Afghanistan needs a "stable security environment to prevent it from again becoming a safe haven for Al-Qaeda or other terrorists," a U.S. report says.

The report was released on January 11 by the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR), which gives independent oversight of U.S. reconstruction funds for the country.

It says Afghan security forces have "not yet been capable of securing all of Afghanistan and has lost territory to the insurgency."

Most NATO-led foreign combat forces pulled out of Afghanistan in 2014, leaving nearly 10,000 U.S. troops behind.

Afghan forces have since struggled to fend off the Taliban, which has gained control of more territory than any time since the U.S.-led invasion in 2001.

SIGAR described corruption as "one of the most serious threats to the U.S.-funded Afghanistan reconstruction effort."

"Powerful drug networks, mainly run by close-knit families and tribes, bankroll the insurgency and launder money," it also said.

With reporting by AP</s>KABUL, Afghanistan — Afghanistan needs a stable security environment to prevent it from again becoming a safe haven for al-Qaida and other militants, but Afghan security forces have not yet become capable of securing all of the country by themselves, a U.S. report said Wednesday.

The report, by the U.S. government's Special Inspector General for Afghanistan, offered a high-risk list assessment for the war-torn country, two years after NATO-led foreign combat forces pulled out at the end of 2014, leaving only a smaller training and assisting mission behind.

SIGAR, which provides independent oversight of U.S. reconstruction funds for Afghanistan, also noted that despite the fact that more than half of all U.S. reconstruction funds since 2002 has gone toward building, equipping and training Afghan forces, they still have lost territory to the Taliban.

"The Afghan national defense and security force has not yet been capable of securing all of Afghanistan and has lost territory to the insurgency," SIGAR said.

Last August, the U.S. military mission in Afghanistan, or USFOR-A, said only 63.4 percent of the country's territory was under government control — compared to the 72 percent that the military said was controlled by Kabul in November 2015.

SIGAR also noted at least seven other areas of concern in Afghanistan, including rampant corruption and drug trafficking.

"To combat the Taliban and other threats, the United States has provided more than $64 billion since 2002, including $3.45 billion in fiscal year 2016 alone, to support the Afghan National Army, the Afghan National Police, and the Afghan Air Force," the report quoted Inspector General John F. Sopko as saying.

SIGAR cited U.S. Defense Department reports that say Afghan forces are "generally capable and effective at protecting major population centers, preventing the Taliban from maintaining prolonged control of specific areas, and at responding to Taliban attacks."

The Taliban had declared their goal for 2016 was to take a provincial capital - something they failed to do despite several attempts.

However, militant groups in Afghanistan are still capable of launching large-scale attacks, including in major urban centers — such as two large bombings, including a suicide attack, on Tuesday that killed at least 38 people near the government offices in Kabul.

Also Tuesday, a bombing that targeted the provincial governor's guesthouse in the southern city of Kandahar killed five diplomats from the United Arab Emirates and six other people. The governor and the UAE ambassador to Afghanistan were among several people wounded in that attack.

In 2014, SIGAR issued its first "High-Risk Report," identifying areas it assessed need special attention in Afghanistan. The new report is likely intended to help inform the incoming U.S. administration of the most pressing reconstruction challenges in 2017 and beyond.</s>Two years after NATO handed responsibility for Afghanistan’s security to local forces, the country remains crippled by corruption and its troops can barely hold the Taliban at bay, a US inspector said Wednesday.

Since US-led NATO troops stopped leading patrols and stepped into an advisory and support role at the end of 2014, Afghan army and police forces have suffered thousands of casualties and face continual assaults from a well-funded and well-armed Taliban.

“As much as I wish I could say much has improved in Afghanistan over the past two years, I cannot,” John Sopko, the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR), told a Washington think tank.

Sopko was speaking as his agency published a list of high-risk threats to Afghanistan, less than two weeks before incoming President-elect Donald Trump takes office.

Just as President Barack Obama did eight years ago, Trump is inheriting an Afghan conflict that seems impossible to resolve.

Trump has offered few indications of his plans for Afghanistan.

In a 2013 tweet, he said “Let’s get out” of the country and said the money America spends there would be better used at home.

Neither he nor his Democratic opponent Hillary Clinton gave Afghanistan more than a passing mention during the presidential campaign.

Sopko noted the number of armed groups opposing the Afghan government is growing, and said the amount of Afghan districts under government control or influence dropped from 70.5 percent at the start of 2016 to just 63.4 percent by the end of August.

The Afghan army is “basically playing whack-a-mole following the Taliban around Afghanistan,” Sopko said.

“At a minimum, they’re playing defense and are not taking the fight to the Taliban.”

Underscoring the fragile security situation, bombings across three Afghan cities including Kabul killed around 50 people and wounded 100 others Tuesday, in a day of carnage as Taliban insurgents escalated their deadly winter campaign of violence.

To date, America has spent more than $115 billion in US taxpayer money on reconstruction efforts in Afghanistan.

When warfighting costs are included, the United States has spent close to $1 trillion.

Complicating matters, a long-standing issue of Afghan commanders lying about troop numbers to swindle the payment system remains a stubborn problem.

The Afghan army likely still has tens of thousands of these phantom troops on its payrolls, Sopko said.

“Afghan commanders often pocket the paychecks of ‘ghost soldiers’ for whom the US is paying salaries,” he said.

He added there is evidence the Taliban has instructed field commanders to buy US-supplied weapons, fuel and ammunition from Afghan soldiers.

“To do so is both easier and less expensive for the insurgents,” he told the Center for Strategic and International Studies, noting that the Taliban were now part of the US-provided weapons “supply chain.”

The Taliban has plenty of cash, thanks to booming poppy production that is growing at near-record levels as eradication efforts falter.

CSIS expert Anthony Cordesman, who hosted Sopko, said in a report this month that it is “more than possible” Afghan forces will be locked in a war of attrition with no clear end, and that 2017 could mark “at least be the beginning of a major defeat” for them.

In 2015, Afghan police sustained more than 5,000 fatalities and saw the regional capital Kunduz briefly captured by the Taliban.

Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Joe Dunford, has called the Afghan situation a “stalemate,” though commanders later tried to massage the assessment, calling it an “equilibrium.”

Obama has cut the US troop presence to about 8,400. Sopko warned the incoming Trump administration about the complexities of making further adjustments.

“Withdraw, and the democratic government may well fall. Stay, and continue what we have been doing and we may be faced with what General Dunford has described as a stalemate,” Sopko said.

Still, Sopko noted some signs of improvement.

He said both President Ashraf Ghani and Chief Executive Abdullah Abdullah had cooperated with US efforts to prevent waste and fraud.

He also highlighted an anti-corruption justice center that has begun to prosecute graft cases.

Repeated bids to launch peace negotiations with the Taliban have failed and a fierce new fighting season is expected to kick off in the spring</s>Afghanistan needs a stable security environment to prevent it from again becoming a safe haven for al-Qaida and other militants, but Afghan security forces have not yet become capable of securing all of the country by themselves, a U.S. report said Wednesday.</s>Afghan officials are pushing to create a “safe zone” for Taliban insurgents in a bid to wean them away from traditional sanctuaries inside Pakistan, in a radical and contentious strategy to de-escalate the conflict.

The plan underscores desperation in Afghanistan for out-of-the-box solutions to tackle the 15-year insurgency, as peace bids repeatedly fail and US-backed forces suffer record casualties in stalemated fighting.

If implemented, the strategy -- aimed at undercutting Pakistan’s influence over the Taliban -- could, for better or for worse, be a game changer in a strife-torn nation where ceding territory to insurgents is seen as tantamount to partition.

“I urge the Taliban to return to Afghanistan. We should make a safe zone for them and their families,” Kandahar police chief Abdul Raziq told a gathering of religious scholars and tribal elders last month.

“We can no longer rely on foreign governments and embassies to end the war. The Taliban belong to this country, they are sons of this soil.”

That Raziq, arguably the most powerful commander in southern Afghanistan and long one of the staunchest anti-Taliban figures, would suggest such an idea amplified the shockwaves it created.

“The government shouldn’t be giving safe zones to terrorists,” warned former Helmand governor Sher Mohammed Akhundzada, while some observers dismissed the strategy as “illogical” as the Taliban already control vast swathes of Afghan territory.

Raziq did not respond to repeated requests for an interview, but a senior security official told AFP the government’s goal “is to bring the Taliban from Pakistan to Afghanistan”.

“We will separate a territory for them to come with their families. Then whether they want to fight or talk peace, they will be relieved from the pressure of Pakistan,” he said, speaking anonymously.

Pakistan began supporting the Taliban movement of the 1990s as part of its policy of “strategic depth” against nemesis India.

Seen by many Afghans as the biggest obstacle to lasting peace, Islamabad has long been accused of playing a “double game” in Afghanistan: endorsing Washington’s war on terrorism since the 9/11 attacks, while nurturing militant sanctuaries.

After years of official denial, a top Pakistani official in 2016 admitted for the first time the Taliban enjoys safe haven inside his country, which Islamabad uses as a “lever” to pressure the group into talks with Kabul.

However, Pakistan has hosted multiple rounds of talks ostensibly to jumpstart a peace process -- without result.

The “safe zone” strategy appears to have taken shape as prominent Taliban figures call to make the insurgency independent of Pakistan’s powerful intelligence agency, which they accuse of manipulating the group.

Read | Afghanistan rejects move by Russia, China and Pak to rope in Taliban for talks

“The presence of our movement’s key decision makers and institutions inside Pakistan means they can impose things that are against the interests of our movement and Afghanistan,” Sayed Tayyeb Agha wrote in a letter last year to Taliban leader Haibatullah Akhundzada.

“To be able to make independent decisions, our leadership... should leave Pakistan,” the former head of the Taliban’s political commission added in the letter seen by AFP.

Afghanistan’s National Security Council did not officially confirm the government strategy, saying only: “The Taliban are allowed to relocate to Afghanistan under state protection.”

The Afghan security official said the government was in contact with Taliban leaders over the proposal, a fact corroborated by militant sources in Pakistan.

He refused to specify the potential location for the safe zone, and whether it will be immune from aerial bombardment or ground assault, but insisted no areas with military installations will be handed over.

Speculation that the government was furtively trying to cede territory recently grew when local media cited secret military documents revealing Afghan forces were planning to retreat from two Helmand districts during a winter lull in fighting.

Afghan officials dismissed the report, while also rejecting longstanding claims that the Taliban leadership council -- Quetta Shura -- has relocated to Afghanistan.

But multiple insurgent sources told AFP that prominent members, including the Taliban’s military chief Ibrahim Sadr, recently moved to an undisclosed location in Afghanistan.

“Ibrahim also urged Haibatullah to come to Afghanistan but he refused,” a top Quetta Shura member told AFP.

Obaidullah Barakzai, an MP from Uruzgan province, argued that giving the Taliban a permanent address in Afghanistan would make it easier to convince them to participate in an “Afghan-owned, Afghan-led peace dialogue without interference from our neighbour”.

However Timor Sharan, an analyst at the International Crisis Group, said the strategy was flawed.

“It’s like asking the Taliban to leave their brick-built houses and settle in a tent in the desert with half-hearted guarantees that they will not be bombed,” Sharan told AFP.

“The Taliban need to receive a strong assurance from coalition forces, in particular the US, before making the move.”

Read | Include us or leave country: Pak tells Taliban after being sidelined in talks

But the Afghan security official insisted there was no military solution to the conflict.

“If this plan does not work, Afghanistan will be ready for another tough year of fighting,” he said.</s>Afghan villagers gather on Nov. 4 around several victims' bodies who were killed during clashes between Taliban and Afghan security forces in the Taliban-controlled, Buz-e Kandahari village in Kunduz province, Afghanistan. In a statement released Thursday, the U.S. military in Afghanistan said the results of its investigation into the November firefight shows that American troops had fired on Afghan homes, killing 33 civilians. [Najim Rahim | Associated Press]

KABUL, Afghanistan — The U.S. military in Afghanistan said on Thursday that its investigation into a November firefight with the Taliban in northern Kunduz province has shown that 33 civilians died in the raid during which U.S. troops fired on Afghan homes.

The probe followed claims that civilian deaths resulted from airstrikes called in to support Afghan and U.S. forces who came under fire in the province's village of Buz-e Kandahari, which targeted two senior Taliban commanders.

The two Taliban figures, responsible for violence in Kunduz the previous month, were killed in the operation.

According to a U.S. military statement, the investigation "determined, regretfully, that 33 civilians were killed and 27 wounded" as troops responded to fire from "Taliban who were using civilian houses as firing positions."

After the raid, Kunduz residents carried over a dozen corpses of the dead, including children and family members of the Taliban fighters, toward a local governor's office in a show of rage.

"Regardless of the circumstances, I deeply regret the loss of innocent lives," the statement quoted Gen. John Nicholson, commander of U.S. Forces in Afghanistan. "On this occasion the Taliban chose to hide amongst civilians and then attacked Afghan and U.S. forces."

"I wish to assure President (Ashraf) Ghani and the people of Afghanistan that we will take all possible measures to protect Afghan civilians," Nicholson added. "We will continue to assist the Afghan security forces in their efforts to defend their country."

But a Kunduz official told the Associated Press that the Afghan civilian death toll in the U.S. military probe was less than what local authorities had.

"More than 50 people, including women and children, were killed in the Afghan and U.S. forces' attack in Buz-e Kandahari," said Toryalia Kakar, a deputy provincial council member.

Kakar urged the United States to compensate the victims' families who he said not only lost their loved ones but also saw their homes and property destroyed in the airstrikes.

The Taliban briefly overran the city of Kunduz, the provincial capital with the same name, in October 2015, in a show of strength by the insurgents that also highlighted the troubles facing local Afghan forces, 15 years after the U.S.-led invasion of the country. The Taliban captured and held parts of Kunduz a year earlier as well, before the city was fully liberated weeks later with the help of U.S. airstrikes.

In the 2015 operation, a U.S. Air Force special operations AC-130 gunship attacked a Kunduz hospital run by the medical charity Doctors Without Borders, killing 42 people. Sixteen U.S. military personnel, including a two-star general, later were disciplined for what American officials described as mistakes that led the strike. Doctors Without Borders has called the attack a war crime and demanded an independent investigation.

After the firefight last November, Ghani criticized the Taliban for using women and children as "a shield" during the raid in Buz-e Kandahari. He also announced a local investigation had been started.

The U.S. military statement further added that its investigation "concluded that U.S. forces acted in self-defense" in the joint Afghan-American raid in the village.

"As an indication of the ferocity of the fire faced by friendly forces from the Taliban-occupied houses, two U.S. soldiers and three Afghan Army Commandos were killed," it said. "In addition, four U.S. soldiers and 11 commandos were wounded."

The raid also killed 26 Taliban fighters and wounded around 26 other insurgents, the U.S. military report said.

However, Kakar, the Kunduz official, disputed that death toll, saying not more than 10 Taliban fighters died.

The investigation concluded that U.S. air assets used the minimum amount of force required and that the civilians who were wounded or killed were likely inside the buildings from which the Taliban were firing. In addition, the U.S. military said a Taliban ammunition cache was struck and exploded, which also destroyed multiple civilian buildings and may also have killed civilians.

"It has been determined that no further action will be taken because U.S. forces acted in self-defense and followed all applicable law and policy," the statement concluded.

NATO's combat operations ended in Afghanistan at the end of 2014, a move that put Afghan forces in charge of the country's security. Since then, Afghan forces have suffered heavy casualties battling the Taliban, who have tried to expand their footprint across much of the country. NATO and U.S. casualties have been few.</s>Last week, as the mainstream media continued to obsess over the CIA’s evidence-free claim that the Russians hacked the presidential election, President Obama quietly sent 300 U.S. Marines back into Afghanistan’s Helmand Province.

This is the first time in three years that the U.S. military has been sent into that conflict zone, and it represents a final failure of Obama’s Afghanistan policy. The outgoing president promised that by the end of his second term, the U.S. military would only be present in small numbers and only on embassy duty. But more than 8,000 U.S. troops will remain in Afghanistan as he leaves office.

When President Obama was first elected he swore that he would end the U.S. presence in Iraq (the “bad” war) and increase U.S. presence in Afghanistan (the “good” war). He ended up increasing troops to both wars, while the situation in each country continued to deteriorate.

Why are the Marines needed in the Helmand Province? Because although the foolish and counterproductive 15-year U.S. war in Afghanistan was long ago lost, Washington cannot face this fact. Last year the Taliban controlled 20 percent of the province. This year they control 85 percent of the province. So billions more must be spent and many more lives will be lost.

Will these 300 Marines somehow achieve what the 2011 peak of 100,000 U.S. soldiers was not able to achieve? Will this last push “win” the war? Hardly! The more the president orders military action in Iraq and Afghanistan, the worse it gets. In 2016, for example, President Obama dropped 1,337 bombs on Afghanistan, a 40 percent increase from 2015. According to the United Nations, in 2016 there were 2,562 conflict-related civilian deaths and 5,835 injuries. And the Taliban continues to score victories over the Afghan puppet government.

The interventionists in Washington continue to run our foreign policy regardless of who is elected. They push for wars, they push for regime change, then they push for billions to reconstruct the bombed-out countries. When the “liberated” country ends up in worse shape, they claim it was because we just didn’t do enough of what ruined the country in the first place. It’s completely illogical, but the presidents who keep seeking the neocons’ advice don’t seem to notice. Obama — the “peace” candidate and president — has proven himself no different than his predecessors.

What will a President Trump do about the 15 year failed nation-building experiment in Afghanistan? He has criticized the long-standing U.S. policy of “regime-change” and “nation-building” while on the campaign trail, and I would like to think he would just bring the troops home. However, I would not be surprised if he accelerates U.S. military action in Afghanistan to “win the war” once and for all. He will not succeed if he does so, as the war is not winnable – no one even knows what “winning” looks like!

We may well see even more U.S. troops killing and being killed in Afghanistan a year from now if that is the case. That would be a terrible tragedy.

Ron Paul is a former Congressman and Presidential candidate. He can be reached at the RonPaulInstitute.org.</s>Thousands of 'ghost soldiers' likely still on Afghan payroll: US inspector

The Afghan army likely still has tens of thousands of "ghost soldiers" on its payrolls and Taliban commanders are apparently buying US-supplied weapons from local troops, a US government inspector said Wednesday.

US and NATO commanders in Afghanistan have long criticized endemic corruption in the Afghan security forces, but 15 years after the US-led invasion the problem remains persistent, said John Sopko, the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction.

"Afghan commanders often pocket the paychecks of 'ghost soldiers' for whom the US is paying salaries," Sopko said in prepared remarks to a Washington think tank.

"The number of ghost soldiers is significant, likely reaching into the tens of thousands."

He added there is evidence the Taliban have instructed field commanders to buy US-supplied weapons, fuel, and ammunition from Afghan soldiers.

"Because to do so is both easier and less expensive for the insurgents," he said in a speech at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

Afghan police and army units took over providing security for Afghanistan from NATO in 2015.

Their first year was something of a disaster, when they sustained more than 5,000 fatalities and saw the regional capital Kunduz briefly captured by the Taliban.

Numbers of casualties were significantly higher in 2016.

Sopko, who frequently delivers scathing reports detailing Afghan corruption and hapless US reconstruction efforts, delivered his latest assessment just weeks before President-elect Donald Trump takes office.

Just as President Barack Obama did eight years ago, Trump is inheriting an Afghan conflict that seems impossible to resolve any time soon.

Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Joe Dunford, has called the situation a "stalemate."

Obama has cut the US troop presence to about 8,400 but Sopko warned of the consequences of drawdowns.

"Withdraw, and the democratic government may well fall. Stay, and continue what we have been doing and we may be faced with what General Dunford has described as a stalemate," Sopko warned.

Including war fighting, US costs for Afghanistan now total near $1 trillion.</s>Kabul, Afghanistan was rocked by a Taliban suicide attack Tuesday evening that has left dozens dead and as many as 80 people injured, according to reports. The Taliban attack came during rush hour as convoys of people were leaving the Afghan Parliament offices, where meetings regarding the national budget were being held.

Reporting from VOA News indicates that the Taliban suicide attack occurred in the Darulaman neighborhood of Kabul, Afghanistan. One Taliban attacker apparently detonated an explosive vest as Parliament officials and employees left the area, and moments later, another Taliban fighter detonated a car bomb as first responders arrived on the scene, in order to maximize deaths and injuries. A number of high-level officials are thought to be among those killed.

Afghan security immediately attempted to secure the area, and rescue crews came to assist. The transportation of injured individuals was hampered due to heavy traffic. According to Wahidullah Majrooh, a spokesman for the Afghan Health Ministry, some 30 people were killed, a number likely to rise, with around 80 suffering various degrees of injury.

The New York Times spoke with Afghan lawmaker Kamal Safi, who was present during the suicide attack.

“I left the area a couple of minutes before the explosions. The explosions took place exactly at the time when government employees were going home, so it was a rush hour. More than thousand people are working there, so I know the number of casualties are very high.”

The Taliban immediately claimed responsibility for the Kabul, Afghanistan suicide attack, the worst the city has seen in many months, in a public statement. Another attack in Lashkargah, in the Helmand province of Afghanistan, took place at a meeting of security officials. That attack claimed seven lives and wounded numerous others. Much of the Helmand province, a major poppy-producing area, is under Taliban control.</s>WASHINGTON: The security of Pakistan, India and Afghanistan is interconnected and it will be better for these countries to cooperate with each other in countering terrorism, a US State Department spokesman said.

Responding to a question at a briefing at the State Department, Mark Toner said, “Afghanistan’s, security Pakistan’s security and indeed India’s security, they’re all interconnected. And so as much as they can work in tandem or work in a partnership on counterterrorism operations I think it’s for the betterment of the region.”

Responding to a question, the spokesman observed that denying safe havens to terrorists had been part of discussion with Pakistan and acknowledged that there had been progress.

“We’ve seen them (Pakistan) take some steps to address these safe havens,” he said but maintained that the problem persisted and there was something which was part of ongoing conversation and dialogue between Pakistan and the United States.

He, however, acknowledged the difficulties going after the safe havens in the border region with Afghanistan given the remote areas that terrorists were hiding in.

The spokesman strongly condemned the Monday’s terrorist attack on the parliamentary buildings in Kabul that killed 38 Afghans and wounded more than 70 people.

“The United States stands strongly with the people of Afghanistan and remains firmly committed to building a secure peaceful and prosperous future for Afghanistan,” he added.

Replying to another question, he said “There has been a consistent trend of these kinds of senseless acts of violence on the part of the Taliban who have claimed responsibility for the attack in Kabul.”

He said that the United States did not want to see Afghanistan slide back into what it was. Toner said the US was trying to build the capacity of the Afghan security forces to determine and to provide for the security of the Afghan people.

“We’ve also worked hard to foster an Afghan-led peace process which again ultimately is we believe the way forward and we encourage that. “We want to see a strong stable democratic Afghanistan that can never again provide a safe haven to any terrorist organisation,” he said.

Security of Pakistan, Afghanistan, India interlinked: US was posted in Top Story of TheNews International - https://www.thenews.com.pk on January 12, 2017 and was last updated on January 12, 2017. This news story is related to Print/178572-Security-of-Pakistan-Afghanistan-India-interlinked-US/ - breaking news, latest news, pakistan ne. Permanent link to the news story "Security of Pakistan, Afghanistan, India interlinked: US" is https://www.thenews.com.pk/print/178572-Security-of-Pakistan-Afghanistan-India-interlinked-US.
The Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction releases a report on Afghanistan, saying that the Afghan Armed Forces are not capable of securing the country and have lost more territory to the Taliban, the most since the United States invasion of Afghanistan in 2001.