Afghan War after Troops Increase

April 1, 2010

By Padmini Arhant

The latest on Afghan war after adding more troops to the nine-year-old battle, a contentious debate that was dominant last year.

Associated Press – Sunday, March 28, 2010.

By Sebastian Abbot – Thank you.

“Troop deaths rise in Afghanistan – Numbers soaring as U.S. adds soldiers

Kabul – The number of U.S. troops killed in Afghanistan has roughly doubled in the first three months of 2010 compared to the same period last year as Washington has added tens of thousands of additional soldiers to reverse the Taliban’s momentum.

Those deaths have been accompanied by a dramatic spike in the number of wounded, with injuries more than tripling in the first two months of the year and trending in the same direction based on the latest available data for March.

U.S. officials have warned that casualties are likely to rise further as the Pentagon completes its deployment of 30,000 additional troops to Afghanistan and sets its sight on the Taliban’s home base of Kandahar province, where a major operation is expected in the coming months.

“We must steel ourselves, no matter how successful we are on any given day, for harder days yet to come,” Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said at a briefing last month.

In total, 57 U.S. soldiers were killed here during the first two months of 2010 compared with 28 in January and February of last year, an increase of more than 100 percent, according to Pentagon figures compiled by the Associated Press.

At least 20 American service members have been killed so far in March.

The steady rise in combat deaths has generated less public reaction in the United States than the spike in casualties in the summer and fall, which undermined public support in the United States for the mission here.

Fighting typically tapers off in Afghanistan during the winter but peaks in the summer.”


War Strategy Assessment – By Padmini Arhant

The troops increase to Afghanistan was a national debate last year with mixed reaction from all sources.

It’s important to emphasize that there wasn’t an overwhelming public support to the additional troops deployment in Afghanistan.

There were many reasons for the lack luster response.

Among them, the most relevant ones being:

The U.S. and allies’ nomination of President Hamid Karzai as the head of the government for second term defied the Afghan people’s will.

Notwithstanding, the international outrage on the fraudulent general election that led to the opponent, DR. Abdullah Abdullah’s withdrawal from the election.

Another factor is the U.S. occupancy in Afghanistan approaching a decade and the constantly changing ‘purpose’ behind the mission remains intriguing until now.

After much deliberation, President Barack Obama decided to approve the request from the defense high command and argued, “It’s not an easy decision to do so.”

Indeed, pledging the troops’ lives to succeed in the targeted goals is never a simple action.

However, a prolonged war provides enough evidence to consider winding up the operation or at least minimize the troop level by supplementing with diplomacy and peaceful negotiations.

Peace and diplomacy could have prevailed with a democratically elected government. It was thwarted by the U.S. endorsement of an unpopular candidate.

Further, the explanation for more troops involved the U.S and NATO efforts to restore political stability in Afghanistan and terminate the Taliban/Al-Qaida activities.

The irony is, the Afghanistan political situation under the U.S. backed Karzai government shows no improvement in governance, despite the incumbent Afghan President being the U.S. foreign policy designates’ choice.

Similarly, the shift in the U.S. and Afghan government’s strategy towards Taliban insurgents appears to be a new approach to win the militants on their side with cash payments and abandoning the poppy fields eradication – the main source of income for the Taliban forces.

An action that is widely criticized by the human rights groups against narcotics in Afghanistan.

As predicted, the tension between the Karzai government and the U.S. administration has surfaced confirming the mistrust in the relationship.

While the political stalemate between the authorities in Kabul and Washington persists, the mounting U.S. casualties in the Afghan war cannot be ignored.

Troop withdrawal from Afghanistan and Iraq is no longer a choice but an immediate requirement to end the procrastinated occupation in foreign lands.

Divestment from wars to social and economic development in these regions must begin to reflect the sincere commitment to bring hope and opportunity in a society deprived of normal existence for decades.

Substituting the combat troops with Peace Corps eliminates the tragic loss of lives on all sides.

In addition, the peaceful atmosphere would deter terror recruitment and foster an environment for the youth as well as others to build their nations towards a positive direction.

Now is the time for the U.S. authorities in the White House, Pentagon and the State department to relinquish failed policies that is proved a liability claiming precious lives and contributing to the rising deficit.

War leads to grief, revenge and destruction.

Whereas, peace is an eternal bliss.

I convey my condolences to the families of the fallen heroes and pray for the early recovery of the wounded brave hearts.

Your sacrifice makes freedom possible for all.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

The Mighty Deception – War and Politics

December 9, 2009

By Padmini Arhant

The West Point address delivered by President Barack Obama on the troops surge resonate the message from the former President George W. Bush then amassing support for troop expansion in Iraq. Therefore, it is no surprise and not hard to figure out the source providing the material.

Since invasion, Afghan war is presented as the war of ‘necessity’ against the Iraq war of ‘choice.’ Indisputably, on September 11, 2001 there were over three thousand lives mercilessly and willfully murdered through pre-meditated, callous act apparently by the terror organization Al-Qaida but seemingly masterminded by the alleged real terror, the Cabal wreaking havoc on the planet thus far.

What has not been acknowledged until date is the deliberate negligence of the forewarnings and intelligence reports raising red flag on the imminent threat in American soil prior to the September 11 attack with no one being brought to justice including Osama Bin Laden. Any trials that have been conducted up until now are focused on the terrorists carrying out the heinous crime without even considering probing the conspirators in the modus operandi signifying the entire show is nothing but a charade.

Let the world not forget that the White House under President George W. Bush personally ensured the safe departure of Osama Bin Laden’s immediate and extended family members upon the terror striking the WTC and other U.S. interests during 9/11. It’s well documented and available on the video.

Despite numerous testimonials and facts presented ‘in your face’ manner, the powerful entities reining in on democracy through mass media, columnists representing the ‘reputable’ news organizations and the legislative body continue to suppress the truth behind the worst atrocity ever to take place on this planet. Plainly spoken, the justice system hijacked presumably by the secret society, the illuminati.

In fact, what these spokespersons and the silent spectators do not realize is, masquerading sinister depicts complicity to the diabolicalness evidenced in the September 11 attack. Furthermore, the cynical majority against the concerned minority share the moral and ethical degradation of the criminal epicenter.

Regardless, justice will be served in the ‘Land of the Free, Home of the Brave,’ the United States, by bringing all the perpetrators responsible for the cold blooded murder of their own citizens and scores of other innocent lives in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan.

The predecessors of this nation, President Dwight Eisenhower and President John F. Kennedy have courageously exposed the secret society activities and alerted the American public to come forward and challenge the unconstitutional dominance in all affairs particularly the perpetual warfare. Both Presidents have expressed their serious concerns against the undemocratic events clichéd in the past eight years with simultaneous wars, economic and energy crises eventually contributing to the unsustainable environmental disaster.

The operators’ strategy explicitly detailed by the various reliable sources viz. “the insiders,” is indeed an artful masterpiece. It’s based on creating a monumental catastrophe such as September 11,2001 followed by a reaction in the form of ‘Islamaphobia’ and solutions derived through waging endless wars in regions unconquerable leading to random imprisonments at Guantanamo Bay, Bagram and Abu Ghraib prisons,

Notwithstanding the abhorrent techniques such as water boarding, torture, extraordinary renditions, kidnapping of targeted civilians exclusively of Muslim descent from foreign locations as potential suspects, denial of Habeas corpus cited in the case U.S. vs. Sami Al Arian…

The Virginia federal prosecutor along with the U.S. Justice department under Atty. General John Ashcroft relentlessly pursued the South Florida University Professor Sam Al Arian, the Islamophobia victim after being acquitted by the jury on all twenty accounts clawed back into the vicious dragnet during the dark ages of the notorious Bush–Cheney administration.

The American professor is still a political prisoner having been subject to the draconian policies and the family put through a horrendous ordeal from the blatant discriminatory practices against the Muslim population to conceal the organizational vile activities in the name of democracy.

If the United States judicial system is based upon the constitution protecting every citizen whether native or naturalized, then the Professor Sam Al Arian deemed not guilty by the jury in the first trial should be acquitted of all politically motivated false charges including the deportation order and released immediately for reunion with his family.

Other extremes such as hiring private contractors like the infamous ‘Blackwater,’aka Xe Services LLC not only abusing our own service members especially the female personnel but also the civilian population in the occupied regions as noted in Iraq, Afghanistan and other war zones around the world.

In terms of constitutional breach against the citizens of the United States, the hyperbolic color-coded security threat constantly surfaced throughout the Bush-Cheney era and helped the administration win the second term in the national elections to pursue extended global terror.

The ‘war on terror’ enabled the establishment of the Patriot Act that led to the unlawful apprehension, humiliation and harassment of South East Asians and Middle Eastern travelers at the U.S. airports and most notably FISA, the illegal wiretapping otherwise eavesdropping on private citizens’ personal communications under the pretext of national security which essentially is the ‘Cabals’ insecurity.

Under the Obama administration, the Bush-Cheney Patriot Act is followed through to confirm the legitimacy of the tactically implemented ‘war on terror,’ in spite of the imminent ‘change’ promised on the campaign trail.

Unfortunately, again similar policy embraced now to prolong the military occupation in Afghanistan with a possibility to strike Iran under the exaggerated nuclear threat from the Islamic Republic incapable of producing the nuclear weapons required to challenge the nuclear-armed Israel and the strongest ally, the United States.

Given the pre-existing propaganda about “Iran positioned to attack Israel resulting in a nuclear holocaust anytime now,” the alarming information circulated to substantiate the devious plans behind the World War III.

It’s vital for the American and the international community to realize that Afghanistan is the preferred location for the military industrial complex, even though they reaffirmed the terror networks convergence in Pakistan. The reason being, the MIC true intention for the massive troop buildup is to utilize Afghanistan as the strategic base to launch attack against Iran that would conclusively pre-empt the World War III. Another factor is the MIC denied access by Iraq, the initial location selected as the launching base against another Islamic, poignantly the Shiite dominant Iran.

More dangerously, the war counsel represented by the U.S. Secretary of State and the Defense Secretary visibly promoting Afghan troops increase will soon exert pressure on the Obama administration and the Congress into participating in the brewing grand worldwide conflict.

Since the unveiling of the military industrial complex and the oligarchs ‘dubious scheme likely to be scorned by the ‘veteran’ pundits and experts in the respective fields,

I would like to remind the world that, prior to the swearing in of the Obama Presidency, the Vice President Joe Biden dropped the ball during the political fund raising event in Seattle, WA,on October 2008:

Biden to Supporters: “Gird Your Loins”, For the Next President …

“20 Oct 2008 … “Mark my words,” the Democratic vice presidential nominee warned at the …
Watch, we’re gonna have an international crisis, a generated crisis, to test the
mettle of this guy. …. Vice president Joe Biden asks can humans be microchipped
. …. They are just waiting for chaos to bring order, their NWO. … Test
Obama’s mettle?”

Interestingly, some columnists laud the President’s leadership mettle for standing up against the anti-war democratic base rather than the supreme force dictating the world with a cleverly camouflaged stagecraft that is designed for profitable war games at the expense of death and destruction of countless innocent lives, case in evidence being the September 11, 2001.

How difficult is it to comprehend that it ‘s politically astute to represent the ‘Powerful’ than the ‘Powerless?’

Afghanistan mission is sometimes portrayed as nation building and other times a specific task to eliminate Al-Qaida about 100 or less members against the combined U.S., NATO & Afghan forces estimated around 150,000 possessing modern artillery, aerial raids via drones and every conceivable intelligence resources at their disposal. With Afghan Taliban, re-negotiation is claimed to be considered by letting them join the foreign troops in fighting against the rebels opposed to the corrupt Karzai government reinstated by none other than the illicit foreign power through intrusion.

To gain domestic support for the bizarre yet calculated war expedition, some journalists and certain media are being used for verbal and visual hypnosis to brainwash the American taxpayers footing the military extravaganza.

Nuclear threat is the new wave fear mongering to orchestrate aggressions in the vulnerable regions like the Middle East, Central Asia and the Indian sub-continent clearly mindful of the dire consequences from the nuclear confrontation. Pakistan developed into a terror haven by the architects of the global terrorism that serves the interest of the conglomerate to maneuver political upheavals in the Islamic nation with an overwhelming population in abject poverty.

Widespread terrorism is beneficial to perennial military incursion in the Islamic countries, the nerve center of the geopolitics. The successful hate campaign against Islam as the religion and the systemic abuse of the Muslim population in the wake of ‘global terror’ cannot be underestimated.


Pope’s speech stirs Muslim anger

Muslim religious leaders have accused Pope Benedict XVI of quoting anti-Islamic remarks during a speech at a German university this week.

Questioning the concept of holy war, he quoted a 14th-Century Christian emperor who said Muhammad had brought the world only “evil and inhuman” things.”

Afghan War – Troop Surge in Comparison with Iraq War – Troop Increase

Another explanation provided in President Obama’s speech for the prolonged Afghan war was the distraction by the Iraq war in 2003 suggesting it diminished the progress made from 2001 to 2003. For the war proponents, the phenomenal casualties suffered by the Afghan civilians and the U.S./NATO combats deaths are a consequential warfare tragedy cowardly described by the former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld as a ‘collateral damage.’

Simultaneously, the Iraq adventure launched through immense manipulation and contrived theories while ignoring the worldwide dissent proclaimed as a victory. When in reality, the Iraq war is still in progress with bombings and explosions taking place at the present time and the Iraqi parliament struggling to gain support to hold national elections in January and reportedly postponed to March 2010.

The Iraq war conducted in a Machiavellian approach has produced the world’s largest war widows, orphans and significant number of combat veterans wounded with both physiological and psychological damage, not to mention the tarnished image of the United States from the Guantanamo Bay, Bagram prison and Abu Ghraib images flashed around the world.

According to recent reports, Taliban is the shadow government easily undermining the beleaguered Karzai administration riddled with corruption charges from the beginning leaving the only option for the Afghan people – ‘Better the devil you know than the devil you don’t know.’ Hence, they are more inclined to accept the Taliban as the lesser of the two evils.

The illuminati agenda for the NWO progresses while Afghanistan regresses to the stone age under Taliban.

At the end of the day, if corruption is synonymous to Karzai government,

What do we call Washington?

In light of the hard core facts and evidences, it’s clear the cataclysmic terror attack on September 11,2001 ought to be investigated and the criminals regardless of hierarchy and affiliations brought to justice in due respect for the 9/11 victims and the innocent lives lost in Afghanistan, Iraq and Pakistan.

During the Presidential campaign in 2008, the candidates from both parties laid out their precise plan to capture the world’s most wanted ‘Osama Bin Laden.’ Senator John McCain stated that

“I will follow Osama bin Laden to the gates of hell” ….

Perhaps, that fallacy is now the prophecy for the cohort behind the September 11, 2001 horror and the despicable humanitarian crime ever to be committed in the modern civilization. It would be a matter for the Supreme Court as the highest order and legal authority in the land of justice to preside over the judicial process to honor and safeguard the United States Constitution grossly violated since the dawn of the twenty first century.

This would be the real test for the legal guardians obligatory to the great nation, the United States founded on the fundamentally sacred principles that guarantees freedom, civil liberties and justice for all.

Please remember that silence and abstinence embolden injustice and violence.

The topic discussion will continue with special attention on the political aspect.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

Global Terrorism – 9/11 and Osama Bin Laden Revelations

December 4, 2009

By Padmini Arhant

It is evident from recent terror attacks around the world, that democracies or other form of governments are incapacitated in dealing with security issues on national and international level.

The perennial War on Terrorism has invigorated worldwide fundamentalism aside draining the economies.

It is important for the global community to come forward and demand a legitimate explanation for their government’s impotence in establishing peace as opposed to war against human race.

Time has arrived for checks and balances in the operation of curbing terrorism that has not only frozen any advancement towards socio-economic progress in Africa, Americas, Middle East, South and Central Asia but also paralyzed the optimism for nations to come together in resolving political and economic issues as the global priority.

Given the technological power and resources available to the advanced nations,

Why violence and terror continue to dominate the world?

Why civil wars in Africa are the norm and the people of that continent deprived of normal existence?

Why is the military coup often successful in Africa, South and Central America as well as countries like Haiti in the Western hemisphere?

Why is the peace process between Israel and Palestine an eternal dismal failure?

Why does Middle East reject democratic rule over theocratic, autocratic and dynasty rule?

Last but not the least, Pakistan, presently governed by the civilian rule essentially the continuation of a political dynasty of the late Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto deserves spotlight as the country of origin of terror.

Pakistan is the haven for the terrorist organization Al-Qaida and their well oiled various networks Laskhar-e-Taiba, Jamaat-ud-Dawa, the Deccan Mujahideen, Jaish-e-Mohammad, including,

Notorious personalities like the nuclear scientist Abdul Qadeer Khan, aka Father of the nuclear program, confessed to sharing nuclear technology with Iran, Libya, and North Korea as well as the Mumbai Underworld Don / Mobster, Dawood Ibrahim.

Why statesmanship prevalent among the eligible, educated and moderate electorate denied of power in the democratic process in Pakistan?

Why the people of Pakistan never granted an opportunity for active and real democracy?

Most relevantly, who controls the controversial, corrupt Pakistani Military and Intelligence services ISI, claimed to be responsible for many terrorist activities including the recent Mumbai terror attacks?

The reasons for all of the above issues lead in one direction.

Wealth controlled and amassed by few operating as a conglomerate in the global scene propagate wars as the defense industry flourishes with the ever proliferating arms race including devastating nuclear weapons.

So, the concerted effort from these organizations ensures global unrest, turmoil, chaos and exclusively the recent energy, financial, economic and environmental crises.

The earlier centuries have been the era of colonialism or imperialism in different parts of the world creating hierarchy like industrialized nations and “third world” countries after having plundered those parts of the world for economic advantage.

In the twenty first century, imperialism is in the form of undermining —

Peace process,

Bilateral or multilateral relationships among poor and developing nations,

Invasion and occupation of sovereign nations under the guise of promoting democracy,

Fomenting oppositions against democratic rule not in cohesion with imperialistic agenda particularly in the impoverished regions of the world and more… Relevant point in case – Honduran Military coup orchestrated from Washington D.C. with complete knowledge of the Secretary of State of the U.S. State Department and then the fraudulent Afghan Elections.

It is noteworthy that despite transformation in world dominance between earlier and contemporary times, the strategy of divide and rule remains effective in eliminating peace and diplomacy during conflict.

Citizens of the free world must examine these facts and reflect upon the tragedies whether it is 9/11, Mumbai attacks, Terrorism around the world, Iraq war, the genocides in Darfur, Congo, Rwanda, the ethnic cleansing in Sri Lanka, the plight of Palestinian population, the oppression of Tibetans, persecution of the Burmese, Iranian revolution and other atrocities around the world.

Is there a light at the end of the tunnel?

Sure is, with the global cooperation of moderate thinkers determined to seek truth and justice for humanity can conquer the elements orchestrating catastrophe as the key cabinet members and the heads of the government.

People possess the power as consumers and voters in a free market and democratic systems.

History is testimony to revolutionary changes initiated and driven by ordinary citizens.

The election of an African American candidate Barack Obama as the 44th President of the United States aptly confirms that ordinary people can do extraordinary things and overcome any challenges together.

Meanwhile, please check out the following information from The Center for Research on Globalization (CRG) – Bold, uninhibited and true representation of free press reports for further understanding of the role of government and the agencies responsible for the maintenance of national and international security.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant


Source: – Thank you.

New Revelations on 9/11
According to Pakistani journalist, Amir Mateen (in a prophetic article published on September 10):

"ISI Chief Lt-Gen. Mahmoud’s week-long presence in Washington has triggered speculation about the agenda of his mysterious meetings at the Pentagon and National Security Council.

Officially, he is on a routine visit in return to CIA Director George Tenet’s earlier visit to Islamabad.

Official sources confirm that he met Tenet this week.

He also held long parleys with unspecified officials at the White House and the Pentagon.

But the most important meeting was with Marc Grossman, U.S. Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs.

One can safely guess that the discussions must have centred around Afghanistan . . . and Osama bin Laden.

What added interest to his visit is the history of such visits.

Last time Ziauddin Butt, Mahmoud’s predecessor, was here, during Nawaz Sharif’s government, the domestic politics turned topsy-turvy within days."

Nawaz Sharif was overthrown by General Pervez Musharaf.

General Mahmoud Ahmad, who became the head of the ISI, played a key role in the military coup.

Was it an ‘intelligence failure’ to give red carpet treatment to the ‘money man’ behind the 9-11 terrorists, or was it simply ‘routine’?

On the morning of September 11, Pakistan’s Chief Spy General Mahmud Ahmad, the alleged "money-man" behind the 9-11 hijackers, was at a breakfast meeting on Capitol Hill hosted by Senator Bob Graham and Rep. Porter Goss, the chairmen of the Senate and House Intelligence committees.


by Alexandra Richard

Translated courtesy of Tiphaine Dickson

Le Figaro, 11 October 2001
Posted at 2 November 2001
Dubai, one of the seven emirates of the Federation of the United Arab Emirates, North-East of Abi-Dhabi.

This city, population 350,000, was the backdrop of a secret meeting between Osama bin Laden and the local CIA agent in July.

A partner of the administration of the American Hospital in Dubai claims that public enemy number one stayed at this hospital between the 4th and 14th of July.

Having taken off from the Quetta airport in Pakistan, bin Laden was transferred to the hospital upon his arrival at Dubai airport.

He was accompanied by his personal physician and faithful lieutenant, who could be Ayma-al-Zawahari–but on this sources are not entirely certain–, four bodyguards, as well as a male Algerian nurse, and admitted to the American Hospital, a glass and marble building situated between the Al-Garhoud and Al-Maktoum bridges.

Each floor of the hospital has two "VIP" suites and fifteen rooms.

The Saudi billionnaire was admitted to the well-respected urology department run by Teerry Callaway, gallstone and infertility specialist.

Dr Callaway declined to respond to our questions despite several phone calls.

As early as March, 2000, ‘Asia Week,’ published in Hong Kong, expressed concern for bin Laden’s health, describing a serious medical problem that could put his life in danger because of "a kidney infection that is propagating itself to the liver and requires specialized treatment".

According to authorized sources, bin Laden had mobile dialysis equipment shipped to his hideout in Kandahar in the first part of 2000.

According to our sources, bin Laden’s "travels for health reasons" have taken place before.

Between 1996 and 1998, bin Laden made several trips to Dubai on business.

On September 27th, 15 days after the World Trade Center attacks, at the request of the United States,

The Central Bank of the Arab Emirates announced an order to freeze assts and investments of 26 people or organisations suspected of mainting contact with bin Laden’s organization, and in particular at the Dubai Islamic Bank.

"Relations between the Emirate and Saudi Arabia have always been very close," according to sources, "princes of reigning families, having recognized the Taliban regime, often travelled to Afghanistan.

One of the princes of a ruling family regularily went hunting on the land of bin Laden, whom he had known and visited for many years."

There are daily flights between Dubai and Quetta by both Pakistan and Emirates Airlines.

As to private planes from Saudi Arabia or from the Emirates, they regulariy fly to Quetta, where their arrival is rarely registered in airport logs.

While he was hospitalised, bin Laden received visits from many members of his family as well as prominent Saudis and Emiratis.

During the hospital stay, the local CIA agent, known to many in Dubai, was seen taking the main elevator of the hospital to go to bin Laden’s hospital room.

A few days later, the CIA man bragged to a few friends about having visited bin Laden.

Authorised sources say that on July 15th, the day after bin Laden returned to Quetta, the CIA agent was called back to headquarters.

In late July, Emirates customs agents arrested Franco-Algerian activist Djamel Beghal at the Dubai airport.

In early August, French and American authorities were advised of the arrest.

Interrogated by local authorities in Abu Dhabi, Beghal stated that he was called to Afghanistan in late 2000 by Abou Zoubeida, a military leader of bin Laden’s organization, Al Qaeda.

Beghal’s mission: bomb the US embassy on Gabriel avenue, near the Place de la Concorde, upon his return to France.

According to Arab diplomatic sources as well as French intelligence, very specific information was transmitted to the CIA with respect to terrorist attacks against American interests around the world, including on US soil.

A DST report dated 7 September enumerates all the intelligence, and specifies that the order to attack was to come from Afghanistan.

In August, at the US Embassy in Paris, an emergency meeting was called between the DGSE (French foreign intelligence service) and senior US intelligence officials.

The Americans were extremely worried, and requested very specific information from the French about Algerian activists, without advising their counterparts about the reasons for their requests.

To the question "what do you fear in the coming days?", the Americans kept a difficult-to-fathom silence.

Contacts between the CIA and bin Laden began in 1979 when, as a representative of his family’s business, bin Laden began recruiting volunteers for the Afghan resistance against the Red Army.

FBI investigators examining the embassy bombing sites in Nairobi and Dar es Salaam discovered that evidence led to military explosives from the US Army, and that these explosives had been delivered three years earlier to Afghan Arabs, the infamous international volunteer brigades involved side by side with bin Laden during the Afghan war against the Red Army.

In the pursuit of its investigations, the FBI discovered "financing agreements" that the CIA had been developing with its "arab friends" for years. The Dubai meeting is then within the logic of "a certain American policy". – For more chilling realities on the role of governments entrusted with Power in democracy.
The foreknowledge issue is a Red Herring:

"A Red Herring is a fallacy in which an irrelevant topic is presented in order to divert attention from the original issue."

In standard CIA jargon, Al Qaeda is categorized as an "intelligence asset".

The CIA keeps track of its "intelligence assets". Al Qaeda is infiltrated by the CIA.

Amply documented, Osama bin Laden’s whereabouts were always known.

In other words, there were no "intelligence failures"!

In the nature of a well-led intelligence operation, the "intelligence asset" operates (wittingly or unwittingly) with some degree of autonomy, in relation to its U.S. government sponsors, but ultimately it acts consistently, in the interests of Uncle Sam.

Political Deception: The Missing Link behind 9-11 by Michel Chossudovsky

In this timely study, Michel Chossudovsky blows away the smokescreen, put up by the mainstream media, that 9-11 was an "intelligence failure".

Through meticulous research, the author uncovers a military-intelligence ploy behind the September 11 attacks, and the coverup and complicity of key members of the Bush Administration.

Chossudovsky peels back the layers of rhetoric to reveal a huge hoax — a complex web of deceit aimed at tricking the American people and the rest of the world into accepting a military solution which threatens the future of humanity.

ON May 16th The New York Post dropped what appeared to be a bombshell: "Bush Knew . . .

" Hoping to score politically, the Democrats jumped on the bandwagon, pressuring the White House to come clean on two "top-secret documents" made available to President Bush prior to September 11, concerning "advance knowledge" of Al Qaeda attacks.

Meanwhile, the U.S. media had already coined a new set of buzzwords:

"Yes, there were warnings" and "clues" of possible terrorist attacks, but "there was no way President Bush could have known" what was going to happen.

The Democrats agreed to "keep the cat inside the bag" by saying:

"Osama is at war with the U.S." and the FBI and the CIA knew something was cooking but failed to connect the dots.

" In the words of House Minority Leader, Richard Gephardt:

"This is not blame-placing. . . . We support the President on the war against terrorism — have and will.

But we’ve got to do better in preventing terrorist attacks." 1


Fear and Disinformation Campaign

The Bush Administration — through the personal initiative of Vice President Dick Cheney — chose not only to foreclose the possibility of a public inquiry, but also to trigger a fear and disinformation campaign:

"I think that the prospects of a future attack on the U.S. are almost a certainty. . . .

It could happen tomorrow, it could happen next week, it could happen next year, but they will keep trying. And we have to be prepared."

What Cheney is really telling us is that our "intelligence asset", which we created, is going to strike again.

Now, if this "CIA creature" were planning new terrorist attacks, you would expect that the CIA would be first to know about it.

In all likelihood, the CIA also controls the so-called ‘warnings’ emanating from CIA sources on "future terrorist attacks" on American soil.


Carefully Planned Intelligence Operation

The 9-11 terrorists did not act on their own volition. The suicide hijackers were instruments in a carefully planned intelligence operation.

The evidence confirms that Al Qaeda is supported by Pakistan’s military intelligence, the Inter-services Intelligence (ISI). Amply documented, the ISI owes its existence to the CIA:

"With CIA backing and the funnelling of massive amounts of U.S. military aid, the ISI developed [since the early 1980s] into a parallel structure wielding enormous power over all aspects of government….

The ISI had a staff composed of military and intelligence officers, bureaucrats, undercover agents and informers estimated at 150,000."

The ISI actively collaborates with the CIA. It continues to perform the role of a ‘go-between’ in numerous intelligence operations on behalf of the CIA.

The ISI directly supports and finances a number of terrorist organizations, including Al Qaeda.


The Missing Link

The FBI confirmed in late September, in an interview with ABC News (which went virtually unnoticed) that the 9-11 ring leader, Mohammed Atta, had been financed from unnamed sources in Pakistan:

"As to September 11th, federal authorities have told ABC News they have now tracked more than $100,000 from banks in Pakistan, to two banks in Florida, to accounts held by suspected hijack ring leader, Mohammed Atta. As well . . .

"Time Magazine" is reporting that some of that money came in the days just before the attack and can be traced directly to people connected to Osama bin Laden.

It’s all part of what has been a successful FBI effort so far to close in on the hijacker’s high commander, the money men, the planners and the mastermind."9

The FBI had information on the money trail. They knew exactly who was financing the terrorists.

Less than two weeks later, the findings of the FBI were confirmed by Agence France Presse (AFP) and the Times of India, quoting an official Indian intelligence report (which had been dispatched to Washington).

According to these two reports,

The money used to finance the 9-11 attacks had allegedly been "wired to WTC hijacker Mohammed Atta from Pakistan, by Ahmad Umar Sheikh, at the instance of [ISI Chief] General Mahmoud [Ahmad]."

According to the AFP (quoting the intelligence source):

"The evidence we have supplied to the U.S. is of a much wider range and depth than just one piece of paper linking a rogue general to some misplaced act of terrorism."


Pakistan’s Chief Spy Visits Washington

Now, it just so happens that General Mahmoud Ahmad, the alleged "money man" behind 9-11, was in the U.S. when the attacks occurred.

He arrived on the 4th of September, one week before 9-11, on what was described as a routine visit of consultations with his U.S. counterparts.


Schedule of Pakistan’s Chief of Military Intelligence Lt. General Mahmoud Ahmad, Washington, 4-13 September 2001

Summer 2001: ISI Chief Lt. General Mahmoud Ahmad transfers $100,000 to 9-11 Ringleader Mohamed Atta.

4 September: Ahmad arrives in the US on an official visit.

4-9 September: He meets his US counterparts including CIA Head George Tenet.

9 September: Assassination of General Massood, leader of the Northern Alliance. Official statement by Northern Alliance points to involvement of the ISI-Osama-Taliban axis.

11 September: Terrorist Attacks on the WTC and the Pentagon.

At the time of the attacks, Lt General Ahmad was at a breakfast meeting at the Capitol with the chairmen of the House and Senate Intelligence Committees Sen Bob Graham and Rep Porter Goss.

Also present at the meeting were Sen. John Kyl and the Pakistani ambassador to the U.S., Maleeha Lodhi.

12-13 September: Meetings between Lt. General Ahmad and Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage.

Agreement on Pakistan’s collaboration negotiated between Ahmad and Armitage. Meeting between General Ahmad and Secretary of State Colin Powell

13 September: Ahmad meets Senator Joseph Biden, Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

On the morning of Sept. 11, Goss and Graham were having breakfast with a Pakistani general named Mahmud Ahmed – the soon-to-be-sacked head of Pakistan’s intelligence service.

Ahmed ran a spy agency notoriously close to Osama bin Laden and the Taliban.

While the Washington Post acknowledges the links between ISI Chief Mahmoud Ahmad and Osama bin Laden, it fails to dwell on the more important question:

What was Mahmoud doing on Capitol Hill on the morning of September 11, together with Rep. Porter Goss and Senator Bob Graham and other members of the Senate and House intelligence committees?

Neither does it acknowledge the fact, amply documented by media reports that "the money-man" behind the hijackers had been entrusted by the Pakistani government to discuss the precise terms of Pakistan’s "collaboration" in the "war on terrorism" in meetings held at the State department on the 12th and 13th of September.

When the "Foreknowledge" issue hit the street on May 16th, "Chairman Porter Goss said an existing congressional inquiry has so far found ‘no smoking gun’ that would warrant another inquiry."

This statement points to an obvious "cover-up".


The Investigation and Public Hearings on "Intelligence Failures"

In a bitter irony, Rep. Porter Goss and Senator Bob Graham, –the men who hosted the mysterious September 11 breakfast meeting with the alleged "hijacker’s high commander" (to use the FBI’s expression), had been put in charge of the investigation and public hearings on so-called "intelligence failures".

Meanwhile, Vice President Dick Cheney had expressed anger on a so-called "leak" emanating from the intelligence committees regarding

"the disclosure of National Security Agency intercepts of messages in Arabic on the eve of the attacks.

The messages (…) were in two separate conversations on Sept. 10 and contained the phrases

‘Tomorrow is zero hour’ and ‘The match is about to begin.’ The messages were not translated until Sept. 12"

Red Carpet Treatment to the Alleged "Money Man" behind 9-11.

The Bush Administration had not only provided red carpet treatment to the alleged "money man" behind the 9-11 attacks, it also had sought his ‘cooperation’ in the "war on terrorism".

The precise terms of this ‘cooperation’ were agreed upon between General Mahmoud Ahmad, representing the Pakistani government and Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage, in meetings at the State Department on September 12 and 13.

In other words, the Administration decided in the immediate wake of 9-11, to seek the ‘cooperation’ of Pakistan’s ISI in "going after Osama", despite the fact (documented by the FBI) that the ISI was financing and abetting the 9-11 terrorists.

Contradictory? One might say that it’s like "asking the Devil to go after Dracula."


An article in the French daily Le Figaro confirms that Osama bin Laden underwent surgery in an American Hospital in Dubai in July.

During his stay in the hospital, he met with a CIA official.

While on the World’s "most wanted list", no attempt was made to arrest him during his two week stay in the hospital, shedding doubt on the Administration’s resolve to track down Osama bin Laden.

Barely a few days ago Defense Secretary Rumsfeld stated that it would be difficult to find him and extradite him.

Its like "searching for a needle in a stack of hay".

But the US could have ordered his arrest and extradition in Dubai last July.

But then they would not have had a pretext of waging a war.

Meanwhile, innocent civilians are being killed by B-52 Bombers as means "to go after" Osama bin Laden.

According to UN sources, the so-called "campaign against international terrorism" could lead to the death of several million people from an impending famine.

The original article in French is also posted on the CRG webpage.

Michel Chossudovsky, CRG. 2 November 2001

——————————————————————- – For more chilling realities on the role of governments entrusted with Power in democracy.

Afghanistan – The Military Industrial Complex (MIC) Indefinite Mission

December 1, 2009

By Padmini Arhant

The White House and the Congress members are back at work after a refreshing break from the ‘Thanksgiving’ holiday that allows the average and the privileged citizens to celebrate the family moments together. Not all are able to participate in the long held tradition due to the ceaseless demands of the high commanders, the real authority in the system disguised as democracy.

Military Industrial Complex (MIC) troops expansion policy is having a nuclear impact on the nucleus of the Army, the brave men and women in harm’s way as evidenced in the following reports:

Thanksgiving for the soldiers on the ground in Afghanistan is a moment to pause and express gratitude to one another for providing the family like atmosphere through solidarity.

1. Associated Press, November 27, 2009 – By Denis D. Gray

‘Another day, another mission’ for U.S. soldiers in Afghanistan

Most of all, they give thanks for surviving a year of combat

From 1st Sgt. Gonzalo Lassally said of soldiers from Able Troop, 3-71 Cavalry Squadron:

“They become your family and being able to eat together like this, to break bread together is a highlight.”

“We’re thankful for all still being here. We’ve been lucky, on the lower spectrum when it comes to casualties.”

“Just another day, another mission,” several soldiers said as the first patrol prepared for a six-mile slog to aid village schools without windows, desks and other necessities.

From Padmini Arhant: For the kind attention of,

President Barack Obama, Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal, the Defense Secretary Robert Gates, the U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, Senator Diane Feinstein and the united Republican members of Congress endorsing the enormous troop buildup,

Would you, perhaps consider either matching or exceeding the incredible sacrifice by the honorable Sgt. Gonzalo Lassally in the following manner?

As per the above report, “1st Sgt. Gonzalo Lassally, a father of three from Deltona, Fla., has spent four ‘Thanksgivings, three Christmases and “quite a few birthdays” away from home.”


2. Associated Press – By Pauline Jelinek, November 28, 2009.

Divorce rate edges up among military families

It’s climbed since troops were first sent to Afghanistan

The toll for a nation long at war is evident in military homes: The divorce rate in the armed forces edged up again in the past year despite many programs to help struggling couples, and the rate now is a full percentage point higher than around the time of the attacks of September 11, 2001.

There were an estimated 27,312 divorces among roughly 765,000 married members of the active-duty Army, Air Force, Navy and Marine Corps in the budget year that ended Sept. 30, the Pentagon said Friday.

That’s a divorce rate of about 3.6 percent for fiscal year 2009, compared with 3.4 percent a year earlier, according to figures from the Defense Manpower Data Center. Marriages among reservists failed at a rate of 2.8 percent compared with 2.7 percent the previous year.

Friday’s reported 3.6 percent rate is a full percentage point above the 2.6 percent reported in late 2001, when the U.S. began sending troops to Afghanistan in response to the September terrorist attacks.

As in previous years, women in uniform suffered much higher divorce rates than their male counterparts – 7.7 percent in 2009, compared with 3 percent for men.

3. Associated Press, Washington, November 18, 2009:

Suicides in Army likely to increase:

“Army Vice Chief of Staff General Peter Chiarelli said that as of Monday, 140 active duty soldiers were believed to have died of self-inflicted wounds so far in 2009. That’s the same as were confirmed for all of 2008. We are almost certainly going to end the year higher than last year … this is horrible, and I do not want to downplay the significance of these numbers in any way.”


It’s essential to highlight other news related to the Afghanistan war, NATO involvement and the Karzai government credentials or the lack thereof.

4. As for NATO alliances in the war on terror:

Germany’s top military official resigns:

New York Times – By Nicholas Kulish, November 27, 2009

Berlin – Germany’s defense minister, Karl-Theodor zu Guttenberg, told Parliament that the chief of staff, Gen. Wolfgang Schneiderhan, as well as a senior official in the Defense Ministry, State Secretary Peter Wichert, had tendered their resignations after a German news report that information on civilian casualties had been withheld from the public and from prosecutors.”


5. Pakistan warns of influx of militants

More U.S. troops could push Taliban from Afghanistan

By Kim Gamel – Associated Press, November 21, 2009.

Islamabad – Pakistan expressed fear Friday that a large increase in foreign troops in Afghanistan could push militants across the border into its territory and called on the U.S. to factor in that concern as part of its new war strategy.”


6. Washington Post – By Joshua Partlow, November 18, 2009.

Afghan official accused of taking bribe

Contract allegedly goes to Chinese firm after $30 million payout

Kabul – The Afghan minister of mines accepted a roughly $30 million bribe to award the country’s largest development project to a Chinese mining firm, according to a U.S. official who is familiar with military intelligence reports.

Karzai is coming under intense international pressure to clear his Cabinet of ministers who have reaped huge profits through bribery and kickback schemes. Although he announced a new anti-corruption unit this week, the president has been reluctant to fire scandal-tainted ministers in the past and it is unclear whether he is ready to do so now.

Meanwhile, Afghans’ perceptions that they are ruled by a thieving class have weakened support for the government, and bolstered sympathy for the Taliban insurgency.”

Notation – By Padmini Arhant:

Obviously, the prolonged occupation and the extended service by the armed personnel are crippling the integral unit of the society, the American families of these silent patriots.

Accordingly, the checks and balances are appropriate to determine the validity of the additional troops request.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

World Peace – Part One

November 29, 2009

By Padmini Arhant

Since it’s my 200th post on this website,, I would like to dedicate the article to my favorite topic, Peace.

The world is riddled with violence in the worst form of terrorism and warfare not barring the dangerous nuclear threats. Then there are local crimes like the drug war in Mexico or the politically incited Philippines massacre exacerbating the miseries of the population. It would be appropriate to attribute the present situation to the political, economic and social injustice prevalent in the society.

Throughout history, the dominance of one nation over another through invasion, illegal occupation and provocative actions have led to the retaliation through terrorism and war including the use of nuclear arsenal witnessed in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Often, when the rich nations demonstrate the political power in combination with the military might against the economically weaker countries, the aggression contributes to the perennial chaos and catastrophe.

Further, the most powerful, in their quest for eternal supremacy engage in activities, which provide a fertile ground to the less superior elements seeking similar status, thereby creating a permanent hostile environment to prolong their agenda. It’s increasingly prominent in the impoverished regions of the world. Subsequently the supreme forces’ commandeering the nation is depicted as the marquis in the modern concept of global war on terror.

Interestingly, with reference to warfare vs. terrorism the pronounced bias is noteworthy. The disproportionate civilian casualties during war is accepted as a collateral damage while the equally reprehensible results from a terrorist bombing is condemned reeking racial and anti-religious overtones in the moral evaluation fomenting anger, frustration and anticipated violent reaction. In a way, the setting is well orchestrated to justify the Machiavellian pursuit.

Synonymously, democratic nations conducting war is characterized as purposeful act for national security regardless of the implementation producing mass fatalities on all accounts. The operation is easily facilitated in a democratic system than any other form of government. Democracy is convenient because of its representation by the people. Therefore, the populace choice is ideal for the ultimate authority to authenticate undemocratic policies. It’s currently conspicuous in the contentious debates on health care reform and troops increase in Afghanistan.

The elected representatives succumb to the pressure from the establishments controlling every legislative matter. Congress is supposed to be the central governing body. Yet, it is decentralized with the existing partisanship between the two major political parties and the selective allegiance to the various special interests and lobbyists by the members constitutionally obligatory to the republic.

In terms of military commitments, the economic and political factors determine the cavalier approach to an indefinite presence on foreign soil. Economically, the defense budget is by far the favored legislation carried out through bipartisanship with supplements approved by Congress in the absence of legitimate evidence supportive of the claim. Contrary to the belief among certain lawmakers positioned themselves as fiscal conservatives and prioritizing political correctness over rationality, war is profitable to the operatives whereas it is remaining to be a phenomenal liability to the national deficit.

It’s poignant to raise the Afghan war costs in this context.
According to the New York Times article on November 15, 2009 by Christopher Drew,

“Titled – High costs playing role in Afghan war debate: At $1 million per soldier per year, troops drain budget.

The latest internal government estimates place the cost of adding 40,000 U.S. troops and sharply expanding the Afghan security forces, as favored by Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal, the top U.S. and allied commander in Afghanistan, at $40 billion to $54 billion a year, the officials said.

Even if fewer troops are sent, or their mission is modified, the rough formula used by the White House, of about $1 million per soldier a year, appears almost constant. In 2006, congressional researchers had estimated the per-soldier cost to be $390,000.

So even if Obama opts for a lower troop commitment, Afghanistan’s new costs could wash out the projected $26 billion expected to be saved in 2010 from withdrawing troops from Iraq.
And the overall military budget could rise to as much as $734 billion, or 10 percent more than the peak of $667 billion under the George W. Bush administration.”


Cost Factor Analysis – By Padmini Arhant

Evidently, the military spending rises exponentially with the new administration in power, suggesting the real authority is not necessarily the ‘democratically’ elected entity. Above all, the status quo is bolstered by the fiscal conservatives’ unequivocal acceptance of the pentagon demands despite the track record confirming it a national burden on deficits and death tolls. In contrast, the same legislators vote against the investment in health care and economic stimulus guaranteed to benefit the constituents granting them the power.

The dilemma of democracy and military intervention does not end at the economic level. In fact, it permeates to the political dynamics, through hawkish prevalence in key cabinet positions like the defense and the State department relentlessly promoting extravagant military operations. It’s important to shed light on the recent setbacks in the foreign policy due to the State department’s indulgence or the lack thereof in many international crises, since the arrival of the new administration.

Afghanistan being the immediate focus, the events thus far signify the continuation of the detrimental U.S. foreign policy notwithstanding the complexity in forging renewed alliance with the beleaguered leader by the administration’s top diplomats and the generals.

Moreover, the U.S. Secretary of State has been instrumental in the controversial nomination surpassing the ego trip of the Bush administration. The Afghan government headed by the U.S. and NATO appointed official, President Hamid Karzai is no stranger to the worldwide criticisms.

The Karzai government’s credibility is eclipsed by the substantial corruption besides the internationally rejected fraudulent election. Never mind the repercussions on the Afghan people, the Western power always knows the best in the handling of the cultures that are inherently alien in every aspect.

Moving towards Pakistan, Prime Minister Gilani has expressed deep concerns over the U.S. decision to increase troops in Afghanistan stating that it would facilitate the influx of militants escaping the U.S. and NATO attacks, inevitably straining Pakistan’s mission against the terror networks. Pakistan’s predicament is valid along the foreign troops’ enormity in Afghanistan.

Pakistan has been urged by the victim nations of the terror attacks to earnestly dismantle and eradicate terror organizations responsible for global terrorism. In this respect, it’s incumbent on Pakistan to display integrity by bringing the Mumbai 26/11 attackers to justice. Amid immense grief, Mumbai remembered the victims on November 26, 2009, the anniversary of the brutal terror act that besieged the commercial center with the perpetrators hiding behind the judicial impunity.

The victims’ family endures life-long pain and agony, which is compounded with the delay in the swift deliverance of justice as seen in the Mumbai terrorism. Pakistan’s deliberation in the open shut case is rather political than judicial when it is conclusive that the terror plot was masterminded in Pakistan.

There is urgency for India’s neighbor to act fervently considering the spate of suicide bombings in Pakistani cities overwhelming the law and order rendering the government incapable of dealing with security matter.

In the Western hemisphere – The Honduran military coup convincingly launched by the promoters in Washington D.C. in coherence with the national and the Latin American business networks ousted the democratically elected President Manuel Zelaya and appointed the military coup leader Roberto Michelleti.

International news media reported that following the scandal exposure, Roberto Michelleti decided to step down and agreed to allow the deposed President Zelaya resume office until the end of the constitutional term.

However, in a sudden twist to the political showdown, the mysterious interference by the powerful disrupted the democratic process that has not only weakened the United States status in Latin America but also expected to split the Honduran population in the national elections scheduled today under heavy army vigilance to assist the conservative candidate succeed in the undemocratic poll.

Honduras has seven out of ten people living in abject poverty and surely, the political sabotage might serve the powerhouse interest at the expense of the Hondurans plight, the maneuver still fail to achieve the recognition they desire.

This is one of the many events where the power politics raised its ugly head to rein in progress under democracy. The conspirators behind the political instability in Honduras are no different from the elements constantly engaged in toppling governments for radical reasons. History is testimony that democracy is resilient and will ultimately prevail irrespective of external intrusion whether it is Honduras, Afghanistan, Palestine or Tibet.

The topic World Peace is intended to cover other regions on a wide range of issues. Hence, the sequel with comprehensive details will follow in the due course of time.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

Afghan War, the Additional Troops Request and the Election – Analysis

September 29, 2009

Analysis: By Padmini Arhant

From the earlier data, it is conclusive that since the inception of the Afghan war, the constant flow of funding and the troops surge has remained the routine build up in the ill-conceived ‘so-called’ war on terror. The long fought war in the past eight years and previously against the Soviets should provide the U.S. defense a concise idea about the Afghan terrains, terrorists’ hideouts and other relevant operational tactics by the Talibans and the Al-Qaida forces.

Considering the earlier Taliban generation were trained as the Mujahedeens by the CIA against the Soviets and instrumental in driving the Soviet Army from the Afghan land, it’s reasonable to ask the question,

When success was then possible with the limited financial and military contingency, why is it not feasible now with the exceptional assets at the defense forces disposal?

The Congressional approval of excess funding via discretionary channel to circumvent the constitutional limitations and the increasing troop deployment at the highest military hierarchy behest with no accountability for the monetary or combat forces investment in the evolved operation raises a serious credibility issue leading to an appropriate investigation.

Oddly, the Afghan situation possesses an uncanny resemblance to the financial sector bailout in the absence of checks and balances against the oligarchs responsible for the world economic crisis.

The irony is, the U.S. and NATO resources are superfluous against the insurgents’ outdated and conventional stockpiles purchased from the tribal warlords in control of the narcotic industry. Despite the United States extensive prior knowledge of the mountainous regions and enhanced weaponry including the state of the art technology, the U.S. and NATO command continue to claim the insurgency by the Taliban and Al-Qaida operatives as ‘uncontainable.’ Somehow, it doesn’t fit in with the rationality.

Then the trio forces represented by Afghanistan, Pakistan and the United States declare the combatants, ‘a force to reckon with,’ when Pakistan and Afghanistan must be familiar with the respective demography in the northwestern Pakistan, the eastern Afghanistan apart from the southern provinces of the Kandahar district. Again, the status acknowledged by the U.S. and NATO highest command in a statement that “Talibans are emboldened more than ever and dangerously widespread making Afghanistan a possible failed state.”

Is it a real concern or a proposition for a permanent military base evidenced in the topic’s prequel?

Another poignant matter is Pakistan’s role in aiding and abetting the Talibans following the U.S abandonment and the Soviet departure. During the Bush administration, the Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf received substantial financial aid and arms supply as an “important” ally of the apparent war on terror.

Evidently, the disclosed $10 billion dollars and more was not spent for the desired purpose, instead Pakistan ventured into replenishing stocks targeting the eternal rival and neighbor India.

In spite of the U.S. royal treatment of the former military regime under President Musharraf, the nuclear technology trader A.Q. Khan was protected and the U.S. intelligence forces were denied access to the entity by the regime. Today’s nuclear proliferation among North Korea and Iran stem from A.Q. Khan’s illicit dealings in trading WMD secret programs.

The trend continues with the financial aid being tripled combined with more arsenal supply ‘supposedly’ to extinguish the fire set by the Pakistani ISI and the military in cohort with the Talibans and the Al-Qaida elements in Waziristan and other parts of the north western region up until recently. It’s not a concocted theory when the independent Pakistani and other international journalists reported that the world’s most wanted terror leader Osama Bin Laden received medical treatment in Pakistan during the Musharraf Presidency.

The military agents actively promote the Kashmir issue between the two nuclear neighbors to see the snoring lion turn into a roaring beast. Meanwhile, distracting the world from the compounded problems within Pakistan – the people of Pakistan deprived of the genuine freedom and democracy not to mention the chaos and mayhem caused with frequent suicide bombings and explosions.

In fact, the situation in the two Islamic nations has been perpetually meddled with excessive foreign policy interventions doing more harm than any good until date. The constant turmoil and warfare has crippled the economies leaving the populations at the mercy of the oil rich Saudi Arabia and the Western control.

The bright and the educated middle class to the poorest of the Pakistani population are subject to the dynasty rule disguised as democracy with the Pakistani military having an upper hand in the major governance.

Diverting attention homeward;

The legitimate question for the American taxpayers engaged in the health care battle of the century is –
How do the so-called fiscal conservatives from both sides of the aisle justify the enrage at the hypothetical costs of providing universal health care, while seemingly comfortable with the Fiscal Year 2009, defense spending amount to 4.7% of GDP?

The military industrial complex dominance with strong hawkish representations in the Defense and the State Departments in the current administration is conspicuous with the irrational winning streak calculations in the misguided missions in both Iraq and Afghanistan. The tragic truth revealed in the casualties endured by the families of the U.S. military and the ally forces along with the scores of civilian deaths callously dismissed as the ‘collateral’ damages in the warfare.

Regarding the permanent military base in Afghanistan, the published reports confirm the former Afghan President Hamid Karzai’s complicity to the occupation of his homeland by foreign forces, questioning the President’s loyalty to the nation, he is expected to govern.

Then the subsequent crowning of the controversial ex-President Hamid Karzai amidst election fraud and widely exposed scandals by the secretary of state Hillary Rodham Clinton and other NATO diplomats clearly indicates the entities following specific directions of the military industrial complex defining the role for the executive members in the sprawling scheme.

Since when the Secretary of State and other NATO foreign ministers overtly assigned the duty to select the head of the foreign government smeared with corruption charges and voter fraud allegations, against the will of the population yearning for real democracy?

Isn’t the role of the U.S. military and NATO in Afghanistan restricted to eliminating terror, and refrain from any intervention in the electoral decisions?

When the U.S and NATO forces indulge in the appointments of the heads of the foreign governments, they not only threaten the democratic opportunities for the subject nations but also undermine the democracy they represent.

The Defense Forces’ high commands testify to the elected representatives in a democracy, the Congress, by repeatedly urging that “the troops and discretionary funding requirement is essential to succeed in the escalating war on terror” with the reality being otherwise.

But not anymore. This time, it’s incumbent on the Pentagon to face the nation and lay the facts as the permanent military base in Afghanistan or elsewhere is an act of treason against the nation, not barring the crime against humanity with the notion to enslave the innocent population trusting the organization to protect and liberate them from the tyranny and oppression.

When the defense budget funds are misappropriated for destructive reasons of the never ending warfare, illegal arms race i.e. both conventional and nuclear arsenal in the open markets, then the military institution loses the trust and respect of the national population. It’s equivalent to the betrayal of the parents declining to protect the children and instead endanger their lives.

If the military institutions confine to the honorable duty to defend the sovereignty of the nation, safeguard the pledge of allegiance to the flag and regard the life of another like their own, then the battle grounds would no longer be the killing fields.

Those who engage in invasion, occupation, pillage, ruin of other nations have engulfed in the self ignited flames, while others eventually come to the realization that in the laws of nature, there is no state of permanence. History witnessed the emperors like Napoleon Bonaparte, Alexander the Great and the likes succumb to the crumbling of their greatness, regarding themselves once as invincible.

The wisdom serves that mortals brought nothing into the world and hence take nothing back with them and no one is a permanent resident on the planet irrespective of status. Life is a journey and travelers leave when their travel ends with their activities evaluated and judged accordingly.

Wars can’t go on forever and must eventually ceasefire.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

Afghanistan War, the Additional Troops Request and the Election

September 28, 2009

By Padmini Arhant

There has been additional troops request from the U.S. and NATO Commander, Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal accompanied by the endorsements of the other highest commands. The request made with a sense of urgency within the military ranks based on variable assessments and conflicting reports from different sources that if the troops request delayed or denied; “it could perhaps lead to the mission failure” in the prolonged war that had continued to deploy troops on that strategy.

According to reputable news sources, the U.S. force in Afghanistan estimated to reach 68,000 by the year’s end. Now, the fact remains to be carefully examined on the U.S. and NATO defense policy implemented in the Afghanistan war prompting the current administration to inflate the defense budget disproportionately to $651.2 billion excluding the various non-itemized expenditures by the other departments in the nucleus.

The following materials are extremely important in ascertaining the real purpose of the persistent war nearing almost a decade with incessant violence, lawlessness and horrendous loss of lives on all sides that could have been contained considering the interjection of enormous resources in terms of funding and troops supply possibly restoring a democratic rule in Afghanistan conforming with the metaphor –

“Where there is a will, there is a way.”

The sequel with a detailed analysis will follow in due course of time.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant
Advisers split over Afghan troop request:

Military divided over force levels required for plan

By Peter Baker and Elisabeth Bumiller – New York Times

Provided through The San Jose Mercury News, Sunday September 27, 2009 – Thank you.

“Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal’s troop request, which was submitted to the Pentagon on Friday, has reignited a longstanding debate within the military about the virtues of the counterinsurgency strategy popularized by Gen. David H. Petraeus in Iraq and embraced by McChrystal, the top U.S. and NATO commander in Afghanistan.

McChrystal is expected to ask for as many as 40,000 additional troops for the eight-year old war, a number that has generated concern among top officers like Gen. George W. Casey Jr., the Army chief of staff, who worry about the capacity to provide more soldiers at a time of stress on the force, officials said.

While Obama is hearing from more hawkish voices, including Hillary Rodham Clinton, the secretary of state, and Richard C. Holbrooke, the special representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan, some outside advisers relied on by Obama have voiced doubts.

But other officers who have served in Iraq and Afghanistan and say they admire McChrystal nonetheless have privately expressed doubt that additional troops will make a difference.
“If a request for more forces comes to the Army, we’ll have to assess what that will do in terms of stress on the force,” said a senior Army officer, who asked not to be identified speaking before McChrystal’s troop request became public.”

Casey, whose institutional role as Army chief is to protect his force, has a stated goal by 2012 to increase a soldier’s time at home from the current one year for every year of duty in Iraq or Afghanistan to two years at home for every year served.”

—————————————————————————————— – Thank you.

U.S. Defense Budget for the Fiscal Year 2009:

For the 2009 fiscal year, the base budget rose to $515.4 billion. Adding emergency discretionary spending and supplemental spending brings the sum to $651.2 billion. Not included in the DoD budget is $23.4 billion to be spent by the Department of Energy to develop and maintain nuclear warheads.


This does not include many military-related items that are outside of the Defense Department budget, such as nuclear weapons research, maintenance, cleanup, and production (about $16.4 billion, which is in the Department of Energy budget), Veterans Affairs (about $53.0 billion), defense spending by the Department of Homeland Security (about $41.4 billion),

Interest on debt incurred in past wars, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan (about $83.4 billion in 2009, funded through extra-budgetary supplemental bills), or State Department financing of foreign arms sales (about $5.3 billion) and militarily-related development assistance.

The U.S. Department of Defense budget accounted in fiscal year 2008 for about 21% of the United States federal budgeted expenditures. Including spending for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, Homeland Security, and Veteran’s Affairs, defense spending was approximately $800 billion, or 32% of 2008 tax receipts of $2.5 trillion.[5]

Because of constitutional limitations, military funding is appropriated in a discretionary spending account. (Such accounts permit government planners to have more flexibility to change spending each year, as opposed to mandatory spending accounts that mandate spending on programs outside of the budgetary process.) In recent years, discretionary spending as a whole has amounted to about one-third of total federal outlays. Military funding’s share of discretionary funding was 50.5% in 2003, and has risen steadily ever since.

The 2005 U.S. military budget is almost as much as the rest of the world’s defense spending combined and is over eight times larger than the military budget of China (compared at the nominal US dollar / Renminbi rate, not the PPP rate). The United States and its close allies are responsible for about two-thirds of the world’s military spending (of which, in turn, the U.S. is responsible for the majority). In 2007, US military spending was above 1/4 of combined industrial and agricultural production in the USA.

Focus on the Afghanistan war and the Operational Deficiency:



By January 2009, the Taliban claimed that they had killed 5,220 foreign troops, downed 31 aircraft, destroyed 2,818 NATO and Afghan vehicles and killed 7,552 Afghan soldiers and police in 2008 alone. The Associated Press estimated that a total of 286 foreign military personnel were killed in Afghanistan in 2008.[130] Icasualties puts the total number of coalition soldiers killed in 2008 at 294.

2009: U.S. Surge :

Main article: Coalition combat operations in Afghanistan in 2009


The Khyber Border Coordination Center between the U.S., Pakistan, and Afghanistan, at Torkham on the Afghan side of the Khyber Pass, has been in operation for nine months. But U.S. officials at the Khyber Center say language barriers, border disputes between Pakistani and Afghan field officers, and longstanding mistrust among all three militaries have impeded progress.

In January, about 3,000 U.S. soldiers from the 3rd Brigade Combat Team of the 10th Mountain Division moved into the provinces of Logar and Wardak. The troops were the first wave of an expected surge of reinforcements originally ordered by George W. Bush and increased by Barack Obama.

In mid-February, it was announced that 17,000 additional troops would be deployed to the country in two brigades and additional support troops; the 2nd Marine Expeditionary Brigade of about 3,500 from the 7,000 Marines, and the 5th Brigade, 2nd Infantry Division, a Stryker Brigade with about 4,000 of the 7,000 US Army soldiers. The U.S. commander in Afghanistan, General McKiernan, had called for as many as 30,000 additional troops, effectively doubling the number of troops currently in the country.


On August 10, 2009, Stanley McChrystal, the newly appointed U.S. commander in Afghanistan, said that the Taliban has presently gained the upper hand and that the ISAF is not winning in the 8 year-old war.
Possible long-term U.S. role & military presence:

Many of the thousands of U.S. troops in Afghanistan are positioned in what experts say are large, permanent bases.

In February 2005, U.S. Senator John McCain called for the establishment of permanent U.S. military bases in Afghanistan, saying such bases would be “for the good of the American people, because of the long-term security interests we have in the region”.

He made the remarks while visiting Afghan President Hamid Karzai in Kabul as part of a five-member, bi-partisan Senate delegation travelling through the region for talks on security issues.

The same delegation also included then-Senator Hillary Clinton, now U.S. Secretary of State.

In mid-March, 2005, U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman General Richard Myers told reporters in Kabul that the U.S. Defense Department was studying the feasibility of such permanent military bases. At the end of March, the U.S. military announced that it was spending $83-million on its two main air bases in Afghanistan, Bagram Air Base north of Kabul and Kandahar Air Field in the south of the country.

A few weeks after this series of U.S. statements, in April 2005, during a surprise visit to Kabul by U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, Afghan President Hamid Karzai hinted at a possible permanent U.S. military presence in Afghanistan, saying he had also discussed the matter with President Bush. Rumsfeld refused to say whether or not the U.S. wanted permanent American military bases in Afghanistan, saying the final decision would come from the White House.

As of July 2008, hundreds of millions of dollars were being spent on permanent infrastructure for foreign military bases in Afghanistan, including a budget of $780-million to further develop the infrastructure at just the Kandahar Air Field base, described as “a walled, multicultural military city that houses some 13,000 troops from 17 different countries – the kind of place where you can eat at a Dutch chain restaurant alongside soldiers from the Royal Netherlands Army.” The Bagram Air Base, run by the U.S. military, was also expanding according to military officials, with the U.S military buying land from Afghan locals in different places for further expansion of the base.

As of January 2009, the U.S. had begun work on $1.6 billion of new, permanent military installations at Kandahar.

In February 2009, The Times reported that the U.S. will build two huge new military bases in southern Afghanistan. One will be built in Kandahar province near the Helmand border, at Maiwand – a place famous as the site of the destruction of a British army during the Second Anglo-Afghan War. The other new U.S. military base will be built in Zabul, a province now largely controlled by the Taliban and criminal gangs.

The idea of permanent U.S. military bases vexes many people in Afghanistan, which has a long history of resisting foreign invaders.

In May 2005, riots and protests that had started over a false report in Newsweek of U.S. interrogators desecrating the Koran and turned into the biggest anti-U.S. protests in Afghanistan since the 2001 invasion included demands that the Kabul government reject U.S. intentions to create a permanent military presence in Afghanistan.
Public opinion

Main article: International public opinion on the war in Afghanistan

Although the war was supported by most Americans, most people in the world oppose the war.
In a 47-nation June 2007 survey of global public opinion, the Pew Global Attitudes Project found considerable opposition to war.

In 41 of the 47 countries, pluralities want U.S. and NATO troops out of Afghanistan as soon as possible. In 32 out of 47 countries, clear majorities want this war over as soon as possible.

Majorities in 7 out of 12 NATO member countries say troops should be withdrawn as soon as possible.

Afghan Election:

After Karzai’s alleged win of 54 per cent, which would prevent a run off with his rival, Abdullah Abdullah, over 400,000 votes had to be discounted for Karzai, and many more with hundreds of thousands of votes and polling ballots being accused of fraud.

Making the real turnout of the elections much lower than the official numbers, many nations criticizing the elections as Free but not fair.

Coalition in Afghanistan backs Karzai’s Strategy:

By Karen DeYoung, Washington Post , provided by San Jose Mercury News, Monday September 28, 2009.

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton and other NATO foreign ministers, meeting Friday in New York with their Afghan counterpart, reached “consensus” that Karzai would probably “continue to be president,” whether through a runoff or as the legitimate winner of more than 50 percent of votes cast in disputed Aug.20 elections, an Obama administration official said.”


Afghanistan War and Election

August 21, 2009

By Padmini Arhant

The nation ravaged with decades of wars, terrorism, militant rule and occupation goes to the polls to exercise the basic human right, a privilege in this part of the world , while taken for granted in the U.S.of A as reflected in the health care battle.

Afghanistan known for the ruggedness and terrains with the Khyber Pass enabling invaders to move across the foreign territories in a manner as the ‘no-man’s land’ ignoring the inhabitants scattered around the vast mountainous regions.

Afghan demography is complex and beyond the grasp of understanding for Western powers and even its Central Asian neighbors. The Imperial powers from the British, Russian and now the American & NATO forces have struggled to enforce any form of stability, political or otherwise.

The tribal laws conforming to the medieval times view the progress desired by the mainstream population from the rural to the urban areas, a threat to the ancient culture and the tribal archaic ascribed to the Western influence through occupations.

Further, the abandonment of the Afghan nation by the Western forces after brutal Soviet decimation solidified the anti-trust against the Western power. Unfortunately, the desolate population then sought the support of the groups earlier recognized as the mujahedeen (combatants against struggle) trained by the CIA and fostered by the Reagan administration core foreign policy titled Reagan doctrine to challenge the Soviet rule.

Ironically, the trade tricks related to weaponry and military retaliation imparted by the sophisticated U.S. armed forces in the late 1970’s to combat Soviet presence tactfully demonstrated in the on-going war on terror between the Taliban insurgents and the U.S & NATO alliance.

Mujahedeen were nurtured through the neighbor Pakistani ISI and military aid essentially representing various multinational forces like the United States CIA, Saudi Arabia, People’s Republic of China, several Western European countries and the military regimes in Pakistan.

When the U.S. departure followed the end of Soviet occupation, the country engaged in a civil war in the late 1980’s forcing the orphans of the Mujahedeen evolve into today’s menace the Talibans. The outcome – the tiny lizard morphed into a tyrannosaurus…wreaking havoc in the Islamic Afghanistan and neighboring Pakistan apart from becoming the terrorists’ haven for the terror organization Al-Qaeda and the world’s most wanted Osama Bin Laden.

Now when democracy appears to work its way through, the country riddled with bureaucracy, corruption and the ever-lucrative production of poppy fields.

What could the people of Afghanistan possibly live for and aspire in the twenty first century?

After prolonged tyranny and drudgery, the people are tired and worn out from the perpetual cycle of violence that has paralyzed progress leaving the nation behind in stone age, when the rest of the world zoomed past them reminding that Afghanistan frozen in time.

The Afghani people as part of the human race seek simple life. A life guaranteed with freedom, human rights allowing every human being to live with respect, honor and dignity. Above all, the people of Afghanistan deserve peace like their fellow citizens in Palestine, Africa and other war torn regions of the world. Women as victims of extreme hostility and abuse imploring for their release from the ideological shackles and inhumane practices shockingly happening in both the developed as well as the ‘backwaters’ of the nation.

Children, the future of any country and the world dream of normal existence such as attending schools for both girls and boys, raised by their parents and the family unit if they are lucky to survive the Western aerial bombardments via drones and the Taliban insurgency. These innocent souls, even in that environment of despair and hopelessness don’t forget to smile or pose…momentarily floating in their fantasy to be the center of the universe for the international press and media.

When they grow up, the men have the options to either become a terror network recruit or hired by the tribal warlords to toil in the poppy fields contributing to the flourishing narcotic industry. The alternative for young women is to become the obedient slave in the male chauvinistic society regardless of the Western backed and financed political leaderships in Kabul.

It’s relevant to analyze the objective and achievements by the U.S. led war against terror mission in this region. After consuming millions of Afghani lives as well as American/NATO casualties and billions of American taxpayer dollars the status quo is –

There is no information on Osama Bin Laden, Talibanization of Afghanistan and northwestern Pakistan leading to Pakistani military action in Waziristan and the Swat Valley, fragmented Al-Qaeda temporarily relocating to Somalia while controlling operation in Pakistan.

In terms of the U.S. national security, the war in Afghanistan claimed to be justified.

How long is the war in Afghanistan long enough for the U.S. and allied forces?

Has continued U.S. aggression eliminated terror forces from the region?

One might argue that there have been no attacks against U.S. interests since 9/11 as a result of the continuous drone and ground attacks in Afghanistan. It could serve as a legitimate argument,

However, the fact of the matter is the terrorists believe that they gain nothing from repeating September 11 attacks. The motive behind September 11 was to inflict economic chaos and constrict the once booming U.S. economy, which the terror network accomplished with the catastrophic terrorist activity. The economic turmoil further exacerbated with the previous administrations’ Machiavellian Iraq adventure exceeding Al-Qaeda’s expectations to reign in on the U.S. economic progress.

Instead, Al-Qaeda diverted its attention to Iraq’s battleground with their insurgencies to prolong the Iraqi conflict in their aim to continue draining the U.S. treasury.

Meanwhile, the re-emergence of the Taliban in Afghanistan issuing death warrants to the electorate and forbidding them from going to the voting booths confirm the insurgents’ defiance against the U.S. and NATO forces. The Taliban and Al-Qaeda’s primary goal is to re-establish their Sharia law governance and headquarters in Afghanistan. They will fight fiercely until the Western power exhausted of the never-ending guerilla warfare that the West proven weaker at… for e.g. Vietnam, Iraq and in Afghanistan.

The Drones might be successful in reducing the U.S and NATO casualties and seemingly achieving their targets, but the major problem of the entire warfare strategy lies in the massive civilian loss of lives from this operation. Although, the Taliban insurgents counteracting the Western drone attacks by blending in with the civilians in the remote and rural regions, the Afghani government and the people view the incidents as Western negligence given the past track record and remarks by the ex-defense secretary Donald Rumsfeld on the civilian deaths in Kabul in 2001 – “collateral damages in war.”

No populace would like the eternal presence of foreign troops on their soil, whether it’s Afghanistan or Iraq, irrespective of the occupiers’ mission. The hypocrisy is conspicuous when the U.S. conservative agenda vehemently opposes the ‘illegal’ immigrants represented by the unarmed civilians and in the same breath relentlessly supports the ‘illegal military invasion and occupation’ of foreign lands whether it is Iraq or Afghanistan.

How does the U.S and NATO make progress in the rocky Afghanistan?

First, eliminating the arsenal and arms supply to the insurgents would considerably debilitate the militants’ strength. Detecting the providers and enforcing severe international arms control would substantially relieve the U.S. and NATO command from any additional troops requirement. Similar techniques in Iraq would reduce the internal violence over there.

The immediate implementation of such methods would not only protect immense lives from all sides but also greatly help the U.S. economy from the war spending and investing in the life saving “National health care with public option.”

Second, allocating a major segment of the military operation towards nation building like infrastructure, schools and hospitals rather than held responsible for national chaos and killings. This would easily win the hearts and minds of the local population.

Last but not the least, paving way for job creations in both agricultural and industrial sector would gradually lead to the emancipation of the society. Afghanistan believed to be thriving in poppy plants yielding Opium. Likewise, Afghanistan has other valuable cash crops with vast potential to become a leading exporter of dry fruits and nuts, other than woolen products – clothing, shawls, carpets, rugs and silver, mineral ore etc.

Therefore, substituting Opium with healthy life sustenance crops like wheat, nuts, dry fruits and setting up woolen mills and carpet manufacturing guaranteed to revive hope and change that is long overdue in this nation.

The United States, European countries as well as developing nations like India and others should collectively promote the Afghanistan economy by easing the trade tariffs and quotas for these products and facilitate the trade flow from this long battered nation.

With respect to the political system – Unless and until the substantial corruption, bureaucracy and nepotism restrained if not eradicated from the political structure, no western power can succeed in the democratization of this demographically estranged society.

The incumbent administration under President Hamid Karzai, survivor of several assassination plots and attempts by the alleged Pakistani ISI supported Talibans up until early this year, has disappointed the international community on a range of issues.

President Karzai’s inability and lack of interest in housekeeping specifically the Opium production, minimizing government bureaucracy leading to corruptions, alleviating the nation’s poverty and devising any effective plan for job creations and economic growth has undermined regional advancement given the tribal control of the remaining areas.

Moreover, the Karzai government’s endorsement of social injustice towards women slighting women’s rights in the marital relationship is a matter of deep concern and violates the democratic norm in a society represented by the Western sponsored leadership.

According to various news reports, the voter turnout was relatively low as a result of the Taliban’s stern warnings to harm the electorate.

In light of the above perspective, Afghanistan would be better off with a coalition government of the three contenders – President Hamid Karzai, DR. Abdullah Abdullah and DR. Ashraf Ghani exchanging ideas, sharing intellect and experience in a concerted effort to move the war torn nation forward to the twenty first century. In addition, the fractured society would benefit from the collective talent and experience of the consolidated government, besides maintaining checks and balances on activities hindering the democratic functions.

On that note, Best Wishes offered to the new government in Afghanistan with peace, progress and prosperity in the immediate future.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

U.S. Relations with India

July 19, 2009

By Padmini Arhant

The Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton’s visit to the Indian sub-continent is a topic to discuss in different context. It’s obvious that the United States engagement in Afghanistan tied with the success of the Zardari-Gilani government presumably involved in eliminating the mayhem in the northwestern region by the Al-Qaeda and Taliban forces after substantial autonomy from the less credible previous military rule of the President Pervez Musharraf.

Despite the severe domestic economic crisis, the continuation of U.S. financial and military aid to Pakistan is an enormous investment of U.S. trust and resources in the nuclear Pakistan. In return, Pakistan must deliver the long anticipated results terminating not only the major terror organizations like Al-Qaeda and Taliban but also all terror networks in its entirety constituting a menace to its own and international peace and security.

Much to the anxiety of the nuclear neighbor India and the remaining Western nations, United States role in expecting the Pakistani government to co-operate and contribute effectively in the global war against terror is crucial unlike the blind trust and blank checks policy of the Bush administration.

As stated earlier, the United States focus and priority should shift from the governments of Afghanistan and Pakistan to the people of these socially and economically disadvantaged nations.

Although, the long overdue transformation depends on the interface with the respective governments, the United States must not squander the leverage it holds against the bureaucratic powers in both Pakistan and Afghanistan denounced for widespread corruption.

Further, given the disproportionate U.S. economic aid and troops commitment in the global cause, it’s incumbent on the international allies and every other nation affected by global terrorism to share the financial and military burden in alleviating the universal security crisis.

With respect to the emerging economic power and nuclear India’s concern over its nuclear neighbor Pakistan’s refusal and non-compliance of the international extradition treaty involving terrorists and terror networks in the Mumbai attacks last year —

The non-committal and disheartening response by the head of the State Department during the Indian press conference in Mumbai do not bode well with the world’s largest democracy in tune with the U.S. relations and pledges towards its allies particularly the closest ally Israel evidenced in the recent rhetoric such as —

“Strike against Israel will be an attack on the United States with a serious retaliation…”

To reiterate, the key representatives of the present White House and some legislators conspicuously favored to double standards are doing more harm than helping the United States in regaining the lost international solidarity and support much required in all fronts ranging from the economy, the environment, to the international security.

Unfortunately, the changing political landscape and economic developments in Asia and elsewhere ignored by the old school of thoughts indicates their ill preparedness of the reality.

The United States interest to take economic advantage of the expanding Indian middle class segment that is impressively political savvy and the U.S. demand seeking Indian input in the environmental issue possibly characterized as an ‘opportunism,’ considering the United States defense of the Zardari government’s inaction towards India’s security matter.

It would add to significant blunders in the U.S. foreign policy if the United States continues to adhere to the conventional strategy of hard line approach towards hypothetical threats yet selectively oblivious to genuine frustration based on real and proven events between the two nuclear nations in the Indian sub-continent.

Needless to state that the dysfunctional U.S. foreign policy due for drastic reform in the world view and understanding of the plight of the nations dependent on the United States to be a trustworthy partner in the mediation process of international peace and security. Otherwise, the status quo reviving the cold war era facilitating the nuclear and conventional arsenal proliferation is imminent.

Leadership thrives with fairness and equal treatment of all.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

‘Talibanization’ of Afghanistan and Pakistan

May 13, 2009

By Padmini Arhant

The Taliban insurgency in Afghanistan and the northwestern regions of Pakistan, particularly the swat valley have proven deadlier for the ruling powers in Afghanistan, Pakistan and the United Sates due to the inevitable civilian casualties and displacement arising from the incessant shelling supposedly targeting the Taliban militants.

According to the Pakistani government, the military operation has been effective thus far in the attack against the militants, without any confirmation or denial on the humanitarian catastrophe.

Meanwhile, the Taliban’s pervasive retaliation to the military force is evident from the clashes in other districts, Buner and Dir with the Taliban expected to be within 60 miles of the Capital city, Islamabad. Incidentally, the Taliban’s eyes are set on Karachi, the commercial capital and an epicenter for various terror networks readily available to forge alliance with the ideological militant group.

The North -Western Frontier Province appears to be under siege. The heavy bombing has elevated the humanitarian crisis with the internal refugees toll reaching a phenomenal 1.3 million and still rising including the earlier 550,000 from the tribal warfare.

It’s intriguing for those familiar with the Taliban’s rise and fall and their sudden emergence with well-equipped weaponry to challenge the U.S. and NATO forces in Afghanistan, and the Pakistani artillery predominantly supplied by the United States and China.   Most recently, the Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari reportedly blamed the United States i.e. CIA for creating the Taliban and implied that such creation consequently led to the present quagmire.

Origin of Taliban as ‘Mujahideens’ (The Arabic meaning “strugglers” )

As per Wikipedia – The Free Encyclopedia – Thanks

“The best-known mujahideen, various loosely-aligned Afghan opposition groups, initially fought against the incumbent pro-Soviet Afghan government during the late 1970s.

The mujahideen were significantly financed and armed (and are alleged to have been trained) by the United States Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) during the Carter[5] and Reagan administrations and the governments of Saudi Arabia, the People’s Republic of China, several Western European countries, Iran, and Zia-ul-Haq’s military regime in Pakistan.

The Pakistani Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) was the interagent used in the majority of these activities to disguise the sources of support for the resistance. Under Reagan, U.S. support for the mujahideen evolved into an official U.S. foreign policy, known as the Reagan Doctrine, which included U.S. support for anti-Soviet resistance movements in Afghanistan, Angola, Nicaragua, and elsewhere.”

Reality Check:

Although, the facts support the origin of Taliban (historically the orphans of the former Soviet oppression) as the ‘Mujahideens’ previously funded and trained by the nations vigorously involved in the lucrative arms race up until now,

The contemporary rise of Taliban and their empowerment attributed to the covert support by the Pakistani military and prominently the ISI (Inter-Services Intelligence) implicated in various terrorist activities around the world notably the September 11, 2001 and notwithstanding the Mumbai terror attack in November 2008.

The dynamic duo also presumably associated with other national and international conspiracies…

Fostering acrimony between India and Pakistan on the Kashmir dispute,

Coordinating with China and Israel in the arms supply to the island nation Sri Lanka in the ethnic cleansing of the Tamils,

Assassination attempts on the Afghan President Hamid Karzai,

The Indian embassy bombing in Kabul, and

Last but not the least, the possible link in the assassination of the former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto are few of the many contentious issues related to both institutions.

The above information might be controversial and inflammatory however, in Pakistan’s political reality democracy never allowed to blossom by the all-powerful Pakistani military force and the Intelligence Services apparently controlling the nuclear site. The successful coups in the past right down to the former Military Commander and President Pervez Musharraf are testimony to the fact that democracy proven oxy-moron by the ISI and the Pakistan armed forces.

Ironically, the waging of war against Taliban by the Zardari-Gilani administration succeeding a Military regime with a puppet figurehead after having given refuge and diplomatic immunity to the ousted Taliban forces post 9/11 is analogous to a raging forest fire set by the rangers entrusted with safeguarding the habitat’s interest.

It’s noteworthy that the former President Musharraf’s government was the only nation and the Islamic power to extend an open invitation to the Talibans following the U.S. troops led war against Afghanistan in 2001, while simultaneously posing as an important ally to the former U.S. administration under President George W. Bush.

Talibans are the by-product of the historic multinational blunder and botched up conventional stockpiles sale by the military industrial complex in Afghanistan under the guise of prototype for democracy in the lawless region of the world.

How does the scenario play out in Pakistan’s neck of the woods and for the rest of the world?

Taliban and Al-Qaida are formidable in their ideology to destabilize the democratic (more appropriately ‘dynasty’) rule in Pakistan perceived as the “American appointees” with the political cohesion of the Pakistani ISI and the Military hierarchy.

The Congress under Bush administration approved and granted $10 billion U.S. taxpayers aid to the Military power represented by the ex-President Musharraf for FATA (Federally Administered Tribal Areas) in an effort to fight the global war on terror. In return, the Pakistani Military misappropriated the funds(?) and diverted all attention towards the long time rival India in anticipation of a major confrontation on Kashmir by instigating the local militant groups alongside the Kashmiri border.

Evidently, failure on FATA combined with the conciliatory actions by the Pakistani ISI and the Military contributed to a myriad of terror networks within Pakistani soil.  Furthermore, the lack of oversight and accountability on the U.S. taxpayers’ aid to the Pakistan Military rather than the people enabled the precipitous decline of law and order.

As a result of the unconditional foreign aid to the institutions with flawed track record, today Waziristan is a safe haven for the Al-Qaida leader Osama Bin Laden and the North-Western Frontier Province now under Taliban control, thereby comprising a strategic victory for the terror and militant groups.

Interestingly, the Pakistan military has incorporated the incumbent U.S. President Obama’s “Change” philosophy in their traditional political agenda, i.e. toppling the government elected through a muddled electoral process in Pakistan. The difference being the conspicuous departure from the overt military coup launched against the prior democratic governments in the state.

Nothing more potent in fomenting anti-government and anti-American sentiments than a political turmoil from the homegrown insurgency forcing the ruling government to stage air and ground assaults yielding immense civilian casualties and ultimately the refugee status for a sizeable population in the homeland, again the humanitarian disaster unfolding with the blessings of the United States behind the scenes.

The anger and disappointment is visibly widespread among the victims and the families, they are demanding that the international community hold the United States and Zardari government accountable for the greatest human tragedy.

In this particular instance, the Pakistani ISI and the Military score the highest points for being the smooth operators.

Not surprisingly, the moderate, peaceful and pro-democracy population in Karachi and different parts of Pakistan is terrified of the Taliban rule and the Sharia law. The domestic and the international news agencies along with the human rights organizations have released several reports with graphic visuals on the civilian deaths and the exodus of at least 1,000,000 refugees and probably more are fleeing the main town, Mingora in Swat Valley and other war zones.

Accordingly, the Pakistani Prime Minister Syed Yousuf Raza Gilani seeking international aid to relieve the millions and the President Zardari’s visit to the U.S. requesting Congress for at least $83 billion U.S aid to rescue his nation from tyranny might be justified.

Howsoever, the United States taxpayers and other nations should not fall into the booby trap of funneling funds to the state, since the ordinary citizens in Pakistan and Afghanistan never ever receive a dime and invariably the funds are channeled to the nefarious sources lacking in ethics and defiant of national or international law. Please refer to the alternative recommendations detailed in the ‘remedy’ section of the article.

With respect to Afghanistan, the United States Special Forces’ recent aggression against the Talibans and other terror networks producing the huge civilian casualties is unacceptable. The medical reports from the international aid organizations suggest the use of White Phosphorous bombs in the raid, claiming to be legal in the international wars despite the use of such chemical arsenal considered a humanitarian crime on all accounts.

These are the reasons why war is a terrible choice as there is no winner except for the deaths and destruction of innocent civilians apart from the truth being the other casualty. An independent, international committee should conduct any investigation and not the parties accused of the crime to reflect seriousness and credibility in the matter.

International Crisis Remedy

Civil unrest and internal violence anywhere is a matter of concern. Nevertheless, the situation in Pakistan is precarious not just for the ‘nuclear’ factor and the potential ramifications in the Indian sub-continent, but also the imminent danger of radical elements in control of a highly volatile nation complex in demographic, political and socio-economic structure. In addition, Taliban and Al-Qaida together constitute a tremendous threat to the international security.

Effective immediately, any financial assistance from the United States and other nations must be conditional with a requirement for complete overhauling of the Pakistani ISI and the top Military officials to assure the international community the legitimacy of democratic power in the state.

Under no circumstances, cash payments made directly to the government agents in both countries i.e. Afghanistan and Pakistan in the light of embezzlement and bribery scandals involving the political figures. The economic aid to the people delivered by the credible non-profit humanitarian organizations is appropriate to realize the real gains and progress in the nations affected by corrupt bureaucracy.

Investments in cash and kind must be subject to accountability by an oversight committee of the respective nations.

Given the magnitude of the humanitarian plight in Afghanistan and Pakistan, the United States and NATO should engage more in the relief effort by providing logistic support to the people of these two nations desperately in need of efficient services from evacuation to settlement in peaceful manner.

Henceforth, the United States and allies must shift gear from the offensive military operation towards the relentless Peace Corps projects and rebuild civilizations in Afghanistan, Pakistan and war zones around the world. Such unprecedented action called for image reparation and trust revival lost in the imperialistic desire to invade and occupy nations vulnerable to new age weapons experiment.

The escalating violence and tension in these two countries has generated a severe loss of confidence in the local and foreign governments by the victims caught in the crossfire between the tribal warlords in cahoots with the fundamentalist forces and, the military might of the economic powers in the world.

Therefore, it’s essential for Afghanistan, Pakistan, United States and NATO to prioritize civilian protection and welfare before, during and after the combat period. It would greatly improve relationship with the local civilian population important to prevail in the indomitable task of defeating terror around the world.

In the twentieth and twenty first century, the rich and affluent nations imposing economic sanctions against the economically weak offenders has been the common and popular course of action, regardless of the real victims being the people and not the government authorities in power.

Now is the time to abandon the military action, economic sanctions and concepts that are obsolete, redundant and counterproductive.  Instead, useful and meaningful methods guided by moral principles are the best replacement to deal with any and all crises.

International consensus and action is paramount in the permanent arms embargo to relieve poor/ impoverished nations and developing/developed nations alike from the persisting outbreak of civil wars constantly witnessed in Africa, Latin, Central and South America, and relevantly in Sri Lanka with Pakistan and Afghanistan leading the world trend.

The existing conditions in Afghanistan and Pakistan are not a regional issue but a global calamity.  Similarly, it’s no longer the United States’ unilateral battle and the cooperation from the world over at all levels viz. troops involvement, financial assistance and logistic provision instrumental in maintaining international peace and order.

Finally, the game is over for the military industrial complex raking profits at the expense of innocent blood in the worldwide promotion of senseless carnage and chaos among humanity.

For the world at large, it’s worth remembering that,

“Peace within you helps spreading peace around you.”

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant