KARZAI, BUSH'S MAN IN KABUL, REFUSES TO SACK "INDEPENDENT" ELECTION COMMISSION

Hamid Karzai, Bush's embattled "man in Kabul," refuses to fire any of his appointed cronies staffing the Afghan "Independent Election Commission," even though his rival for the presidency, Dr. Abdullah Abdullah has called for the sacking of the commission's president.

Jon Boone reports today for the guardian.co.uk on Abdullah's demands.

"Hamid Karzai's challenger in next month's presidential election run-off has demanded that the head of Afghanistan's election commission be sacked before the end of the month as one of a number of "conditions" for participating in the vote.

"Abdullah Abdullah refused to say what would happen if his demands were not met by 31 October, but insisted that the chairman of the so-called Independent Election Commission (IEC), Azizullah Ludin, must step down from an organisation Abdullah accused of "bias, incompetence and widespread corruption"."

Karzai however is dismissive of Abdullah's claims that the election commission is really in the pocket of Karzai and his cronies. Even though many observers agree with Abdullah that it will be difficult if not impossible to achieve a fair election with the Independent Election Commission still in place, Karzai probably will not budge.

Reports Boone:

"Karzai immediately rejected Abdullah's demands. "Ministers and officials which Abdullah wants sacked or replaced have not done anything illegal, that is why we cannot sack or replace them," the president said in a statement. "In this short period of time, we cannot make these changes – this will not be for the benefit of the country and will harm the country.""

BIDEN HAVING DRUNK BUSH'S KOOL-AID DEFENDS WAR IN AFGHANISTAN AS JUSTIFIED AND NECESSARY

Why is it that so many Washington insiders think that American wars are "justified" and "worth" the casualties? All this sounds so much like Bush-speak. Now we have VP Biden saying the same rubbish about the war in Afghanistan.

Mark Tran writes on The Guardian's web page today:

"Speaking in the deadliest month for British troops since the US-led invasion in 2001, Biden insisted that the current offensive against the Taliban in Helmand province was worth the effort and was a "prerequisite" to get the country ready for presidential elections next month.

"In an interview with BBC Radio 4's Today programme Biden said: "In terms of the national interests of Great Britain and the national interests of the United States and Europe, it is worth the effort we are making and the sacrifice that is being felt and more will come.""

No war is worth the lives of any soldiers or of any civilians. This applies to the war in Afghanistan. There is no such thing as a "justified" war. Soldiers never solve anything because, at the root of all wars, is a political problem that statesmen just don't want to solve diplomatically.

Biden is in effect saying that U.S. and British soldiers must first kill the Taliban in order to get Afghanistan ready for elections. This is outrageous bull and pure sophistry. The Taliban are Afghanis, they know their own country, they have their own social system. Foreign armies of the U.S. and Britain are never going to defeat them or make them change their views. So Biden would have Afghani villagers killed, members of the Pashtun tribe eliminated, women and children bombed, all in the cause of preparing for Karzai's re-election.

Reports Tran:

"With the British government under increasing political pressure as casualties mount, Biden restated the case for Nato's presence in Afghanistan.

""This is the place from which the attacks of 9/11 and all those attacks in Europe that came from al-Qaida have flowed – between Afghanistan and Pakistan … It is a place that, if it doesn't get straightened out, will continue to wreak havoc on Europe and the United States.""

Biden wants to straighten out 20-year Afghani villagers who think they are waging a holy jihad in trying to kill American and British troops. Frankly, I don't see members of the Taliban boarding an airplane in Kabul and flying to London or New York to carry out some mayhem or havoc on Europe or the U.S.

Everything that Biden said about justifying this foolish war seems wrong and short-sighted. And this is a guy who opposed Bush's bellicose foreign policy. Now he himself has come under the spell of defending a misguided war.

U.S. POLICY TOWARDS CUBA MAKES NO SENSE

The U.S. policy towards Cuba is a farce, and it has been a joke ever since JFK imposed an embargo on trade with Cuba. The New America Foundation sponsored a seminar on U.S. policy towards Cuba and C-SPAN carried the program yesterday.

Consider that the U.S. treats the government of Afghanistan as an ally, notwithstanding a new Afghani law that Hamid Karzai signed last week, plainly manifesting prejudice against women. The law among other things mandates that a woman be available for sex with her husband every fourth day. Furthermore, the law prohibits a woman leaving her house at any time unless she has permission of her husband or father. In other words, in Afghanistan, women are basically property, having no rights and no self-determination. Afghanistan's society thus illustrates medieval sexism at its worst. Yet the U.S. under Obama is prepared to send up to 20,000 U.S. troops there in the next few months to back up Karzai's government.

So why has Cuba been singled out for American wrath? What has Cuba done to merit 50 years of economic boycott? Americans don't like Fidel or his brother Raul. As a result, American policy has impoverished the lives of ordinary Cubans. The U.S. government is unhappy that the Castros don't toe the American line.

Bottom line: the U.S. punishes Cuba for not believing in free enterprise and unbridled capitalism and tries to force ordinary Cubans to renounce the Castro brothers. How's that for diplomacy?

END BLOODY WAR IN AFGHANISTAN

Today's The New York Times carries a report by Adam B. Ellick of a U.S. raid against a home in a small village on the border of Afghanistan and Pakistan that killed three civilians and left a four-year old bitten by an attack dog.

Writes Ellick :

"A deadly United States military raid on a house near Afghanistan’s border with Pakistan became a new source of tension on Thursday, with the Americans calling it a successful counterterrorism strike and the Afghans saying it left three innocent civilians dead and two wounded, including a 4-year-old boy bitten by an attack dog.

"The raid took place on Wednesday in the village of Kundi, in Khost Province. American military leaders and Afghan officials said they were investigating the conflicting accounts of what happened. But President Hamid Karzai, who has grown increasingly impatient with the American-led war effort against the Taliban insurgency, condemned the raid in front of government leaders and foreign diplomats, saying that “entering by force to our people’s houses is against the government of Afghanistan.”"

This latest American raid is a good example of the principle that nations never "win" wars with guns and tanks. Why the U.S. thinks that military force will "win" anything in Afghanistan is beyond rational minds. Here we see a commando raid that the U.S. military terms as "successful," yet it has left a whole village angry and hostile towards Americans and the American military effort.

Ellick reports:

"In Khost, American-led forces blasted the gate of the house early on Wednesday, then fatally shot the family’s father and mother and a male relative, according to Tahir Khan Sabry, deputy governor of the province. Their relationship with the wounded boy was unclear, and another woman was also bitten. Mr. Sabry described all the victims as noncombatant civilians.

"The American military said that the raid led to the detention of an operative of Al Qaeda and that those killed were armed and showing “hostile intent.” Grenades, AK-47s, pistols and a shotgun were confiscated, American officials said."

The raid in Khost kills a family's father and mother as well as another relative, and what for? So that the U.S. army can say that it detained an "Al Qaeda operative"? For all the world knows, this "operative" probably was a civilian like the others who happened to express anger and outrage at the American occupation.

And even if the captured man was really connected to Al Qaeda, was it worth it for the Americans to kill a family to capture this guy? My answer is NO. The killing of the father and mother has forever destroyed what little sympathy there might have been in that Khost village and will probably result in 20 other males joining Al Qaeda to take revenge against the United States.

AFGHANISTAN EXECUTES 15 BY SHOOTING THEM

Afghanistan has resumed imposing the death penalty. The BBC reports that Hamid Karzai's government executed 15 people on last Sunday evening.

"Fifteen people in Afghanistan have been put to death for crimes including murder, government officials say.

"They say that the firing squad deaths are the second confirmed executions since the fall of the Taleban in 2001.

"Officials say the 15 were shot at Afghanistan's largest prison Pul-e-Charkhi. The last such executions were in April 2004. "

And I heard the BBC Radio report within the past several hours that Karzai has defended these executions by saying that other nations too have and impose the death penalty, obviously referring to the practice in many states in the U.S.

Here we see the cruelty of Karzai. Just because other states impose the cruel and inhumane penalty is no excuse for Karzai and Afghanistan to take a person's life. Just as I oppose Iraq as well as any other state, including the United States, executing prisoners, no matter how heinous their crime, so I vehemently oppose Karzai in this barbaric act.

KARZAI MEETS WITH AHMADINEJAD IN KABUL

Today there was a meeting between President Karzai of Afghanistan and President Ahmadinejad of Iran. Bush's saying he needs to have a heart to heart with Karzai about Iran's intentions has thankfully been dismissed.

Genuine thanks to Karzai for rejecting Bush/Cheney's hard line towards the Iranians. After so much bluster from Bush on the evil regime in Teheran and how the Iranian people should overthrow their government, Karzai's meeting with Ahmadinejad goes a long way to defuse the drums of war incessantly generated by Washington.


Robert Tait in The Guardian from London describes the meeting:

"Iran's president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, audaciously signalled his determination to counter US global power today by meeting his Afghan counterpart, Hamid Karzai, in open defiance of Washington's wishes.


"Mr Ahmadinejad led a high-ranking Iranian delegation to Kabul in a demonstration of growing Iranian influence in Afghanistan, where the US, Britain and other western powers are engaged in a bitter struggle with the Taliban.


"The visit - Mr Ahmadinejad's first to Afghanistan - was tailor-made to provoke alarm within the Bush administration, which accuses Tehran of destabilising its efforts while claiming that the Taliban is being armed with Iranian weapons. Iran, which is mainly Shia, denies helping the Taliban, whose puritanical Sunni ideology it has condemned."

The last sentence is illuminating. The U.S. claim made by Bush/Cheney is that Iran is arming all of the "enemies" of the United States, including the Taliban in Afghanistan. This claim is most ridiculous and ludicrous on its very face. Iran is mostly Shia muslim. The Taliban are fanatical Sunnis. Are we to believe that Iran is sending arms and aid to a group that tries to kill Shias as a matter of religious doctrine?

Writes Tait:

"Addressing a joint White House press conference last week, Mr Bush said: "I would be very cautious about whether or not the Iranian influence in Afghanistan is a positive force." Mr Karzai flatly contradicted him by describing Iran as "a helper and a solution."

"Departing from Tehran's Mehrabad airport, Mr Ahmadinejad paved the way to further deepen the disagreement by saying today's talks would cover arrangements for establishing Afghanistan's security and independence.


"Describing Iran and Afghanistan as "two brother nations with common interests, cultures and histories", he told reporters: "The present condition of the region demands more exchange and negotiations between Tehran and Kabul. In this trip economic cooperation, especially over Iran's participation in Afghan development plans, will be discussed.""

KARZAI SAYS IRAN HELPS AFGHANISTAN, BUSH SAYS IRAN IS THE ENEMY

Bush and Karzai held a joint news conference yesterday. Karzai had told CNN that the Iranians were helpful to his Afghan government. Bush said they were not forces for good. Who should we believe?

Karzai, of course. Iran is Afghanistan's western neighbor. Many Afghans have relatives in Iran and frequently cross back and forth for business and family. Furthermore, many Afghans speak Farsi.

Consider that the Iranians helped defeat the Taliban in Afghanistan after the U.S. invasion in 2002. Taliban are not favorites of Iran and the Persians. Taliban are Sunni Muslims, the Iranians are mostly Shiites. Iran is not looking to have a hotbed of Sunni Taliban radicals on its eastern frontier.

Bush says Iran is a enemy. Karzai says Iran is a friend. Imagine the destabilization of Afghanistan if Bush attacked Iran.

We know Bush is a myopic bully, but would he really be that reckless?

AMERICAN GENERAL IN AFGHANISTAN NICKNAMED "BOMBER MC NEILL"

More on the the bombardment of a village in Afghanistan in which many civilians were killed on Friday. See my previous post on this story earlier today. Jason Burke has a further story in The Guardian, dated Sunday July 1, 2007, in which he reports that U.S. air strikes and bombs killed up to 80 people in the Afghan village in Helmand province. After a NATO force was attacked and ambushed by Taliban fighters, commander of NATO forces, U.S. General Dan McNeill, who is reported to be enamored of "air power," sent out bombers and war planes to bomb the village where the Taliban took refuge.

Writes Jason Burke:

"The bombardment, which witnesses said lasted up to three hours, in the Gereshk district late on Friday followed an attempted ambush by the Taliban on a joint US-Afghan military convoy. According to Mohammad Hussein, the provincial police chief, the militants fled into a nearby village for cover. Planes then targeted the village of Hyderabad. Mohammad Khan, a resident of the village, said seven members of his family, including his brother and five of his brother's children, were killed. . ."

"In Afghanistan, the civilian deaths caused by US and NATO-led troops have infuriated local people and prompted President Hamid Karzai to publicly condemn foreign forces for careless 'use of extreme force' and for viewing Afghan lives as 'cheap'. The increasingly fragile President has urged restraint and better co-ordination of military operations with the Afghan government, while also blaming the Taliban for using civilians as human shields.


"Ban Ki-Moon, the United Nations Secretary-General, raised the issue of civilian casualties on a four-hour visit to Afghanistan on Friday on which he met the senior NATO commander there, the American General Dan McNeill.

"Senior British soldiers have previously expressed concerns that McNeill, who took command of the 32,000 NATO troops in Afghanistan only recently, was 'a fan' of the massive use of air power to defeat insurgents and that his favoured tactics could be counter-productive.


"'Every civilian dead means five new Taliban,' said one British officer who has recently returned from Helmand. 'It's a tough call when the enemy are hiding in villages, but you have to be very, very careful,' he added.

Note the following sentence in Jason Burke's article:

"The American general has been dubbed 'Bomber McNeill' by his critics."

Because of incidents like the above, my solution is simple. Ban all war planes, do away with the American squadrons, retire everyone in the Air Force. Air planes must be restricted to peaceful purposes, such as commercial aviation. No one should be allowed to shoot a cannon from an air plane, or drop a bomb.

U..S. CLAIMS IT KILLS INSURGENTS - MOST ARE REALLY ONLY CIVILIANS

Pamela Constable writes for the Washington Post Foreign Service that Afghan President Hamid Karzai is fed up with the number of Afghan civilian casualties resulting from U.S. forces waging their counter-insurgency campaign in Afghanistan.

Every time the U.S. reports so many insurgents or Taliban killed, I wonder how many civilians this number includes. As it turns out, a large number of the killed and wounded are innocent civilians. It seems that the U.S. military puts out an enemy casualty number to buttress George Bush and his deceptive campaign to convince Americans that he is making progress whether in Afghanistan or Iraq. The number of casualties is therefore always suspect.

If this is what the War on Terror means - killing innocent Afghan women, children, babies - then I say end this Reign of Terror. Winning hearts and minds cannot be done with bombs and war planes. We need a new strategy, a new direction, a new president.