Bush administration in Washington anticipated and had planned for an easy victory which would soon morph into a rapid transition to a pro-western Iraq.

This historic misjudgment was vital in creating the scene for much of the violence that followed. A majority of deaths in Iraq may have stemmed from insurgent action, though it is clear that coalition attacks also killed many thousands of civilians. It is often very hard to explain the latter even where information is available about the circumstances. Several columns in this series sought to highlight this point from the war’s very early stages, via (for example) rare reports by embedded journalists who witnessed civilian deaths.

In an example from 4 April 2003, in the midst of the confused American entry into Baghdad, an Associated Press reporter saw a US marines unit killing a confused old man who would not stop when ordered; soon afterwards the same unit fired on a taxi (see "Aftermath: Afghan lessons, Iraqi futures", 10 April 2003). A year later, Pamela Constable of the Washington Post described a punitive air-strike on the city of Fallujah that followed an attack on a marines unit; this destroyed several blocks with unrecorded effects on the civilians living there (see "Between Fallujah and Palestine", 21 April 2004).

If individual actions cannot always be easily explained, reasons for the overall high casualty-levels are often clear. The Iraqi insurgency was, for one thing, almost entirely unexpected by the invaders (who instead anticipated “flowers and cheering crowds”). By the first ten days of the war it had become apparent that around 30% of all United States combat-troops in Iraq were engaged in protecting supply-lines (see "After failure: US strategy in Iraq", 30 March 2003).

This in turn meant that US troops began to take severe hits, which often led to deaths but even more to grave injuries. The high survival-rate was largely owed to the improvements in battlefield medicine and body-armour over previous years, though many soldiers still endured appalling face, throat and groin injuries and loss of limbs. The inevitable effect was to produce deep frustration and anger among their comrades, leading them to have ready recourse to their overwhelming firepower advantage (see The Iraq War in Context, Oxford Research Group briefing, October 2010).

The work of record

This focus on individual experiences and cases is a dark but also timely reminder of the work of those initiatives that argue for open and transparent recording of casualties in armed conflicts as they happen (see John Sloboda, “The human cost of war: name before shame”, 29 July 2009).

A pioneer of this approach is the Recording Casualties in Armed Conflict (RCAC) group, part of the Oxford Research Group think-tank. The RCAC also belongs to  a practitioner network of over twenty organisations across four continents, all dedicated to refining and raising the profile of this field of work.

The long-term aim of the RCAC's human-security project is “to build the technical and institutional capacity, as well as the political will, to record details of every single victim of violent conflict, worldwide.” 

It is a huge task. But if it can be advanced, it raises the possibility that combatants in war can no longer ignore responsibility for their actions, help survivors come to terms with their experiences, and providing a rich resource to the wider society to understand what happened and prevent any reoccurrence.

A number of existing initiatives has already undertaken major work in the field. Iraq Body Count’s work in Afghanistan and Iraq is a prime example. A comparable project in Guatemala - the Guatemalan Forensic Anthropology Foundation (FAFG) - seeks to record all those who died in the almost decades of violence that tore the country under military rule, much of it inflicting terrible suffering on the country’s indigenous Maya population. A remarkable survey is being conducted by the Research and Documentation Centre of Sarajevo, whose international team has compiled over 240,000 pieces of data to establish details of all all those killed or missing in the Bosnian war of 1992-95; its product, The Bosnian Book of the Dead (2007), lists over 97,000 names.

The much wider aim of all this work is to produce a global change in attitudes, ideas, behaviour and culture in relation to deaths in war and conflict. It will not be easy, though it is worth recalling the great progress in some areas of demilitarisation that has been made in recent years.

The ban on anti-personnel landmines in 1997, for example, was the result of intensive activism and lobbying, aided by a couple of very active governments. It took many years but ultimately was successful. Perhaps even more important, this work has extended to an evolving international ban on cluster-munitions; an agreement, signed in Dublin in 2009, was achieved much more rapidly than most expected (see John Borrie, Unacceptable Harm: A History of How the Treaty to Ban Cluster Munitions was Won, UN Institute for Disarmament Research, Geneva, 2009).

The Recording Casualties in Armed Conflict group, and those associated with it, are determined to make their rigorous and humane research the means for a transformation in the approach to the casualties of war. If they succeed, the quiet long-term work of Iraq Body Count - and the more showy revelations from WikiLeaks, filtered through the editorial work of leading international newspapers such as Der Spiegel - may turn out to have played an important role (see "The AfPak war via WikiLeaks", 29 July 2010). If the parties to war can be made to accept responsibility for who they have killed in each individual instance, the impact on warfare could be fundamental.

Sideboxes

'Read On' Sidebox: 

Paul Rogers, Losing Control: Global Security in the 21st Century (Pluto Press, 3rd edition, 2010)

Department of peace studies, Bradford University

WikiLeaks - Iraq War Logs

Iraq Body Count

Oxford Research Group

Guatemalan Forensic Anthropology Foundation (FAFG)

Research and Documentation Centre of Sarajevo

The Bosnian Book of the Dead

Iraq: The Human Cost

John Borrie, Unacceptable Harm: A History of How the Treaty to Ban Cluster Munitions was Won (UN Institute for Disarmament Research, Geneva, 2009)

Paul Rogers, The Iraq War in Context (Oxford Research Group briefing, October 2010)

Recording Casualties in Armed Conflict (RCAC)

Sidebox: 

Paul Rogers is professor in the department of peace studies at Bradford University, northern England. He is openDemocracy's international-security editor, and has been writing a weekly column on global security since 26 September 2001; he also writes a monthly briefing for the Oxford Research Group. His books include Why We’re Losing the War on Terror (Polity, 2007), and Losing Control: Global Security in the 21st Century (Pluto Press, 3rd edition, 2010)

His books include Why We’re Losing the War on Terror (Polity, 2007), and Losing Control: Global Security in the 21st Century (Pluto Press, 3rd edition, 2010)

Related stories: 

The human cost of war: name before shame

Visegrad, memory and justice

Deaths in Iraq: how many, and why it matters

Deaths in Iraq: the numbers game, revisited

Srebrenica: ten years on

Srebrenica, fifteen years on

The AfPak war via WikiLeaks

Bosnia's war of memory

The toxic gift: Iraq and AfPak

Bosnia's civil society: paths from Srebrenica

A free media: Tasneem Khalil’s project

After disaster: information for life

Guatemala: a good place to kill

The numbers game: death, media, and the public

Bush to Obama: a toxic legacy

Afghanistan and Iraq: western wars, genocidal risks

America in Iraq: power, hubris, change

Iraq, AfPak, beyond: the global cost of war

Here is a comment from Paula Broadwell, who is just your typical Army Reserve officer who is doing a PhD and writing a biography of General Petraeus on the side.

David Martin probably also should be on her corrections list.

By Paula Broadwell
Best Defense guest columnist

Some pretty smart columnists have written this week about a "shift in the strategic effort" in Afghanistan under Gen. David Petraeus from a counterinsurgency (COIN) approach to a counter-terrorism (CT) effort, but that strikes me as an overstatement.

Fred Kaplan of Slate states that "a shift in emphasis is… altering the character of the war." David Ignatius of the Washington Post writes, "Petraeus is experimenting with another mix," and says that over the last four months, he has become "a CT wolf in a counterinsurgent in sheep's clothing." He hypothesizes that the "protean" Petraeus has rewritten "the playbook." Time's Joe Klein cites the same alleged "change" from counterinsurgency (COIN) toward heavy counterterrorism (CT), stating that CT is separate from COIN. What these guys don't get: CT has always been a part of Petraeus's comprehensive COIN strategy.

Here's what Kaplan, Ignatius and Klein should actually be observing: Since Petraeus has arrived in Afghanistan, he has increased the intensity of every element of a comprehensive civil-military COIN campaign, not just the so-called CT element. After my trip to Afghanistan last month, during which I visited at the battalion, division, and ISAF headquarters levels, it is clear to me that the "shift" is not one of focus, but of energy and increased intensity across all lines of the counterinsurgency effort. The Kaplan, Ignatius and Klein observations are based loosely on a recent increase in both air strikes and Special Operations Forces (SOF) targeted killing -- and they are certainly right about that. But take a deep breath, guys: CT operations have always been a key part of the kinetic component of COIN. In his speeches, articles, and doctrine over the past nine years, Petraeus has always been clear on this point. It was evident during his command in Iraq, and is equally so now in Afghanistan. For the record: CT is a subset of COIN. Here's a visual explanation:

As the Anaconda Slide illustrates, there is more than just a CT effort. The COMISAF Anaconda Strategy's seven lines of effort include kinetics, politics, intelligence, detainee operations, non-kinetics, international issues, and information operations. Collectively, these efforts seek to "choke" the eight key "needs" of the insurgency

The following provides some evidence of Petraeus's increased initiatives along each of these critical lines of effort:

[[BREAK]]

The kinetic line of effort includes CT operations, and in this arena, as Kaplan, Ignatius and Klein point out, one cannot deny results. In a 90-day accumulated effects roll-up in late September 2010, ISAF SOF had conducted 2,795 "kinetic" operations (including targeted killing night raids and air strikes), captured or killed 285 insurgent "leaders," captured 2084 insurgents, and killed 889. As impressive as these numbers are, caution is always advised in determining their precise meaning when dealing with an insurgency as determined as the Taliban.

In any event, killing and capturing are not the only component of the kinetic line. From July to late September, ISAF SOF forces also conducted 1,823 population-centric non-kinetic operations. Petraeus's comprehensive COIN strategy clearly states that these CT and population-centric operations must be complemented by clear/hold/build operations of conventional forces, training of host nation elements, and local security initiatives. This comprehensive approach is a mantra Petraeus continues to push on his battlefield circulations and in his morning update briefs to field commanders. And ISAF troops appear to be doing it, though some would clearly prefer a steadier diet of kinetics.

During my visit with the 3/187th Rakkasans in Ghazni Province last month, a "CT plus conventional clear/hold/build approach" seemed very much in evidence. Task Force Iron, led by Lt. Col. David Fivecoat, has worked hard to clear the new area of operations and dismantle insurgent networks in the Ghazni area. They did this in cooperation with their Special Operations brethren, Task Force 3-10. But they quickly followed that CT and "clearing" efforts with "hold" and non-kinetic "build" initiatives right out of the Petraeus playbook. In the last eight months, the Rakkasans have spent over $150,000 in economic development, basic service provision, and jobs program efforts to rebuild Khezer Khell School, support Mata Khan Clinic, and institute other important capacity building efforts to empower the sub-district governors.

One potential capacity building "game changer," adopted this summer under President Hamid Karzai with Petraeus's "relentless prodding," is the Afghan Local Police (ALP) initiative. The long-term impact of this program remains to be seen, but early reviews seem encouraging as it moves toward a goal of 20,000 recruits. Along with the Village Stability Operations, Petraeus has pushed hard to promote the ALP. The ALP program, for which there are 68 sites identified in eastern and central Afghanistan, now has around 250-350 police located at each site. Run by the Afghan Ministry of the Interior and mentored by U.S. Special Forces teams, the ALP have already helped with the disruption of insurgency IED networks. The ALP has yet to hit a tipping point, but it is an important component of the stabilization and transition plans that didn't gain traction under previous ISAF commanders.

The training of host nation elements is another critical component of the Anaconda Strategy that Petraeus has promoted over the past 100 days, especially that of professionalizing the force. Again, there are signs of progress, though much still remains to be done. One of the big ideas Petraeus embraced when he moved to Afghanistan last summer was "the need to change the COIN math, to figure out how to increase the numbers of ISAF/ANSF and to reduce the numbers" of fighters. The kill/capture roll-up rate mentioned above is one side of that ledger, and the other side is the now-complete surge of ISAF troops and the increase in ANSF troops. Though questions remain regarding their quality, the military and police training program is, in fact, ahead of October 2010 goals (Afghan National Army, Goal: 134K, Actual: 139K; Afghan National Police, Goal: 109K, Actual: 122K). As Petraeus acknowledges in his own presentations, thanks are due in part to the ground work laid by General McChrystal and ongoing efforts by Lt. Gen William B. Caldwell, but Petraeus has also accelerated efforts on this front. His trip to Brussels, London, and Rome this past week, and his effort to rally international support (especially for military and police trainers) seem to be yielding results. Back in Kabul, staff officers in the CJ5 claim that while sometimes it feels like "NATO has culminated," Petraeus is working to energize and refocus the contributions of allied nations. Again, time will tell how successful he is. And he's certainly not going to bat 1.000, with Italy, Holland and Canada already having announced near-term departure dates. But his efforts seem to be having an effect with most other NATO members.

To garner additional international support, Petraeus has formed a healthy partnership with his civilian counterpart, Ambassador Mark Sedwill, as he did with Ambassador Ryan Crocker in Iraq. This week, the two conducted a "relentless communication" campaign in Europe, briefing NATO/ISAF Ambassadors in Brussels. Petraeus met with the Belgian and British prime ministers. He also met with the Belgian, British, and Italian ministers of Defense and Foreign Affairs; and various chiefs of Defense in their respective countries. In Italy, he briefed the senior representatives for Afghanistan and Pakistan at an International Contract Group on Af-Pak in Rome. It appeared a dizzying pace, but maybe not for vintage Petraeus, who puts as much emphasis on diplomacy and strategic communications as he does on counterterrorism. This belief in communication continues in routine meetings with coalition ambassadors in Afghanistan.

These efforts have been complemented by an accelerated political line of effort that include reconciliation, reintegration, governance, and -- under Brig. H.R. McMaster -- a focus on inclusivity, transparency, and anti-corruption. One initiative where Petraeus has focused immense attention and effort, for example, is a focus on fixing COIN contracting. As Petraeus's new October COIN Contracting Guidance says, "With proper oversight, contracting can spur economic development and support collective Afghan and ISAF objectives. But by spending large quantities of international contracting funds quickly and with insufficient oversight, some of those funds have unintentionally fueled corruption, financed insurgent organizations, strengthened criminal patronage networks, and undermined our efforts in Afghanistan." Petraeus made anti-corruption efforts "commander's business" and has focused equal attention on this aspect of the campaign as he has the CT effort. Now, in partnership with Karzai, he's trying to hold contractors accountable. It's a task that has defeated most everyone who has taken on corruption in Afghanistan, but Petraeus remains determined to make progress.

Petraeus has also placed increased emphasis on reconciliation and reintegration efforts in his first four months. "Reconciliation" focuses on senior Afghan leaders, most of who are hiding in Pakistan leading by cell phone. News of recent negotiations with senior Taliban this week indicates that small reconciliation efforts may be underway. "Reintegration" is conducted with those who are on the ground in Afghanistan -- mid-level leaders including district shadow governors and below. The objective, Petraeus said in a recent interview, "is to take away as many of the rank and file, take them off the battlefield again turn them from bad guys to good guys" or at least prevent them from "trying to kill our troopers and our Afghan partners and civilians." Intel chatter interdicted via low-level voice intercepts has shown that some senior-level insurgents feel coalition force pressure across their networks. Some reports indicate they may be willing to "cut a deal," as the recent negotiations between the Afghan government and Taliban portend. Speculation about negotiations has cast some doubt in the minds of low-level insurgents who speculate that "senior insurgent leaders are defecting," according to a senior ISAF official in October.

Gathering that type of atmospheric about the Taliban has only been possible through increased intelligence efforts, another area of emphasis. Some of these intelligence initiatives were initiated under McChrystal while Petraeus was still CENTCOM Commander. These efforts included acquiring 2,000 more intelligence officials for the command, and pushing intelligence analyst out on raids because "if you want them to know what is going on, they have to know what is going on," according to CJ2, MG Mike Flynn. Petraeus has also promoted the "fusion cell" concept from the strategic to the tactical levels; he deems this more important even than the other enablers like ISR platforms, SIGINT intercepts, and full-motion videos. Additionally, the biometrics program, which overlaps with the detainee operations line of effort and now has over one million Afghans registered, has helped empower the Afghan government in its correction, detention, rule of law efforts, and local intelligence gathering efforts.

The comprehensive COIN effort would not be complete without credible voices and strategic communications plan, both of which fall under the information operations line of effort. In that vein, Petraeus's COIN guidance says simply that U.S. forces should "be the first with truth." His Information Operations Task Force has condemned the brutal Taliban killing of sub-district governors or Taliban attacks on sacred mosques, and he has ordered an investigation into the botched rescue attempt that killed Linda Norgrove. Petraeus is also candid about the many challenges in this war, admitting that his 15-hour days, 7 days a week are sustainable but he doesn't have "much of a reserve." Petraeus conscientiously avoids the word "optimistic," labeling himself instead as a qualified realist.

For the other realists who are watching Afghanistan, there has not been a shift in the war strategy. The strategy that President Obama sent Petraeus there to execute hasn't changed, and neither has Petraeus's momentum: this is a multi-pronged comprehensive COIN strategy, intensified across all lines of effort -- and Petraeus is "all in."

Paula Broadwell, a West Point graduate, is the author of the forthcoming book, All In: The Education of General David Petraeus (Penguin Press, 2011). The views expressed here are her own and do not necessarily represent the views of the U.S. government, the Department of Defense, or Derek Jeter.

Motorola, CARE and CURE International today announced that the Motorola Foundation, the philanthropic arm of Motorola, is donating funds totaling $200,000 to the two aid organizations to support education and healthcare programs in Afghanistan. CARE received a $100,000 grant from the Motorola Foundation to support the Community-Based Education for Girls Project in Afghanistan. The project began in 2006 and seeks to expand sustainable access to quality secondary education for rural girls in Khost province through community-managed schools. Teaching kits, student-teaching internships and access to certificate programs from the Ministry of Education will empower students in rural areas to secure jobs in teaching and health education after graduation. Schoolteachers and administrators also will be trained to self-manage the schools and employ community-based education. With support from the Ministry of Education and its local departments, the project provides rural Afghan girls an opportunity to complete secondary schooling for the first time. CURE International received a $100,000 grant from the Motorola Foundation to support the CURE International Family Medicine Residency Program, the first of its kind in Afghanistan. This three-year program educates Afghan doctors in a variety of medical disciplines such as internal medicine, pediatrics, general surgery, obstetrics and gynecology, and orthopedics. CURE's family medicine residency program, which is officially recognized by the Afghan Ministry of Public Health, provides both short- and long-term benefits to an Afghan healthcare system that is in dire need of doctors. According to the World Health Organization, there are only two doctors per 10,000 people in Afghanistan, compared to 26 doctors per 10,000 people in the United States. "Motorola is committed to supporting inspiring and worthwhile organizations like CARE and CURE International," said Eileen Sweeney, director of the Motorola Foundation. "We are proud to assist these valuable programs that make such a difference for the people and communities of Afghanistan." According to Marcela Hahn, executive director of CARE's Strategic Partnerships and Alliances, "A major constraint in the educational system in Afghanistan is a shortage of quality secondary schools in rural areas. This generous grant from Motorola Foundation will provide an opportunity for girls living in rural areas to advance beyond 6th grade, complete secondary school and gain valuable jobs in their local communities." "We are very grateful for this generous grant from the Motorola Foundation," said Dr. Scott Harrison, CURE International's president and CEO. "One of the greatest challenges facing the Afghan healthcare system is the lack of skilled doctors. Training represents a major part of the solution. For the past eight years, CURE International has invested heavily in the training of Afghan medical professionals with initiatives like this family medicine residency program. Through this grant from the Motorola Foundation, our residents will acquire the skills that will enable them to deliver life-saving medical care to thousands of Afghans." About the Motorola Foundation The Motorola Foundation is the charitable and philanthropic arm of Motorola. With employees located around the globe, Motorola seeks to benefit the communities where it operates. The company achieves this by making strategic grants, forging strong community partnerships, fostering innovation and engaging stakeholders. Motorola Foundation focuses its funding on education, especially science, technology, engineering and math programming. For more information, on Motorola Corporate and Foundation giving, visit: www.motorola.com/giving. About Motorola Motorola is known around the world for innovation in communications and is focused on advancing the way the world connects. From broadband communications infrastructure, enterprise mobility and public safety solutions to mobile and wireline digital communication devices that provide compelling experiences, Motorola is leading the next wave of innovations that enable people, enterprises and governments to be more connected and more mobile. Motorola (NYSE: MOT) had sales of US $22 billion in 2009. For more information, please visit www.motorola.com. About CARE CARE fights root causes of poverty in the world's poorest communities. CARE places special focus on working alongside poor women because, equipped with the proper resources, women have the power to help whole families and entire communities escape poverty. In 72 countries, women are at the heart of CARE's community-based efforts to improve education, health and economic opportunity. Last year, CARE and our partners helped more than 59 million people effect real, positive changes in their lives. For more information, go to: www.care.org. About CURE International CURE International is a nonprofit organization that transforms the lives of children and their families in the developing world through medical and spiritual healing. Since 1998, it has treated more than 1.1 million patients and performed more than 78,000 life-changing surgeries. For more information, go to: www.cure.org.

"We cannot tolerate in any sense the idea that [Pakistan] is allowed to look both ways and is able . . . to promote the export of terror, whether to India or whether to Afghanistan or anywhere else in the world." Both the content and the location of this sentiment - voiced by Britain’s prime minister David Cameron on 28 July 2010 during his visit to India - ensured that it would provoke a strong backlash among both domestic political opponents and Pakistani government spokespersons. But if much political and media reaction depicted it as an error, the context and rationale of the statement suggest otherwise.

The immediate high-level response certainly gave the impression that Cameron had blundered. Pakistan’s lead intelligence agency cancelled a planned trip to Britain, and its foreign ministry summoned London’s high commissioner for Pakistan to receive an official reproach. Pakistan’s president, Asif Ali Zardari, came under intense pressure at home to cancel his proposed five-day visit to the United Kingdom  on 4-8 August in protest at a perceived insult - a sentiment which was then reinforced by devastating floods across much of Pakistan, which led many citizens to accuse him of abandoning the country during a national emergency.

The balance of judgment of the furore - perhaps reinforced by earlier and later factual slips over the United States and Iran - indeed seems to be that Cameron’s inexperience and lack of understanding of the complexities of Pakistan and south Asia led him to commit a “gaffe”. Another view, however, suggests that both his comments and their place of delivery were well considered; and that they reflect real insight into the regional dynamics as they pertain to the US and Nato’s forthcoming drawdown in Afghanistan - arguably the British prime minister’s number-one foreign-policy challenge.

The Pakistan calculation

Some positive indicators notwithstanding, the coalition effort in Afghanistan is not going well. The killing of ten aid-workers in the northeastern province of Badakhshan on 6 August 2010, though more likely the result of banditry than of insurgent action, is but one illustration of the fragility of the current situation.

The four main planks of Nato’s transition strategy are each in some difficulty. The creation of a strong and unified Afghan national army and Afghan national police able to hold the country together is faltering; the US-led counterinsurgency (COIN) strategy has stalled in Kandahar; the Afghan government is surrounded by allegations of corruption and vote-rigging; and the process of the reconciliation and reintegration of the Afghan Taliban is making little headway.

Despite all this, the US and Nato appear to be preparing for their departure from Afghanistan. To many observers with longer memories, the Rolling Stone magazine article which led to General Stanley McChrystal’s sacking and the WikiLeaks revelations of American military communications recall the publication of the Pentagon Papers in 1971 and the wider atmosphere of civil-military turbulence in the United States which presaged the ignominious withdrawal from Vietnam.

But the coalition forces cannot “just” leave: the fact that so much western blood and treasure has been lost in Afghanistan means that Washington, London and other Nato allies are looking for a positive narrative in Afghanistan to tell their publics which can provide the political cover for disengagement. The key to that narrative, the US and UK now believe, is Pakistan (see "Pakistan and the 'AfPak' strategy", 28 May 2009).

Pakistan is the one state which can in principle advance four desirable objectives: deliver at least some elements of the Afghan Taliban to the negotiating table; help create and stabilise a more inclusive political settlement in Afghanistan which accommodates the Afghan Taliban and other Pakistani proxies like Gulbuddin Hekmatyar; encourage the Afghan Taliban to distance itself from al-Qaida; and host residual US bases in the region (such as the one at Shamsi, in Pakistan's southwestern province of Balochistan), thus enabling the US to maintain downward pressure on al-Qaida.

America and Britain have no illusions about the fact that Pakistan wields a strong hand in Afghanistan. The Pakistan army chief-of-staff General Afshaq Kayani and the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) director General Ahmed Shuja Pasha have made a series of visits to Kabul to meet Hamid Karzai, and have already had some success in influencing the appointment of the head of Afghanistan’s national directorate of security [NDS]. Pakistan has been involved in tentative discussions with the Haqqani network, with Hekmatyar’s group, and with members of the Quetta and Peshawar shuras. It has also cleared the way for the extradition to Kabul of Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar, detained by the ISI in late January 2010, almost certainly with the aim of brokering a deal with moderate Afghan Taliban elements. At the same time the Pakistan army has reportedly been assisting the transit of Punjabi Taliban elements into the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) to strengthen its militant proxies.

Pakistan thus sees itself positioned as the key arbiter of the transition in Afghanistan, which will allow it both to ensure its interests are met and to seek to shape the nature of the US’s continued engagement in the region (in turn ensuring that the US does not again abandon Pakistan, as it did in 1989). It is precisely Pakistan's imminent ascendancy in Afghanistan which triggered the British prime minister’s intervention.

The fear of the United States and United Kingdom is that Pakistan may seek to maximise its dominance in Afghanistan in the years ahead in order to exclude all Indian influence and reassert itself as the de facto master of its neighbour (see "The Pakistan army and the Afghanistan war", 25 November 2008). The anxiety is that this will create the conditions on the ground either for civil war in Afghanistan or for renewed Indo-Pakistan conflict. The reasons for such a worry lie in the very different stakes for India in Afghanistan than those which were at play in 1989.

The Indian factor

Over the past twenty years, India has emerged as a dynamic rising economy whose fortunes are now dependent on the energy supply-lines from or through the middle east and central Asian states. Afghanistan is geo-strategically poised between these two regions, and Pakistani control of Afghanistan creates a powerful choke-hold on India, reinforced in turn by the vast Chinese-built port at Gwadar on Pakistan’s Balochistan coast (which has the potential to threaten India’s strategic waterways).

India - which has no contiguous border with Afghanistan, and which cannot project significant military power at distance into Afghanistan - thus faces a stark strategic predicament (see Kanchan Lakshman, "India in Afghanistan: a presence under pressure", 11 July 2008). Its options, in a situation where it is perceived to be pushed to the wall, are limited. They include revivifying the Northern Alliance to recreate a violently contested space in Afghanistan, which may shore up at least some of India’s interests; and pressuring Pakistan through Kashmir (and the main Pakistani rivers, which rise there and on which much of Pakistan depends). But both of these options are pathways to conflict.

In this context, David Cameron’s remarks in Delhi - which are likely to have been coordinated with Washington - can be seen in part as a statement of reassurance to India that its interests matter and align with those of the west. More importantly, they can also be seen as a strong signal to Pakistan that it should not overplay its hand in Afghanistan, and a warning that it should exert influence on the Afghan Taliban - by using its direct links, and by applying meaningful military pressure on the movement - so that the latter comes to play a constructive role in a plural transitional political settlement.

General Kayani, whose opinion matters far more than that of Pakistan’s President Zardari in relation to Afghanistan, has to find the political courage to limit Pakistan’s objectives in Afghanistan. India in turn could significantly encourage that by once again opening up the political space around Kashmir, and by working with the United States, Nato and Pakistan to underwrite a stable settlement for Afghanistan.

Sideboxes

'Read On' Sidebox: 

Pakistan Security Research Unit

Shaun Gregory, Pakistan: Securing the Insecure State (Routledge, 2008)

Ian Talbot, Pakistan: A Modern History (C Hurst, 2005)

Pakistan Policy Blog

Long War Journal

Pakistan Conflict Monitor

Story of Pakistan

Ayesha Siddiqa, Military Inc: Inside Pakistan's Military Economy (Pluto Press, 2007)

Sidebox: 

Shaun Gregory is professor in the department of peace studies at the University of Bradford and head of the (PSRU). He is the author of Pakistan Security Research Unit. Among his books is Pakistan: Securing the Insecure State (Routledge, 2008)

Also by Shaun Gregory in openDemocracy:

"Pakistan on edge" (24 September 2006)

"Pakistan: farewell to democracy" (3 November 2007)

"Musharraf: the fateful moment" (16 November 2007)

"Pakistan's political turmoil: Musharraf and beyond" (27 August 2008)

"The Pakistan army and the Afghanistan war" (25 November 2008)

"Mumbai: Pakistan's moment of opportunity" (3 December 2008)

"Pakistan and the 'AfPak' strategy" (28 May 2009)

Related stories: 

Pakistan: the road from hell

Pakistan’s American problem

Nepal: Maoists' lock, India's door

Pakistan’s war on civilians

How to solve Pakistan’s problem

Lahore to Peshawar: the trophy-target war

Barack Obama and Afghanistan: a closer look

Pakistan: a path through danger

Pakistan: a country on fire

Kashmir's new generation

Pervez Musharraf, the commando who couldn’t

Pakistan’s democracy: after the honeymoon

India in Afghanistan: a presence under pressure

Pakistan’s rivalrous coalition

Pakistan: dynasty vs democracy

Pakistan after Benazir Bhutto

Pakistan: misgovernance to meltdown

Pakistan: the power of the gun

Pakistan's permanent crisis

The assassin’s age: Pakistan in the world

Pakistan: the army as the state

In Pakistan's heartland of Punjab, the front line force against the surge in Islamic militant attacks is a poorly equipped, incompetent and corrupt police.

...

"Yet another country has decided to shut down key parts the Internet. Kathleen Reen at Internews reports that, as of this past Thursday, the Afghan Ministry of Communications mandated that all Internet Service Providers (ISPs) in Afghanistan filter websites falling under the following categories:- Alcohol- Dating/Social Networking- Gambling- Pxxxnography..."

Yet another country has decided to shut down key parts the Internet. Kathleen Reen at Internews reports that, as of this past Thursday, the Afghan Ministry of Communications mandated that all Internet Service Providers (ISPs) in Afghanistan filter websites falling under the following categories:

• Alcohol
• Dating/Social Networking
• Gambling
• Pornography

Reen reports countrywide blockages of Facebook, Gmail, YouTube, and Twitter. The Afghan Wireless Communication Company (AWCC), one of Afghanistan’s two largest telecommunication companies, is referring people with questions to the Ministry of Communications.

This follows on the heels of reports earlier this week of extensive new Internet censorship in Pakistan and Turkey. Yesterday, Pakistan announced that it will block links to content on Yahoo, Google, MSN, Hotmail, YouTube, Amazon, and Bing — and will completely block 17 other sites — that it deems anti-Islamic. Also this week, Turkey, which has banned more Internet sites than any other country in Europe, started completely blocking YouTube and thousands of other sites, including proxy servers that Turkish citizens were using to circumvent the bans.

EFF will continue to monitor these events. For some ideas on ways to speak freely without falling victim to authoritarian surveillance and censorship, and ways for the rest of us to help support the worldwide community, check out EFF's Surveillance Self Defense International.

Coalition and Afghan forces killed the Taliban's shadow governor for the province of Baghlan, dealing yet another blow to the group's leadership network in the north.

Mullah Rohullah, the shadow governor for Baghlan, was killed after a joint Coalition and Afghan force called in "precision air strikes" against two vehicles transporting Taliban fighters in the Baghlan-i-Jadid district. Rohullah's convoy was identified by human "intelligence sources," the International Security Assistance Force stated in a press release that highlighted his death.

The joint Coalition and Afghan ground force then engaged additional Taliban fighters "who were heavily armed with a heavy machine gun, multiple rocket propelled grenades, automatic rifles, hand-grenades, ammunition, and communications equipment." The Taliban fighters attacked the joint force, but were defeated. ISAF did not provide a total number of Taliban fighters killed in the engagement.

Rohullah was appointed the shadow governor for Baghlan in early May, Afghan officials told Pajwhok Afghan News. As Shadow governor, Rohullah "was responsible for organizing and directing attacks against Coalition forces" and "was in constant contact with Kunduz and Pakistani Taliban senior leaders, providing updates and receiving guidance," ISAF stated.

Rohullah has been the target of Coalition and Afghan efforts to dismantle the top Taliban leadership network in the north. Afghan police had thought they killed Rohullah during a raid in Baghlan on May 20, but ISAF never confirmed the report.

The Taliban establish shadow or parallel governments in the regions they control or where the Afghan government is weak. These shadow governments fill the void by dispensing sharia justice; mediating tribal and land disputes; collecting taxes; and recruiting, arming, and training fighters.

The Taliban have established shadow governments throughout Afghanistan, with provincial and militarily leaders appointed to command activities. In January 2009, the Taliban claimed to be in control of more than 70 percent of Afghanistan's rural areas and to have established shadow governments in 31 of Afghanistan's 34 provinces.

Over the past two years, the security situation in the northern provinces of Baghlan and neighboring Kunduz has deteriorated. The Taliban and allied terror groups maintain safe havens in Baghlan and Kunduz, and control large portions of the provinces. Two districts in Baghlan province - Baghlan-i-Jadid and Burka - are under the control of the Taliban Of the seven districts in Kunduz province, only two are considered under government control; the rest of the districts - Chahara Dara, Dashti Archi, Ali Abab, Khan Abad, and Iman Sahib - are considered contested or under Taliban control, according to a map produced by Afghanistan's Interior Ministry in the spring of 2009 [see LWJ report, "Afghan forces and Taliban clash in Kunduz," and Threat Matrix report, "Afghanistan’s wild-wild North"].

The Taliban's top leadership in the north has been hit hard over the past year. Afghan intelligence captured the shadow governor of Samangan province on May 20. Afghan officials claimed the shadow governor of Kunduz province was killed on April 26. Pakistani intelligence reportedly detained the shadow governors of Kunduz and Baghlan in February. Also, in September 2009, police detained the shadow governor of Bamyan province.

Health offers to make biggest cuts using 'back-office' savings after today's budget

Details of reduced government spending in the future began to take shape today as, one by one, Whitehall departments issued figures for efficiency savings.

In an embellishment to the usual hour-long lunchtime budget delivered by the chancellor, the afternoon was filled by the drip-drip publication of efficiency savings found by the 16 individual Whitehall departments as the Treasury sought to underscore that every area of government had been made to carry out an audit.

The government announced in its November pre-budget report that it would be finding annual £11bn savings in spending across Whitehall but, until today, had not revealed precise plans.

The cabinet minister making the largest trim to his budget was the health secretary, Andy Burnham, who offered up more than a third of the total savings, cutting £4.35bn. He said his department could save £1.5bn by driving down the cost of procurement, £100m from IT programmes, £60m from reducing energy consumption and £555m by reducing staff sickness and absence.

Other notable cuts include £1.1bn from Ed Balls's Department for Children, Schools and Families, £431m from the Ministry of Justice, which will include the closure of 20 magistrates courts, and £700m from the politically sensitive Ministry of Defence budget, although Alistair Darling pointedly pledged to maintain the £4bn spend on the Afghan war.

All ministers emphasised that the total cuts would all come from "back-office savings" – improvements in how they buy equipment, IT and their estates – while protecting frontline services.

Within the £11bn total, £8bn would come from even more specific operational efficiencies such as cleaning contracts, management of payrolls and technical support. In addition, there will be a 50% reduction in spending on consultants by Whitehall departments, alongside a 25% cut in marketing and communications budgets which together save £650m by April 2013.

The government will save £500m from reduced spending on IT programmes and £1.4bn from reducing civil service pay and days lost to sickness, £300m from reducing spending on energy and £500m from reforms to subsidiary bodies.

However, there was irritation at the manner of the staggered announcements throughout the afternoon and questions about why the chancellor had not detailed the individual department cuts in his statement, enabling it to be debated in the house. The opposition charged it was an attempt to distract attention from the budget itself.

There was incredulity from the opposition over some specific pledges – most notably that made by the Department of Health to make such large savings on staff sickness – but also over the wisdom of the entire exercise.

The Tories added that without a comprehensive spending review for the years over which these savings would be made, there is no baseline against which to measure possible savings after 2011. They also said that even factoring in the £11bn of cuts, there was still some £20bn to £25bn in a shortfall.

Vince Cable, the Liberal Democrat Treasury spokesman, said the programme was "totally vacuous". He said: "If it's inefficiency, why has it been tolerated all these years?"

The newly detailed cuts will also be poorly received by many public sector workers already striking over changes to their pay and conditions.

Alongside the £8bn of so-called operational efficiencies, the government also gave details of how it would find efficiencies from elsewhere in government, going further on how it planned to relocate public servants out of Whitehall.

The chief secretary to the Treasury, Liam Byrne, has already announced in his Smarter Government document the intention to consult on relocating civil servants out of London.

Darling said the number of civil servants in London will be reduced by a third over the long term, with 15,000 posts relocated within the next five years. The Ministry of Justice announced that it would be relocating 1,000 civil servants out of London by 2015 and will rationalise its estate from 18 sites to four, saving £41m a year by 2015.

While the chancellor delivered his budget, civil servants mounted picket lines outside parliament as part of a national strike over redundancy pay. Trade union leaders have complained that the relocation has cost jobs and forced some staff to seek alternative work because their families were unwilling or unable to move.

Departments which have switched work from the capital in recent years include the Health and Safety Executive (to Bootle on Merseyside) and the Office for National Statistics (to Newport in South Wales).

"Relocation should be done with the consent of the workforce," said a spokesman for the Public and Commercial Services union. "The government also needs to recognise that people have family ties and many are dual earners, with the partners of civil servants having a job in London. Civil servants should not be forced out of a job at the whim of politicians. There needs to be a sound business case."

The budget book shows progress made on asset sales and reveals that British Waterways, which looks after the country's 2,200 miles of canals and rivers – has been saved from a sell-off and instead will be turned into a mutualised public service.

This will keep the waterways in the public sector, as they have been since 1947, and British Waterways may now to resemble a "national trust". There were plans to sell off attractive British Waterways properties, a process from which it has raised £45m a year.

The US has already axed big budget projects as Obama seeks to curb military spending and analysts anticipate Britain will soon follow suit

BAE Systems, the biggest manufacturing company in Britain, was dealt a major blow today when the government awarded the first phase of a £4bn contract to build new armoured cars for the British army to America's General Dynamics. The move jeopardises the future of the firm's armaments factory in Newcastle and 600 jobs.

The deal is for armoured reconnaissance vehicles to replace Britain's ageing Scimitars – seen as vulnerable to roadside bombs – using better protection and with added firepower.

General Dynamics had previously said 10,500 UK jobs would be safeguarded or created over the 10-year deal, if it won the contract, and Bob Ainsworth, the defence secretary, made the point that the US group's bid contained 73% UK content within the supply chain and the assembly, integration and test facilities at the company's Defence Support Group at Donnington.

For BAE, which spent £50m over five years developing a contender for the deal, based on upgrading its existing CV90 tank, these are dog days as it faces swingeing defence spending cuts by the US and British governments in the wake of the global banking crisis.

Big-budget US projects have already been axed as the Obama administration curbs military spending, which doubled during the Bush years. Among them are the costly F-22 fighter plane, a new communications satellite, shipbuilding programmes and missile development. Further job losses are inevitable. As BAE derives half its £20bn of annual revenue from the US, this is unwelcome news.

Britain is also gearing up for big cuts, with both of the main political parties preparing to slash defence spending by up to £10bn after the election in May.

Analysts anticipate cuts to the BAE Harrier and Tornado fighter jet fleet, an early phasing out of Nimrod MR2 reconnaissance aircraft, and a reduction in orders for the new US F-35 fighters. Such ruthless cost-cutting means BAE could lose tens of millions in revenue.

"BAE faces a challenging period as government seeks to rein in public spending," said Peter Felstead, of Jane's Defence Weekly. "Plans for new aircraft carriers, warplanes and ships are vulnerable at a time when there is cross-party consensus that military spending is too extravagant."

Difficult backdrop

The difficult backdrop has not been lost on the City: BAE's share price is down 20% over 18 months and Goldman Sachs has published a note claiming BAE's earnings could stagnate until the middle of this decade.

According to Goldman Sachs' defence analyst David Perry, profits at BAE's land division look set to halve by 2012 after the US cut funding for several vehicle programmes. Perry said he expected news about the F-35 to get worse. The programme leader, Lockheed, warned recently that it would share the burden among partners, including BAE, after the Pentagon withheld $614m (£410m) in performance fees.

Ed Steed, an analyst at Execution Noble, said BAE was not well positioned to withstand an era of reduced defence spending as it was heavily exposed to so-called platform products: "Big-ticket items such as ships, aircraft and submarines, where the spotlight tends to fall during a defence review."

"Projects where BAE is involved such as F-35 and Typhoon are far advanced but governments around the world are likely to reduce planned orders or abandon plans to place new [orders] at a time of budgetary restraint," he said.

BAE has also suffered a number of setbacks on a second front: competition for new weapons contracts. Today's news that it had lost the armoured car contract follows last year's failure to win the $281m US government contract for armoured battlefield vehicles. That deal was clinched at the eleventh hour by its Wisconsin-based rival Oshkosh Defense and was the first time that BAE has suffered a major contract loss in North America since it launched the last phase of its US expansion strategy two years ago. BAE is now the fourth-biggest defence contractor in the US market.

To hedge against uncertainty in the US and UK, BAE is expanding in India, Australia and Saudi Arabia, where defence spending is expected to rise; and it aims to boost its presence in niche product areas such as cyber-security and unmanned aircraft.

When the company's results were announced in February, Ian King, chief executive, said he expected combat aircraft to take over from land vehicles as the main driver of growth. He expects land systems to fall 30% by 2012, following contract setbacks, and because of retrenchment as the US and Britain withdraw from Iraq and Afghanistan.

But Howard Wheeldon, a strategist at BGC Partners, said he remained positive about BAE. "It is a past master at being able to adapt to changed circumstances. These may be worrying times but the company is well positioned, as it has a diversified product portfolio and international interests," he said.

Analysts at Exane BNP Paribas expect "a flat performance over the next couple of years" but note that about 30% of BAE's income depends on maintenance and support programmes for projects that still have many years to run.

BAE rebutted suggestions that it faces a rocky period ahead, saying: "We have a large order book and programmes such as Typhoon continue to deliver a strong performance. During the year, £3bn of new support contracts were awarded.

"In the US, our high-technology capabilities within our electronics, intelligence and support business continue to be in demand."

BAE is also battling an image problem, after US and UK bribery and corruption inquiries ended with it paying £255m in fines to the US department of justice (DoJ) after admitting to irregularities over the sale of fighter planes to Saudi Arabia and eastern Europe.

In a court filing, the DoJ claimed that BAE transferred millions to Swiss bank accounts controlled by an agent, with a high probability that a payment would go to a Saudi Arabian official in a position of influence. In the past, there have been allegations that BAE had a £60m slush fund to underpin the Saudi al-Yamamah arms contract, which has been worth £43bn over the past 20 years. BAE has denied the allegations.

In Britain, the Serious Fraud Office (SFO) dropped an investigation into BAE's Saudi business after intervention by the Blair government in 2006. But the company must pay £30m after agreeing to plead guilty to a lesser offence of failing to keep accurate accounting records for its activities in Tanzania.

Although the UK National Audit Office investigated al-Yamamah, the conclusions are shrouded in secrecy. The Ministry of Defence said: "The report remains sensitive. Disclosure would harm both international relations and the UK's commercial interests." Anti-armaments campaigners have accused the government of a cover-up.

King has tried to draw a line under the corruption investigations by stating: "The company regrets and accepts full responsibility for past shortcomings. The firm has systematically enhanced its compliance policies and processes."

Francis Tusa, of Defence Analysis, said: "If you ask people what they think of defence companies, they would be extremely cynical and assume that dodgy stuff is going on all the time. Of course, that doesn't make it right."

Rita Clifton, chair of the branding agency Interbrand, said: "No one expects a defence company to be a hearts-and-flowers organisation. Customers are primarily concerned about product quality and service but reputation can be a factor when potential clients are shopping around in a highly competitive marketplace. And image matters in the wider public and political arena. BAE cannot afford to rest on its laurels."

By Peter Almond
MailOnline
Last updated at 2:29 AM on 07th March 2010

It was one of the most complex military logistical and medical operations ever undertaken – and it saved the life of a young British soldier critically injured in Afghanistan.

It involved hundreds of doctors, air and ground crews of several nations, travelling many thousands of miles, revolutionary and experimental medical equipment, several planes and helicopters and communications between three continents and cost millions of pounds.

For months, details of the massive operation to save one man’s life have been shrouded in secrecy. The injured soldier was not shot by the Taliban but was almost certainly wounded accidentally at his camp near Sangin in Helmand province in late July last year.

It is understood that Soldier X – he is not being identified at the request of his family – was not wearing body armour at the time. The Ministry of Defence has declined to offer any explanation.

The respected American journalist Michael Yon, himself a former US special forces soldier, reported on his blog that he heard the shot and saw a flurry of activity and a medical evacuation helicopter taking Soldier X away.

Then began a most incredible effort to save his life.

Soldier X had been shot in the abdomen and chest, losing his right lung and damaging his liver, according to the US military Stars And Stripes newspaper. Another American military report said his blood supply was replaced more than ten times, and that he was transfused with 75 units of blood and another 75 units of platelets.

He was alive – but only just. He needed specialist equipment to do what his lungs could not: provide oxygen to his blood and remove the carbon dioxide built up in its passage through his body. He needed an artificial lung and intensive care within hours. Such equipment was available at hospitals in Britain, nearly 4,000 miles away, but Soldier X would almost certainly die on the long flight.

He needed a portable, low-pressure artificial lung and the Americans offered to help. But the bureaucracy of moving from the British to the American military system meant that valuable time was being lost.

More...

* Major accuses Brown of using troops as a 'party political prop' as PM announces £100m of new equipment on surprise Afghan visit

Contacted by a quick-thinking British doctor at Camp Bastion, Mr Yon sent an urgent email to a group of American civilian volunteers called Soldiers’ Angels near Ramstein Air Base in Germany, where most American casualties from Iraq and Afghanistan are initially sent.

The volunteers, founded by the great-niece of General George S. Patton, alerted the US Army’s nearby Landstuhl Regional Medical Center’s Acute Lung Rescue Team, which specialises in going straight to the aid of soldiers with severe lung problems.

And within an hour, the team was in touch with doctors at the nearby University of Regensberg who had access to a revolutionary portable artificial lung called a Novalung. The still experimental German-made machine takes over much of the job of circulating blood, filling it with oxygen and filtering out the carbon dioxide without the use of the mechanical pumps in the older Extra Corporeal Membrane Oxygenation (ECMO) machines, which have been known to cause damage to a patient by forcing the blood around the body.

Novalung is powered by the patient’s own heartbeat at a lower pressure, and has been used by the Landstuhl team several times, even though it has yet to be formally accepted into general use by either Germany or Britain.

It had never been used on a patient in transit, however. Soldier X would be the first to use it on his flight back to Germany.

With time running out, and Soldier X needing specialist attention immediately, a call was made from Camp Bastion to the US-led Combined Air and Space Operations Center at al Udeid Air Base in Qatar, where all military aircraft movements in and around Afghanistan are controlled.

Within minutes, the Joint Patient Movement Requirements Centre there identified a US C-130 Hercules at Kabul that could fly pulmonary specialists immediately to Camp Bastion.

At the same time, the 618th Tanker Airlift Control Centre at Scott Air Force Base in Illinois was alerted to co-ordinate the move of the Landstuhl team with the Novalung from Germany to Camp Bastion and back.

‘We received the call on our operations floor to airlift the British soldier from Afghanistan to Germany and immediately did what we could to make it happen,’ said Colonel John Martins, the 618th TACC director of operations, who led co-ordination efforts for the mission.

‘It was a complex move. Not only did we have to find a plane and aircrew to fly the patient out of Sangin, but also we had to find another plane and crew to get the right medical personnel and equipment into Afghanistan because we needed specialised medical teams to care for the patient in-flight.’

At Ramstein, a giant US C-17 Globemaster loaded with cargo for Iraq was quickly reassigned to take the Novalung team to Afghanistan and within six hours it was airborne and on its way, via a stop for more medical equipment at Bagram, Kabul.

Once on the ground at Camp Bastion, however, the aircrew found that the six hours it would take to prepare Soldier X for the flight back meant they would run out of permissible flying hours. Another aircrew would be needed while they flew back to Germany with several more wounded soldiers.

A second C-17 was urgently reassigned at Camp Bastion, while the Novalung was carefully connected to the blood vessels of Soldier X’s legs.

Eight hours later, and within 22 hours of receiving the call for help, the US Air Force had moved Soldier X from a combat zone on one continent to the medical safety of another.

At Ramstein, the Germans took over Soldier X’s care. A civilian Lifebird medevac helicopter was on hand to fly him to Regensberg for more operations.

Some time later, Soldier X was flown back to specialist care in England and is believed to be continuing his recovery.

The only official response from the MoD about the case has come in a statement from Surgeon Rear Admiral Lionel Jarvis, assistant chief of defence staff (health), which said: ‘The current Coalition operation in Afghanistan allows flexibility in the selection of the best casualty transfer system available at the time.

‘The US evacuation of a UK casualty to Germany exemplified the success of this arrangement, and the professional skills of the Coalition medical teams, resulting in a highly successful outcome.’

The only reported comment from Soldier X’s family comes from MaryAnn Phillips, of Soldiers’ Angels at Ramstein. In a message to Michael Yon on his website, she said she had met the young soldier’s mother at Regensberg Hospital, where he had regained consciousness and was improving.

‘She had no idea of the extraordinary lengths hundreds of people had gone to save him.

‘I told her about some of this,’ MaryAnn wrote to Yon. ‘She broke down and couldn’t believe “all of those people would do all that for my son”. It was a very, very moving moment.’

 

{loadposition user8}

By Peter Almond
MailOnline
Last updated at 2:29 AM on 07th March 2010

It was one of the most complex military logistical and medical operations ever undertaken – and it saved the life of a young British soldier critically injured in Afghanistan.

It involved hundreds of doctors, air and ground crews of several nations, travelling many thousands of miles, revolutionary and experimental medical equipment, several planes and helicopters and communications between three continents and cost millions of pounds.

For months, details of the massive operation to save one man’s life have been shrouded in secrecy. The injured soldier was not shot by the Taliban but was almost certainly wounded accidentally at his camp near Sangin in Helmand province in late July last year.

It is understood that Soldier X – he is not being identified at the request of his family – was not wearing body armour at the time. The Ministry of Defence has declined to offer any explanation.

The respected American journalist Michael Yon, himself a former US special forces soldier, reported on his blog that he heard the shot and saw a flurry of activity and a medical evacuation helicopter taking Soldier X away.

Then began a most incredible effort to save his life.

Soldier X had been shot in the abdomen and chest, losing his right lung and damaging his liver, according to the US military Stars And Stripes newspaper. Another American military report said his blood supply was replaced more than ten times, and that he was transfused with 75 units of blood and another 75 units of platelets.

He was alive – but only just. He needed specialist equipment to do what his lungs could not: provide oxygen to his blood and remove the carbon dioxide built up in its passage through his body. He needed an artificial lung and intensive care within hours. Such equipment was available at hospitals in Britain, nearly 4,000 miles away, but Soldier X would almost certainly die on the long flight.

He needed a portable, low-pressure artificial lung and the Americans offered to help. But the bureaucracy of moving from the British to the American military system meant that valuable time was being lost.

More...

* Major accuses Brown of using troops as a 'party political prop' as PM announces £100m of new equipment on surprise Afghan visit

Contacted by a quick-thinking British doctor at Camp Bastion, Mr Yon sent an urgent email to a group of American civilian volunteers called Soldiers’ Angels near Ramstein Air Base in Germany, where most American casualties from Iraq and Afghanistan are initially sent.

The volunteers, founded by the great-niece of General George S. Patton, alerted the US Army’s nearby Landstuhl Regional Medical Center’s Acute Lung Rescue Team, which specialises in going straight to the aid of soldiers with severe lung problems.

And within an hour, the team was in touch with doctors at the nearby University of Regensberg who had access to a revolutionary portable artificial lung called a Novalung. The still experimental German-made machine takes over much of the job of circulating blood, filling it with oxygen and filtering out the carbon dioxide without the use of the mechanical pumps in the older Extra Corporeal Membrane Oxygenation (ECMO) machines, which have been known to cause damage to a patient by forcing the blood around the body.

Novalung is powered by the patient’s own heartbeat at a lower pressure, and has been used by the Landstuhl team several times, even though it has yet to be formally accepted into general use by either Germany or Britain.

It had never been used on a patient in transit, however. Soldier X would be the first to use it on his flight back to Germany.

With time running out, and Soldier X needing specialist attention immediately, a call was made from Camp Bastion to the US-led Combined Air and Space Operations Center at al Udeid Air Base in Qatar, where all military aircraft movements in and around Afghanistan are controlled.

Within minutes, the Joint Patient Movement Requirements Centre there identified a US C-130 Hercules at Kabul that could fly pulmonary specialists immediately to Camp Bastion.

At the same time, the 618th Tanker Airlift Control Centre at Scott Air Force Base in Illinois was alerted to co-ordinate the move of the Landstuhl team with the Novalung from Germany to Camp Bastion and back.

‘We received the call on our operations floor to airlift the British soldier from Afghanistan to Germany and immediately did what we could to make it happen,’ said Colonel John Martins, the 618th TACC director of operations, who led co-ordination efforts for the mission.

‘It was a complex move. Not only did we have to find a plane and aircrew to fly the patient out of Sangin, but also we had to find another plane and crew to get the right medical personnel and equipment into Afghanistan because we needed specialised medical teams to care for the patient in-flight.’

At Ramstein, a giant US C-17 Globemaster loaded with cargo for Iraq was quickly reassigned to take the Novalung team to Afghanistan and within six hours it was airborne and on its way, via a stop for more medical equipment at Bagram, Kabul.

Once on the ground at Camp Bastion, however, the aircrew found that the six hours it would take to prepare Soldier X for the flight back meant they would run out of permissible flying hours. Another aircrew would be needed while they flew back to Germany with several more wounded soldiers.

A second C-17 was urgently reassigned at Camp Bastion, while the Novalung was carefully connected to the blood vessels of Soldier X’s legs.

Eight hours later, and within 22 hours of receiving the call for help, the US Air Force had moved Soldier X from a combat zone on one continent to the medical safety of another.

At Ramstein, the Germans took over Soldier X’s care. A civilian Lifebird medevac helicopter was on hand to fly him to Regensberg for more operations.

Some time later, Soldier X was flown back to specialist care in England and is believed to be continuing his recovery.

The only official response from the MoD about the case has come in a statement from Surgeon Rear Admiral Lionel Jarvis, assistant chief of defence staff (health), which said: ‘The current Coalition operation in Afghanistan allows flexibility in the selection of the best casualty transfer system available at the time.

‘The US evacuation of a UK casualty to Germany exemplified the success of this arrangement, and the professional skills of the Coalition medical teams, resulting in a highly successful outcome.’

The only reported comment from Soldier X’s family comes from MaryAnn Phillips, of Soldiers’ Angels at Ramstein. In a message to Michael Yon on his website, she said she had met the young soldier’s mother at Regensberg Hospital, where he had regained consciousness and was improving.

‘She had no idea of the extraordinary lengths hundreds of people had gone to save him.

‘I told her about some of this,’ MaryAnn wrote to Yon. ‘She broke down and couldn’t believe “all of those people would do all that for my son”. It was a very, very moving moment.’

 

{loadposition user8}

PM must clarify 2003 role at today's session, as military and former allies say vital funding was slashed

LIVE: Watch the video and follow our minute-by-minute blog

Gordon Brown will today face one of the toughest challenges of his premiership when he faces charges at the Chilcot inquiry that he slashed the defence budget, leading to equipment shortages and British casualties in Iraq and a lack of vital helicopters in Afghanistan.

Brown set up the Iraq war inquiry in what has been described as "a risk-free gesture to history and public opinion". But he had not initially intended to give personal testimony until after the election.

Today's session, which will see him give evidence for four and a half hours, will be the first time he has faced a sustained grilling over his elusive attitude to the war, and he may find that his emotional response to the cross-examination will prove as important as his detailed answers.

Brown plans privately to meet the families of soldiers killed or injured in Iraq, probably before today's session.

Last night he faced criticism from a former head of the armed forces who accused him of being "unsympathetic" towards defence while serving as chancellor.

"Not fully funding the army in the way they had asked ... undoubtedly cost the lives of soldiers," General Lord Guthrie of Craigiebank, who led the armed forces from 1997 to 2001, told the Times.

"He should be asked why he was so unsympathetic towards defence and so sympathetic to other departments."

The prime minister's aides meanwhile say he does not intend to distance himself from the cabinet decision to go to war, or to pin the blame on Tony Blair or even George Bush. His allies have argued that to shirk responsibility would look weak and reinforce the image of a man not willing to stand up and defend difficult government decisions.

He will emphasise that he supported the war due to Iraq's clear failure to comply with UN resolutions requiring co-operation with UN weapons inspectors, sources say, putting less emphasis on the existence of weapons of mass destruction.

He will acknowledge that postwar planning was not as well organised as it should have been, but is likely to put the blame on internal disputes within the US administration – the position adopted by the then foreign secretary, Jack Straw, in his testimony.

Brown has frequently been characterised, in accounts of the period leading up to the war, as a peripheral figure who largely saw the conflict through the prism of his own position: namely, whether Blair would sack him as chancellor. But Alastair Campbell, Blair's director of communications, said Brown was a key figure in the discussions in the runup to the war.

In previous inquiry sessions, senior military figures, as well as one-time political allies such as Clare Short, the former international development secretary, have blamed the Treasury – and by implication Brown as chancellor – for underfunding both the war and the subsequent reconstruction efforts.

Sir Kevin Tebbit, the then permanent secretary at the Ministry of Defence, claimed he was forced by the Treasury to operate with an emergency budget between September 2003 and October 2004, depriving the department of £1bn.

Former defence secretary Geoff Hoon told Chilcot that changes in Treasury accounting rules led directly to cuts in equipment after the Iraq war. Referring to the lack of helicopters in Afghanistan, he said: "It is reasonable to assume that by now, had that budget been spent in the way that we thought we should spend it, then those helicopters would probably be coming into service any time now."

It has also been claimed that a lack of funding also led to the use of inadequate Snatch vehicles.

Short said the Treasury refusal to provide her department with extra cash at the time meant it was impossible to provide an exemplary role in the Basra area. Shadow defence secretary Liam Fox said: "There have been so many accusations that [Brown] knowingly underfunded defence, that he blocked equipment orders, cut the budget while we were at war, and played politics with announcements of troop numbers. He must be held to account for these decisions, some of which may have had tragic consequences."

Five key questions

• Why do service chiefs claim Brown underfunded the strategic defence review in 1998?

• Did Brown voice any private opposition to Britain going to war without a second UN resolution or sufficient postwar planning?

• Did Brown consult sufficiently on the changes to accounting rules for the defence budget in 2003, and what knock-on effect did this have on the helicopter budget?

• Did Brown constrain the MoD's ability to seek alternatives to equipment such as the Land Rover?

• Did Brown support withdrawal of troops from Basra in 2007 and 2008?

Troops of the 4th Mechanised Brigade take part in exercises before deployment to Helmand province

The commander who will lead the next British brigade to be sent to Afghanistan said today that his troops were the best prepared of any that have so far fought in the conflict.

Brigadier Richard Felton, the commander of 4th Mechanised Brigade, said they were ready to take advantage of any gains made by Operation Moshtarak, the major offensive against the Taliban.

The brigade, made up of about 6,350 men and women, is undergoing final training on Salisbury Plain in Wiltshire before its deployment to Helmand in April. At times as many as 3,500 soldiers, marines and other service personnel have taken part in set pieces.

A group of 10 Afghan army commanders as well as Afghan people living in Britain have helped the brigade prepare for the six-month tour.

Felton said the training the brigade had received had been "quite outstanding". He said great emphasis had been placed on understanding the Afghan people and their culture.

"Cultural understanding is so important. We've been invited into Afghanistan to help their people. To do so we've got to show them respect, not only respect for the people but also for the Afghan forces we are going to partner," Felton said.

He also acknowledged that such understanding may have been lacking previously. "We haven't placed so much of an emphasis on it in the past."

Felton said about 550 members of the brigade had been trained in the languages they will need, Pashto and Dari. Everyone had at least a few hours so they could learn a few basics.

The brigadier said over the last six months the brigade had always had Afghan people working with them. "The 10 serving Afghan officers here on Salisbury Plain are here to guide us, to teach us about themselves and their culture and their army and to give us more of an insight into the operational environment we will face."

During the tour, Felton said, there would be parliamentary elections in Afghanistan – and the British general election would also be a background to the mission. Felton said the men and women under his command would spend as much time as possible away from their bases, living and working with the Afghan people.

He accepted that improvised explosive devices would continue to be one of the brigade's major challenges. He said search team numbers were being boosted by 50% and there would be four times as many specialist dog teams. But they would also focus on disrupting networks.

Today, members of the brigade took part in two exercises that the media were allowed to watch. The first involved the evacuation by helicopter of a badly injured soldier . The second was a re-creation of a meeting between soldiers and Afghan villagers, whose roles were taken by Afghan people living in the UK.

Major General Gordon Messenger, the Ministry of Defence's strategic communications officer, said there would be a "much closer relationship" with the Afghan army and police force. He said: "It means living in the same bases. It means operating in the same places, it means conducting patrols together. It means fighting the Taliban together. It means engaging with the population together."

Messenger said there was a "real sense of progress" at the moment. "There's a plan, the plan is resourced and the plan is achievable," he said.

Freedom of information request reveals unmanned weapons more prominent in RAF strategy

Rob Evans Richard Norton-Taylor

British forces are relying increasingly on unmanned drones to attack targets in Afghanistan, mirroring controversial tactics used by the US.

New Ministry of Defence figures show the RAF has fired 84 missiles from Reaper drones since they were first deployed there in June 2008, with more than 20 being fired over the past two months.

The RAF has not disclosed the number of US-made Reapers deployed in Afghanistan, but say they will double the total over the next two years. Defence chiefs say they have been slow to recognise their potential, both in a surveillance role and as a weapons carrier.

They are launched from a base in Kandahar, but are controlled remotely thousands of miles away by a squadron of some 90 RAF personnel based at Creech US air force base in Nevada.

The drones can carry out surveillance – what the RAF describe as a "staring eye" – of the battlefield around the clock, far longer than conventional manned aircraft. They are highly suitable in Afghanistan where they are not generally vulnerable to enemy fire, defence officials say.

Once a target has been identified, the RAF remote controllers can instruct the drones to fire their two 500lb laser-guided bombs and four Hellfire missiles.

The MoD does not specify how the missiles have been used, arguing the details would hinder operational effectiveness. However, defence sources say the drones are used against a wide variety of targets, especially "high-value targets" – a reference to Taliban commanders. They are often called in by British special forces and army commanders on the ground.

Missiles from a US drone flying over South Waziristan in Pakistan's tribal region are believed to have killed Baitullah Mehsud, the Pakistani Taliban chief last year. Highly publicised CIA attacks on Taliban and al-Qaida suspects on both sides of the Pakistan-Aghanistan border have been criticised for killing civilian bystanders and violating Pakistan's sovereignty.

The MoD says there have been no reports of RAF drones killing Freedocivilians.

The rules governing the firing of the Reapers' missiles "are no different to those used for manned combat aircraft, the weapons are all precision guided and every effort is made to ensure the risk of collateral damage and civilian casualties is minimised", a defence official said.

There has been a long debate within defence circles about the legality of firing weapons from such a distance and about the authority given to drone controllers.

Chris Cole, director of the interfaith peace campaign Fellowship of Reconciliation, who used freedom of information legislation to shed light on the Reapers, said: "Drones are the latest in a long line of new weapons used in the mistaken belief that they will provide a clean and tidy solution to a conflict – time and again history has proved that this is a myth."

He added: "We have a number of serious concerns not least because there is a picture beginning to emerge of high civilian casualties. In addition, the use of armed drones to target specific individuals could amount to summary or arbitrary execution".

Philip Alston, a UN human rights special rapporteur, warned in October that the US use of drones to kill militants in Afghanistan and Pakistan may violate international law. He called on the US to explain the legal basis for killing individuals with its drones. Many US intelligence officials view the Predator drones as their most important weapon against al-Qaida.CIA director Leon Panetta called them the "only game in town" last year.

The RAF is also flying small manned twin turboprop Beechcraft King Air planes to complement surveillance missions undertaken by the unmanned Reapers. They are equipped with sophisticated infrared radar and antennae for electronic and communications eavesdropping.

The MoD bought an initial batch of six Reaper drones from the US firm General Atomics, at a reported cost of £6m. One of the drones crashed in Afghanistan in 2008 in what defence secretary Bob Ainsworth called "a forced landing".

US, UK and Afghan troops to unite in surge to push Taliban out of Helmand by year-end

Thousands of British, US and Afghan troops are poised to launch their biggest joint offensive to push the Taliban out of all major populated areas of Helmand by the end of the year, senior UK military and diplomatic officials said today.

The 9,500 British troops in the province will be joined for Operation Moshtarak, Pashtu for "together", by 30,000 US marines and more Afghan forces than any previous offensive.

Coalition forces will fix the enemy "with a beady eye and take him on", Lieutenant General Sir Nick Parker, deputy commander of Nato forces in Afghanistan, said by video link from Kabul. "It's going to be a difficult task but a very important year ... I believe it will be a successful year."

Tom Dodd, deputy British ambassador in Kabul, described Operation Moshtarak as a test case. Major General Gordon Messenger, the Ministry of Defence's strategic communications officer described the operation as a "high water mark".

He said Grenadier Guards supported by units of the Royal Welsh and Scots Guards, are already engaged in an air and ground operation near Nad e-Ali, in central Helmand province.

The move was in preparation for Operation Moshtarak, British defence officials said. The first major assault was said to be on the town of Maja, a Taliban stronghold.

There is a hope that many insurgents will either lay down their arms and "reintegrate", or flee the area.

Parker said the hope was the offensive would lead to a much lower level of violence, a greater level of "Afghan leadership" on security matters and effective local government, adding: "The population is at the centre of the plan."

Parker's boss, US General Stanley McChrystal, said : "I still will tell you that I believe the situation in Afghanistan is serious. I do not say now that I think it is deteriorating."

KABUL, Afghanistan – The Afghan parliament delivered another rebuke to President Hamid Karzai on Saturday when it rejected 10 of the 17 ministers he proposed on his second try at forming a government – the latest sign that his fraud-tainted election victory has weakened his leadership.

Karzai secured parliamentary approval for his longtime national security aide, Zalmay Roussel, as foreign minister and nominees for justice and counternarcotics. But he went down to defeat in a host of areas that affect the daily lives of Afghans – from health to telecommunications.

For a country in a U.S.-backed war of survival against a fast-spreading Taliban Islamist insurgency, the vote will slow the establishment of an effective government, but it also signaled the first democratic stirrings in a body that previously had achieved little of note.

Members of parliament said they voted down candidates who were closely affiliated with former warlords or were unknown in the capital. But some of those defeated had been viewed with high esteem by leading figures.

Sima Samar, director of the Afghan Independent Human Rights Commission, said of the defeat of two female candidates, "I'm really distressed that two good ones lost." She said Karzai didn't sufficiently support Soraya Dalil for health minister, or Palwasha Hassan for minister of women's affairs.

Samar was critical of Karzai's successful Justice Ministry pick, Habibullah Ghalib, and European officials – particularly the British – are very concerned that Zarar Ahmad Moqbel is now minister of counternarcotics. But that pick apparently was an IOU by Karzai to Moqbel, who campaigned for him in provinces north of Kabul.

Possibly to spite the British, legislators gave Moqbel 162 votes out of 223, the highest number for any candidate.

The voting by secret ballot took about five hours to complete, and the laborious hand count was broadcast live on radio and television. Kabul was gripped by the spectacle. Tradesmen in the main bazaar listened in their stalls or stores, and many weren't happy with the outcome.

"The parliament is acting independently. But the game will continue," said watchmaker Mohammad Sharif Niazi. "Whatever parliament does, Karzai is our leader. We don't have an alternative."

The vote came two weeks to the day after parliament dealt its first rebuke to Karzai, approving only seven of 24 Cabinet positions. It raised doubts of whether he'll be able to present a full government when he travels to London Jan. 28 for a major international conference on the future of Afghanistan.

The British government's justification for launching the Iraq war has been dramatically undermined by two separate inquiries casting new light on the build-up to the invasion in 2003. Delivering the first independent assessment of the legality of the conflict, an official Dutch inquiry yesterday concluded that 'the military action had no sound mandate in international law.' In a 550-page report, it concluded that: 'The UN Security Council resolution on Iraq from the 1990s did not give a mandate to the US-British led military intervention in 2003.' The report added that 'in its depiction of Iraq's WMD programme, the [Dutch] government was to a considerable extent led by public and other information from the US and the UK.'

These findings were delivered as details of Tony Blair's support for the invasion of Iraq emerged in testimonies given by Alastair Campbell, Tony Blair's director of communications from 1994 until 2003, to the Chilcot inquiry in London. During five hours of questioning about the relationship between Washington and Downing Street in the months before the invasion, Campbell revealed that Blair had assured President Bush in a series of letters during 2002 that Britain would support a US-led war against Iraq. Campbell said that he stood by 'every single word' in the Blair government's now largely discredited dossier on Iraq's banned weapons programme,  adding that Britain should be 'proud' of its role in the overthrow of Saddam Hussein.

The openSecurity verdict: Though they may be criticised for being irrelevant to the facts on the ground in today's conflict zones, such inquiries have serious security implications and prompt us to question of whether, in the aftermath of the invasion, American and British citizens are safer. According to opponents of the war, Britain’s involvement in Iraq has served to intensify home-grown extremism.

The failure to find any weapons of mass destruction and the subsequent loss of civilian life in Iraq which, according to some estimates, stands above one million, has brought into question the entire reasoning for war and whether Britain in fact faced a security threat. These questions, together with the reasons for the continuation of the war in Afghanistan, will play a significant role in the British general elections, especially since Gordon Brown is now facing calls to give evidence at the Iraq inquiry in order to ascertain his role in the decision to go to war.

The findings of the Dutch inquiry are particularly significant given that there has been no other independent assessment of the legality of the war in Iraq. The report provides the authoritative view of seven commissioners including the former president of the Dutch Supreme Court, a former judge of the European court of justice, and two legal academics. The Dutch inquiry is therefore likely to influence analysis of events in Britain, particularly as the Chilcot inquiry lacks expertise on issues of legality.

Meanwhile, Alastair Campbell’s unapologetic performance at the Chilcot inquiry has come as no surprise. Campbell blamed the media for creating a frenzy around the notorious claim that Saddam could launch weapons within 45 minutes. He also dismissed the overwhelming evidence of government papers and his own diaries that he pressured spy chiefs to harden the ‘dodgy’ dossier on Iraqi weapons. Critics have slammed his performance with many pointing out inconsistencies in his testimony.

Influential as Campbell might be, he was only making the case for war, not the decisions. It is becoming increasingly clear that only the testimony of Tony Blair himself will truly matter. The former prime minister will need to justify his style of government, which, from the informal decision-making, to the secret memos, to the only sporadic consultation with cabinet ministers, been exposed in a damning light by the Chilcot inquiry. Blair will need to answer questions about the presentation of the case for war and in particular why he deemed the September 2002 dossier on Iraq's weapons was 'beyond doubt.' He will also need to explain his post-invasion plan and more importantly, explain the timing of his decision to support a military invasion by the US.

The outcome of the Chilcot inquiry is not yet clear, though many opponents of the war have were disappointed when it was announced that the inquiry had no power to apportion blame or establish criminal or civil liability. Although Sir John Chilcot has insisted the inquiry will not be a whitewash, it will do little to allay the despair of many given the outcome of previous limited inquiries (Hutton, Butler, ISC, FASC) which have not led to significant revelations of the British government’s misdemeanour or cover-up. There are also questions surrounding Sir John Chilcot himself and whether he can be a credible investigator of the flawed intelligence produced on Iraqi WMDs by MI6 between 2002 and 2003 given he acted as a 'staff counsellor' to MI6 between 1999 and 2004.

Afghan anger over alleged desecration of Quran

Villagers in southern Afghanistan have claimed that Afghan and NATO forces killed thirteen demonstrators and wounded another twenty after a group of people took to the streets to protest the alleged desecration of the Quran. Residents of Garmsir district in the turbulent Helmand province said on Tuesday that NATO-led forces raided a house in the area on Sunday and destroyed copies of the Quran in a local mosque.

The NATO led International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) has rejected the allegations saying Afghan forces backed by coalition troops had conducted an operation in the area on Sunday, but did not fire a shot or detain anyone. On Wednesday, some 100 to 200 Afghans were invited into a Marine combat outpost to hold a shura - a traditional Afghan meeting - with local Marine commanders to look into the allegations and ascertain the facts.

Elsewhere, the UN’s Mission for Afghanistan (UNAMA) reported a 14 percent rise in civilian deaths in 2009, up from 2,118 a year earlier. The rise makes 2009 the worst year for Afghan civilians since the US-led invasion in late 2001. UNAMA figures also showed a significant rise in the deaths of foreign forces stationed in the country.

Yemen kills ‘al-Qaeda cell leader’

The leader of a Yemeni al-Qaeda cell has been killed in clashes with security forces,  Yemen's state news agency claimed on Wednesday. The governor of the eastern province of Shabwa reported that Abdullah Mehdar was killed overnight by security forces after being besieged in a house where he had been hiding. Mehdar was reportedly the leader of an al-Qaeda cell in al-Houta region, 600km east of the capital Sanaa.

In a separate incident in Shabwa on Wednesday, two Yemeni soldiers were killed in an ambush. Earlier, the interior ministry reported that at least fifteen Houthi fighters were killed in clashes with security forces in their stronghold in northern Yemen. On Wednesday, Iranian and Omani officials said that Yemen should turn to dialogue to end a conflict with the Houthi fighters. The conflict between the government and the Houthis has intensified since August 2009 when Yemen's army launched Operation Scorched Earth in an attempt to crush Shia insurgents in the northern province of Saada.

Obama expected to ask $33billion more for wars

The Obama administration plans to ask the US Congress for an additional $33billion to continue operations in Afghanistan and Iraq, on top of a record request for $708 billion for the defense department next year. The Associated Press has learnt that the administration intends to use the money for counterinsurgency and counterterrorism operations. Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Admiral Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, are expected to testify to Congress about the budget and the administration’s Quadrennial defense policy review in February.

Top military commanders have already been briefed this week about the administration’s budget plans through to 2015. The four-year review has outlined six key mission areas with priority being given to the use of pilotless drones for surveillance and attack in Afghanistan and Pakistan. Obama’s request for more war spending is likely to receive support on Capitol Hill though it may expose a rift between the administration and Democrat leaders responding to the increasing tide of public opinion against the military campaign in Afghanistan.

Israel-Turkey diplomatic row deepens

Turkey has said it will recall its ambassador unless a row over his treatment by Israel's deputy foreign minister, Daniel Ayalon, is rapidly resolved. The revelation came after Ayalon issued a special statement on his treatment of the Turkish ambassador to Israel in which he attempted to diffuse the row by saying that he meant no disrespect and that in future he would behave ‘in a diplomatically acceptable manner.’

The diplomatic row broke out after Ayalon summoned the Turkish ambassador, Ahmet Oguz Celikkol, to rebuke him over a Turkish TV series that Israel considers offensive. In doing so, Ayalon made clear in televised remarks that he would not shake hands with the ambassador, ensured no Turkish flag was displayed on the table and made the envoy sit on a low couch, confronted by three Israeli officials in higher chairs, in order to ram home his displeasure with Ankara. On Wednesday, Ayalon conceded that whilst his protest against the attacks on Israel in Turkey remains valid, his manner ought to have been clarified. Turkey however has renewed its demand for a formal apology from Israel.

oD-wide classification

Country: 

United States

UK

Yemen

Turkey

Israel

Afghanistan

Netherlands

Topics: 

Conflict

International politics

A look at Afghanistan President Hamid Karzai's second slate of 16 nominees for his new Cabinet presented Saturday to replace candidates that parliament rejected. No names have yet been submitted to head the Ministry of Energy and Water or the Ministry of Telecommunications.

A look at Afghanistan President Hamid Karzai's second slate of 16 nominees for his new Cabinet presented Saturday to replace candidates that parliament rejected. No names have yet been submitted to head the Ministry of Energy and Water or the Ministry of Telecommunications.

Afghanistan’s second list of Cabinet nominees A look at Afghanistan President Hamid Karzai’s second slate of 16 nominees for his new Cabinet presented Saturday to replace candidates that parliament rejected. No names have yet been submitted to head the Ministry of Energy and Water or the Ministry of Telecommunications. ? Foreign Affairs ? Zalmay Rasoul ? Justice ? ... Read this article on Gaea Times at : Afghan president’s second slate of Cabinet picks after lawmakers rejected most on first list.

A look at Afghanistan President Hamid Karzai's second slate of 16 nominees for his new Cabinet presented Saturday to replace candidates that parliament rejected. No names have yet been submitted to head the Ministry of Energy and Water or the Ministry of Telecommunications.

I hate Spam with a passion, the electronic kind, that is; I don't think I've ever tasted the Hormel version. The spams I hate most are those from the same source that keep coming and coming and coming. In the past several months, I've been receiving literally hundreds of Spam e-mails from some degenerate in Romania, and according to SpamCop, it's all being sent from the Romanian ISP, netcomsolution.ro. I've alerted them dozens of times at the email listed on their contact page, but to no avail. So, I sent an email to the Romanian Ministry of Communications and Informational Society, asking for their help in shutting this jerk down. We'll see what comes of it.


2009 has been a year of changes, some good, some bad. On the other hand, some things didn't change at all. Here are just a few items that come to mind from the PACS world, not in any particular order:

1. AMICAS buys Emageon, and is in turn bought by venture cap firm Thoma Bravo. AMICAS comes out with a higher stock price than has been seen in years (although the vultures disagree with the valuation for some reason). They also gain access to a vendor-neutral database (joining several other companies), a cardiac package, and a large number of customers they hope to keep happy. Emageon was a pretty good system, as evidenced by the loyalty demonstrated by some of its users. There may be a few more elements that AMICAS could utilize before sending the Emageon GUI into the Ethernet for the last time. AMICAS Version 6, affectionately known as simply AMICAS PACS, is deployed, although it took quite a while to get from prototype to production. We hope to get ours sometime in early to mid 2010.
   
2. GE continues to slog away with the reimagination of Centricity. To my knowledge, and someone please correct me if I'm wrong, Centricity IW, the GUI purchased with the Dynamic Imaging acquisition, has yet to be completely and successfully deployed. We'll cross our fingers for 2010.
   
3. Agfa IMPAX is once again the bane of my existence. I'll give credit to Agfa for fixing some of it's problems, but many remain. I'm expecting an upgrade in early 2010. Frankly, if I were Agfa, I would concentrate all possible resources on IMPAX 7, and get it out the door. Assuming it actually works properly at that point, which is a major leap of faith for me right now.
   
4. Cloud computing/storage becomes the rage, with offerings from LifeImage and even DR Systems, amonst many others. To me, this is truly the future of PACS. I'm going to get around to writing a full article about the cloud concept sometime in 2010. (That's about the only resolution I'm making this year.)
   
5. Enterprise PACS, with universal worklists blanketing multiple sites and multiple systems, appear from several vendors, notably Intelerad, Carestream (with the boldly-named SuperPACS™), and eRad, amongst others.
   
6. Thin-client advanced imaging packages proliferate, with varying degrees of integration to PACS. Visage takes a unique approach, touting the ability of their system to serve as an overlay, if you will, to a legacy PACS.
   
7. Siemens revamps their IT offerings with the new syngo.x platform. Look for syngo.via advanced imaging, and syngo.plaza PACS in the near future.

The major medical story overall is, of course, the nearly-complete passage of the health-care bill by Congress. This abomination will certainly change health-care . . . for the worse. Yes, more people will be insured, at tremendous cost, with the eventual erosion of what once was the best system in the world. Please don't bother citing statistics that "prove" otherwise. Those "facts" are gerrymandered and twisted to make us look far worse than we really are. Infant mortality, for example, is "worse" in the U.S. because we count every single live birth in the denominator. Most other nations don't. Our cancer survival is significantly better than elsewhere. You are twice as likely to live through a myocardial infarction here than in many other countries.

Those celebrating the "historic" passage of the bill may be deluded into thinking they have done some good. Sadly, the real reason behind this legislation is power. The Democrats have just snatched 1/6 of the economy for themselves, and they won't let it go until death do them part. My trite little phrase, "If the government controls your health-care, it controls your LIFE," is quite apropos. Once the government steps in and manages, if not provides, health-care, the majority of the public will become dependent upon the ruling party, and will vote them back in again and again. Feel free to disagree, but you won't convince me otherwise.

Our Attorney General, along with those of several other states, is investigating the legality and constitutionality of the gift given to Nebraska as a bribe to Senator Ben Nelson, and they are also looking into the propriety of forcing everyone in the country to buy insurance. We can only hope that the laws of this nation will be visited upon our out-of-control Democratic Congress with the same level of vengeance they have shown to us. And make no mistake, 2010 will be the year of revenge of the average U.S. citizen upon the power-mad Democrats who would have our nation emulate the socialism of their European idols.

Terrorism has reared its ugly shorts in the form of the Crotch-Bomber. We knew we were in line for more terrorist attacks, and I'm really surprised we haven't seen one until now. The Administration is deeply involved in the finger-pointing as to who didn't do what to prevent this near-tragedy. Sadly, until the Democrats acknowledge the fact that we are at war with the terrorists, we are in danger. It was with some trepidation that I put my kids on planes this week to visit friends. We aren't safe, and I don't trust our government to make much progress in this regard.

Climate-Gate should have altered the global climate warming change debate, but that was not quite the case. Emails, ummmm, liberated (supposedly by a hacker, but possibly by someone on the inside) from the Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia in England show that the data has been manipulated, altered, corrupted, and otherwise trashed to come to the anthropomorphic conclusion desired by these left-leaning "scientists". But the fact that there is now no "fact" in existence concerning mankind's responsibility for global warming (which isn't really even happening) doesn't bother those who are convinced of our guilt. Talking with these folks is a very surreal experience. "The data was faked," I say. "But we're killing the planet and we need to all change our ways!" the accolytes cry. "But there's no proof of mankind's involvement," I reply. "But we're killing the planet and we need to all change our ways!" the accolytes cry. What can you do? The only truth in all of this is that yet again, this issue becomes the excuse for a power-grab, a path to more and more government control and domination. And no, I don't think the government is acting in anyone's best interest.

You'll be amused to know that I intend to buy a hybrid vehicle when the time comes to replace something in my family fleet. I'm anticipating gas going up to European levels ($8/gallon) before too much longer, and once that happens, prices on hybrids will also skyrocket. While I don't approve of gratuitous pollution, I'm not convinced that my SUV and I are personally responsible for the death of the polar bears (which isn't really happening, either).

I haven't even begun to touch the specter of a nuclear Iran, the quagmire in Afghanistan, and many other critical issues.

Much is bleak on this New Year's Eve, but there is much promise as well. We can either look forward to the future and hope for change (not the hope and change delivered by Washington so far, thanks) or we can wallow in despair and anger over what is being done against us by our enemies, not to mention to us, supposedly for our own good. Best, of course, to choose life, hope, and optimism. 2010 will bring good things for the country and the world. We hope.

Maybe 2010 will deliver a working version of Centricity IW, and a more functional IMPAX 6.5. I can dream, can't I?

I'll be back next year, much to the chagrin of some of you, and perhaps the amusement of one or two of you.

And with that, I wish you all a most happy and healthy holiday! Don't drink and drive, by the way. Let me know if you need a cab, and I'll call one for you. Happy New Year, everyone!

Tory attack flyers backfire

Conservative MPs have upset many Montrealers with their scurrilous attack ads, mailed to people with Jewish-sounding names in ridings with significant numbers of Jewish voters.

There is much that is abhorrent about the tactic itself and the content. Many of those who received the flyer are furious that the Conservatives assume, falsely, that Canadian Jews base their vote on support for Israel, over and above the community members’ long-standing preoccupation with social justice, health care, the environment and a host of other issues.

While most Montreal Jews do support the federal Liberals, for a variety of historical and policy reasons, they do not vote as a bloc. Even more egregious are the statements in the flyer, which Mount Royal MP Irwin Cotler has denounced as “close to hate speech.” The pamphlet accuses the Liberals of “willingly participating in the overly anti-Semitic Durban I – the human rights conference in South Africa that Cotler attended in 2001 along with a Canadian delegations. In fact, Cotler, along with Israeli government encouragement, showed courage and leadership by staying on, along with representatives of major Jewish organizations, in an effort to combat and bear witness to what turned into an anti-Israel and anti-Semitic hate fest. The flyer also falsely accuses the Liberals of being opposed to “defunding Hamas” and asking that Hezbollah be delisted as a terrorist organization. In fact, the Liberals in 2002 took the lead in branding the two Islamist groups as terrorist organizations, making financial support illegal.

If the Conservatives think they will make inroads with Montreal voters with these untruths and sleazy tactics, they are sadly mistaken.

Spectre of Vietnam looms in Afganistan

US President Barack Obama’s announcement of a 30,000-soldier surge to counter the Taliban insurgency in Afghanistan, bringing to 100,000 the United States’ military commitment to the region, is bound to fail. The parallels with Vietnam are only too obvious. The only possible positive thing we can foresee at this point is that the boost may take some of the heat off Canada’s 3,000-troop Afghanistan contingent, which is to end its combat role in 2011.

On paper, one can wonder how it is that the Taliban, with an estimated force of about 15,000 poorly armed soldiers, can manage to hold out against a coalition of 43 nations equipped with the most sophisticated weaponry and communications capability. The short answer is that, much as in Vietnam, there is a fierce and ingrained determination among the various Afghan peoples to reject foreign interference in their affairs, going back to the British withdrawal more than a century ago and up to the more recent and disastrous attempt by Russian forces to sustain the unpopular Communist regime. The rugged mountainous terrain is an ideal staging ground and hiding place for insurgents. That is among the reasons why US troops failed to capture Osama bin Laden in the Tora Bora area in December 2001.

In Vietnam, US and allied forces were propping up a hated and corrupt regime. Military expert Anthony Cordesman recently told the Washington Post that the regime of Hamid Karzai is “a grossly over-centralized government that is corrupt, is often a tool of power brokers and narco-­traffickers, and lacks basic capacity in virtually every ministry.”

The ballot stuffing that was a feature of Karzai’s recent re-election is but a shadow of the deeper problem. The Afghan version of what was called the “Vietnamization” in the early 1970s is training more Afghan soldiers and police. That is hardly reassuring to Afghanis who know that a uniform there is carte blanche for extortion and abuse. The arrival of 30,000 more Americans can only mean more riches for the Afghani elite whose assistance and cooperation will be needed to provide the infrastructure necessary for their health, safety and security. Let us not forget how deep is the cultural gap that separates that country from our liberal democratic values. Take women’s rights. The recent compromise on family law, after the international outcry over the initial draft in which married women could not refuse sex with their husbands, is this: A husband may deny food to his spouse, even until death, for refusing to have sex with her husband. A wife is now allowed to work outside the home, but only with her husband’s permission.

Thomas Friedman, the respected New York Times columnist, warns that the idea the US and its allies can transform Afghanistan is problematic at best, and deepening the commitment with limited prospects of anything like a victory is “a prescription for disaster.” We say prepare now for some kind of compromise by encouraging the Afghan regime to reach out to the insurgents. Afghanistan will not in our lifetimes adopt our value system. The best we can hope for is to lay the groundwork for building schools, training teachers, doctors, nurses, and engineers and inculcating the essence of our traditions and the rule of law to a new educated elite. Maybe a decent life will be possible in at least parts of the country, justifying to some degree the sacrifice of more than 132 Canadian soldiers since 2002. Ultimately, and sooner than some may think, it will be up to the Afghans to fashion the framework of their society.

Tremblay, Bergeron step up to the plate

While only 39 per cent of eligible voters turned out for last month’s municipal elections, Montrealers voted wisely in re-electing Mayor Gérald Tremblay, but with a reduced majority.

The alleged scandals in construction and water-meter contracts had a lot to do with it, but voters appeared to agree that the mayor himself was not involved. They seemed to say, however, that he should have been more vigilant. With that in mind, he has added the chair of the executive committee and the role of Ville Marie borough mayor to his responsibilities.

Voters also indicated a desire for change by choosing Richard Bergeron’s Projet Montreal to run Plateau Mont Royal borough, and electing to the central city council former Gazette investigative reporter Alexander Norris. Mayor Tremblay has acknowledged this important breakthrough by giving Bergeron responsibility for urban planning. This is an opportunity for him and his party to show whether they have what it takes to persuade Montrealers in four years that they should be in charge.

Richard Holbrooke knows how to work a room. Last night, he volleyed with a fairly tough audience during an event on Afghanistan at the Council on Foreign Relations.

One noteworthy part of the event was when Holbrooke, to the clear chagrin of moderator Michael Gordon, drained almost 10 minutes off of the clock by having 17 separate members of his office staff each stand and give personal introductions.

"I've never seen someone eat up time like that. He's the master," said one attendee.

Now, maybe Holbrooke was just trying to get his staffers some much-deserved recognition and demonstrate (at length) the different issues his office has to deal with. We'll give him the benefit of the doubt and help him achieve that goal. Here are the staffers who rose to the occasion, in order of their presentation:

Vikram Singh (DOD) - "I work on the issues of the defense advisor and on the very difficult issue of communications."

Rami Shy (Treasury) - "I'm working on illicit finance issues, both by disrupting illicit finance loopholes and by creating an environment not conducive to illicit financing in Afghanistan and Pakistan."

Vali Nasr (Tufts) - "I'm a senior advisor to Ambassador Holbrooke on Pakistan issues."

Otto Gonzales (Ag) - "I'm the senior advisor for Agriculture from the U.S. Department of Agriculture. We're focusing on working with USAID and the U.S. military on improving agriculture sector jobs and incomes, and improving Afghans' confidence in their government, particularly their ministry of agriculture."

Dan Feldman (NSN) - "I'm one of two deputies to Ambassador Holbrooke. Among other things, I help to coordinate a small team focusing just on international engagement and diplomatic initiatives, in part to help make donor coordination work. I also help to oversee detainee, human rights, and other issues."

Beth Dunford (USAID) - "I work on development and assistance issue in Afghanistan and Pakistan."

Rina Amiri (U.N.) - "I'm senior advisor on Afghanistan and my primary area of focus is the political developments in Afghanistan."

JoAnne Arzt (State) - "I work on deploying the civilians that are going to the increase in Afghanistan."

Ashley Bommer (Perseus) - "I do his trips to the region and I also work on communications issues, as well as our new mobile products that we are introducing, with the mobile banking, mobile payments to the police, telemedicine, and our SMS program in Afghanistan and Pakistan."

Derek Hogan (State) "I focus on governance ... We're trying to help the Afghan government become more visible and more accountable and responsive to the needs particularly of the subnational groups."

(At this point, Gordon tries to cut off the roll call to get to audience questions but Holbrooke insists, "Let them finish."

Tim List (DHS) - "Mainly I work on border management, cross-border, and customs issues."

Rosemarie Pauli (Heinz) - "I'm the chief of staff. I do whatever needs to be done."

Chris Reimann (FBI) - "I'm the police advisor."

Matt Stiglitz (DOJ) - "Working on rule of law, corruption, and other related issues."

Lt. Col. Brian Lanson (JCS) - "I work security issues."

Mary Beth Goodman (State) - "Covering economic and energy issues for Afghanistan and Pakistan."

Paul Jones (State) - "Deputy to Ambassador Holbrooke and deputy assistant secretary of state for Afghanistan and Pakistan."

"I think that was well worth doing," said Gordon. "And now we're going to try to squeeze in a few questions."

It appears that Holbrooke has used this tactic before.

• New Chinooks expected to be deployed in 2013
• WW2 RAF bomber base at Cottesmore to be closed

The government today bowed to pressure from defence chiefs by providing a £1bn plus boost for frontline equipment, paid for mainly by cuts in the number of aircraft, the loss of an RAF bomber base and thousands of jobs.

In the first steps in what is expected to be a more radical shakeup in military expenditure, Bob Ainsworth, the defence secretary, announced the purchase of 22 new US Chinook helicopters – though they will not be deployed until 2013 at the earliest – and a US C17 heavy lift transport aircraft.

The Ministry of Defence has also ordered equipment vital in countering the Taliban-led insurgency in Afghanistan, including double the number of Reaper unmanned drones, improving what it called the "dismounted close combat" package – better body armour and night vision goggles – and better communications systems for special forces.

Ainsworth told MPs that the government needed "to make hard decisions about what we can stop doing and how we can bear down on other costs".

Air Chief Marshal Sir Jock Stirrup, chief of the defence staff, said: "We have all known for some time that living within our means while making improvements to the most critical areas of capability would involve difficult and unwelcome choices."

The £900m bill will be paid for by cuts elsewhere in the defence budget. RAF Cottesmore in Rutland, a large bomber base in the second world war, will close. One Harrier squadron will be lost and the rest will move to nearby RAf Wittering.

Further cuts in the number of Harrier and Tornado jets will await next year's defence review, Ainsworth said. This will leave the armed forces with two types of fast jets – the Eurofighter/Typhoon, now a multi-role aircraft, and the Joint Strike Fighter, JSF. The plan is to buy US-made JSF aircraft for the proposed two large aircraft carriers and as a ground-based multi-role aircraft. However, the project, like the Eurofighter beforehand, has been delayed and subjected to cost overruns.

Nimrod MR2 maritime reconnaissance aircraft will be withdrawn from service by March next year, a year early, and the deployment of its successor, the Nimrod MRA4, will be delayed. The aircraft are based at RAF Kinloss in Scotland.

Older Lynx and Merlin helicopters will be withdrawn sooner than planned as will a navy survey ship and a minehunter. Ainsworth also told MPs that "some aspects of army training" will be cut.

In addition, the Treasury has agreed to give the MoD an extra £280m from the contingency reserve. The money will be spent on new armoured vehicles and more than 400 hand led detectors to help combat the threat from improvised explosive devices (IEDs) in Afghanistan.

The size of the armed forces will be cut by 2,500 spread across the three services, mainly by slowing down recruitment, according to defence officials. A further 7,000 civilian jobs in the MoD are also under threat.

The RAF now has 48 Chinooks, 10 of which were bought from Boeing in the late 1990s which could not fly because of technical problems the MoD could not solve. Hundreds of millions of pounds have been spent making them usable in Afghanistan where the first two are being deployed. The rest will be deployed next year.

Ten of the 22 new Chinooks will be deployable by 2013 and the remainder by 2016, the RAF said today.

Liam Fox, the shadow defence secretary, said: "The new Chinook helicopters are of course welcome, but this decision would not have been necessary if the prime minister had not, against all advice, cut £1.4bn from the helicopter programme in 2004."

Fox added: "Gordon Brown told us in parliament … that the Treasury reserve is covering the cost of the war in Afghanistan. But today we see that the government is trying to fight a war from the core defence budget."

The Liberal Democrat defence spokesman, Neil Harvey, told Ainsworth: "The core defence budget has been creaking under the strain of these engagements ever since they began. You have tried to put off painful decisions until after the general election, but today harsh reality has caught up."