Home » Posts tagged with » america (Page 138)
CBS Finds Sympathetic College Student to Use to Promote Obama’s Push for ‘Dream Act’

Pedro Ramirez knows his “future depends on” President Barack Obama’s success in passing “immigration reform,” specifically the “Dream Act,” CBS’s John Blackstone asserted in a Tuesday night story which corroborated the need for Obama’s quest by holding up Ramirez as an innocent victim. “He is student body president at California State University at Fresno where he'll graduate this month following years of accomplishment,” Blackstone heralded, “until his parents admitted to him they've been living here illegally since he was three years old. Last year he joined other young undocumented immigrants pushing for passage of the Dream Act. It would award legal residency to children brought to America before they were 16 as long as they graduate from high school and go on to college or the military.” Linking Ramirez’s plight to Obama’s policy solution, Blackstone asserted: “On the Texas border today, the President called for those who want immigration reform to help push an entrenched Congress.” CBS News political analyst John Dickerson soon helpfully pointed out: “The most specific thing the President can talk about at the moment is how much tougher he's been on illegal immigrants than in previous administrations.” Blackstone concluded: “Meanwhile, in the next few weeks some 65,000 students who came here illegally as children will graduate from high school, but for now they'll face a life in the shadows in America.”

Continue reading …
Andrew Breitbart Blames Nancy Pelosi and Congressional Black Democrats for Forcing Tea Partiers to Act Like Racists

Click here to view this media In another embarrassing segment of C-SPAN’s Book TV , Andrew Breitbart is allowed by Armstrong Williams to pretend like he didn’t lose his bet that racial slurs were hurled at members of the Congressional Black Caucus and at others at the “tea party” protests outside of Capitol Hill last year. As Karoli already noted, Breitbart did lose that bet despite his claims here to the C-SPAN audience and Williams. Andrew Breitbart pretends like the “tea party” is not really made up of a bunch of racists and is a place where women and African Americans can find a home for conservatives outside of the Republican Party. What’s utterly laughable here is that Breitbat somehow doesn’t seem to know what rights women and black people had in America when this country was first founded. Maybe someone should remind him that women didn’t have the right to vote and that black people were considered three-fifths of a person back in the days he’s aggrandizing. BREITBART: What is at stake here is that blacks and women are creating the “tea party”, making it a place that unlike the Republican Party which is a toxic environment for blacks and that’s been the media’s job for years. This is a place where blacks and women and hispanics can go to recreate this country in its original Constitutional vision. Yeah, just keep telling yourself that Breitbart and maybe some day someone will believe our “original Constitutional vision” ever meant anything but freedom for anyone but rich white male landowners. If he had a host that was going to challenge him instead of kiss his rear end for this segment, maybe they’d have asked him about this and the “tea party” and their racism — Staying KKKlassy: Tea Baggers Call Congressmen “N****rs” and “F****ts” At HCR Protest. Hate Rules The Day .

Continue reading …

Sean Avery has been a very controversial player in his NHL career. He’s said some stupid things and played over the line at times, but on this issue he’s right on the money. Avery got together with Human Rights Campaign and made this video in support of same-sex marriage. Sean joins New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, and actors Julianne Moore and Sam Waterston, in supporting marriage equality. However, a sports agent came out and criticized Avery for his support of the gay community: Avery’s video in support of gay marriage for the Human Rights Campaign ‘s New Yorkers for Marriage Equality drive spurred hockey agent Todd Reynolds of Uptown Sports Management to write Monday night on the @uptownhockey Twitter account, “Very sad to read Sean Avery’s misguided support of same-gender ‘marriage’. Legal or not, it will always be wrong.” The agent also tweeted: “To clarify. This is not hatred or bigotry towards gays. It is not intolerance in any way shape or form. I believe we are all equal … But I believe in the sanctity of marriage between one man and one woman. This is my personal viewpoint. I Do not hate anyone.” Uptown Sports represents a handful of NHL players, including Nashville Predators winger Mike Fisher , the husband of country singer Carrie Underwood . Response against Reynolds’ tweet was sharp, including from fellow agents. Scott Norton of Chicago -based Norton Sports tweeted, “Not to promote violence, but @NortonSports Jr has something in mind for #UptownSports!” with a link to a video of his son doing karate practice. — The Human Rights Campaign’s video series also has included messages from Mayor Bloomberg, his predecessors Ed Koch and David Dinkins, and both of New York’s senators, Chuck Schumer and Kirsten Gillibrand. A typical excuse by right wingers is that they don’t hate gays, they just think they shouldn’t have equality. It’s nice to see a sports figure stand with the gay community because so much of the sports world is dominated by homophobic right-wing types. And make no mistake, sports in America does have an influence on America and politics. As we’ve seen, sports talk radio has already played a hand in electing Scott Brown in MA., when all the local radio jocks attacked his opponent, Martha Coakley, over her misstatements about Curt Schilling. I wrote about this earlier; Margery Eagan: The media is afraid to talk about how Right Wing Talk and Sports Radio ‘Demonized’ Martha Coakley EAGAN: Well, she got very good press from “The Boston Globe,” not from my paper, “The Boston Herald.” But you know something? People don’t like — TV journalists and newspaper journalists do not like to talk about the influence of talk radio. Let me tell you something. There was a nonstop hammering of Martha Coakley on the AM stations here, on the huge sports stations here. She was the evil incarnate and Scott Brown was the next coming. And, you know, the New England Patriots in the playoffs lost early on. It was as if there was this transference from Tom “Terrific” Brady, the quarterback of the Patriots, to Scott “Terrific” Brown. You look at the rallies for Scott Brown, they were very white, they were very suburban, they were Gillette Stadium fans, and there was almost this…

Continue reading …
California College Adds Secularism as a Major

Religious studies? So old. Secular studies? Brand spanking new! Pitzer College, a liberal arts school in southern California, has added secularism as a possible major for its students and is the first college to do so. Among the courses offered there will be “God, Darwin and Design in America,” “Anxiety in the Age of Reason” and

Continue reading …
MSNBC’s Bashir Asks Tancredo: ‘Would You Have Preferred Obama’s Death Over Bin Laden’s?’

For the second time in less than 24 hours I find myself wondering how an American television “news” network could have assembled such a collection of ignoramuses. After MSNBC's Lawrence O'Donnell Monday evening claimed the Founding Fathers would have understood the need to raise the debt ceiling in order to protect the country's credit rating, Martin Bashir on Tuesday actually asked former Republican Congressman Tom Tancredo if he would have preferred President Obama's death over Osama bin Laden's (video follows with transcript and commentary): MARTIN BASHIR, HOST: In the wake of Osama bin Laden’s killing, I'd like to remind you of something you wrote in the Washington Times last July. You said, “Mr. Obama is a more serious threat to America than al Qaeda. We you know that Osama bin Laden and followers want to kill us but at least they are an outside force against whom we can offer our best defense. But when a dedicated enemy of the Constitution is working from the inside, we face a far more dangerous threat.” Now, I know you're a political opponent of President Obama, but wasn't that a ludicrous thing to accuse the President of? TOM TANCREDO, FORMER CONGRESSMAN (R-COLORADO): Well, I suppose you can phrase it that way because you would think of it that way, but I certainly don’t, millions of other people don't think it was ludicrous because of course the President of the United States as he said many times during his campaign is doing what he promised, and that is to fundamentally — his quote, his exact words were, I am going to fundamentally transform America. Now, he said it on many occasions. His intent upon doing it, and what exactly does that mean? Well, I think we pretty much understand, he's got a low opinion of the Constitution. He's talked about that, too, about how it needs to be changed. The fact is that what he's done, and I'm very pleased about what has happened in Afghanistan. He's ordered an assassination. That is something that, of course, we would have just, oh, my gosh, if Bush had done something like assassinated somebody else, even Osama bin Laden, there would have been… BASHIR: I don't think… TANCREDO: Oh, you don't think it was an assassination? BASHIR: No, I didn't say that. I think that the suggestion that President Bush would have been condemned for such a clean operation is unreasonable and unfair. TANCREDO: He would have. Believe me. You would have been condemning it for an assassination. That's what you would have called it because of course it was that but we talked about during those days… BASHIR: Sorry, Mr. Tancredo… TANCREDO: …we continue to talk about how horrible it was. Any policy of assassination couldn’t be accepted. We accept it with Obama? That’s okay with me. We accept the idea of intimidation and coercive tactics… BASHIR: If I may, if I may just… TANCREDO: …to get the information with Obama. It’s okay with me. BASHIR: If I may just for one moment. TANCREDO: Yeah. BASHIR: You were suggesting that I would have condemned President Bush… TANCREDO: I am. BASHIR: That's not able, that's not right. And also, you know, you're suggesting that there would have been condemnation of the Navy SEALs who executed that, but can I go back to your original quote if I may? TANCREDO: Sure. BASHIR: To follow your logic, would you have preferred then the death of the President as opposed to bin Laden? TANCREDO: No. Of course not. My God. And that is not a logical assumption anybody can make. BASHIR: Well, it is because… TANCREDO: Only you would say a thing like that. BASHIR: Mr. Tancredo. TANCREDO: There was no logic. I never once suggested the President of the United States should be… BASHIR: You said the president was a greater threat than Osama bin laden. TANCREDO: …any violence should happen, any harm. And there is a way to deal with that here in the United States, and that is exactly what I hope to do and that is make sure he does not serve a second term. He's defeated at the polls. Not anything of a violent nature ever nor should I ever, nor would I suggest in a million years that that's some sort of tragedy should befall him. BASHIR: Let's move on to, let's move on to immigration. TANCREDO: I do not wish him harm the slightest bit of harm except political harm. Once again I must ask: what do MSNBC's owners Comcast and General Electric think about this kind of a display from one of their employees? Do these people think it's a fitting question to ask a former member of Congress if he would have preferred the death of a sitting president over what until nine days ago was public enemy number one? Is there absolutely nothing these folks consider sacred? Honestly, the more I watch of this network on a regular basis, the more sickened I am by everyone involved with it. (H/T RCP via NBer Jane)

Continue reading …
Senator Max Baucus says Social Security  is off the table

This is a welcome statement coming from an unlikely source. Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus says he doesn’t think Congress will address Social Security as part of an effort to reduce government borrowing. The Montana Democrat said Tuesday that Social Security has not added to the budget deficit, so it should not be included in a deficit reduction package. Baucus is part of a bipartisan group of lawmakers, led by Vice President Joe Biden, who are trying to negotiate such a package. Baucus said Social Security’s finances should be addressed in the next couple of years. But he also said the program is not in a crisis. At least he said “the program is not in a crisis” and that Social Security doesn’t add to the deficit. Where’s Dick Durbin on this? Why isn’t he the one standing up and doing the right thing instead of standing with the most Dangerous Gang in America ? enlarge

Continue reading …
Willetts on back foot over higher fees

Cameron and Cable insist rich students won’t be able to buy university places, but critics warn of ‘serious blow’ to social mobility Universities minister David Willetts has defended proposals to create extra places on degree courses that would not be publicly funded after critics warned that the plans could deal a “serious blow” to social mobility. British students who take the extra places could be charged the same fees as overseas undergraduates. Employers and charities will also be encouraged to sponsor places outside the quota that English universities are set every year. The government was engulfed in a row over the plans after critics claimed it would allow the rich to “buy advantage”. Willetts said: “We will only consider allowing off-quota places where it contributes to the coalition commitment to improve social mobility and increase fair access. There is no question of wealthy students being able to buy a place at university. Access to a university must be based on ability to learn, not ability to pay.” Ministers have insisted that off-quota students would still have to meet entry requirements for their course and there is no question of the rich being able to “buy their way” into university. Willetts says an overall expansion of places would increase social mobility by freeing up more spaces for students from poorer homes. Despite the furore, Whitehall sources confirmed that a version of the proposal, first outlined in the Guardian on Tuesday , will still appear in the universities white paper, due to be published in June. Speaking during a series of TV interviews, the prime minister David Cameron insisted that the proposal would not create a privileged route of access to universities for rich students. “University access is about being able to learn, not about being able to pay,” he said. “There is no question of people being able to buy their way into university.” Number 10 stressed no proposal would be backed if it reduced social mobility. Vince Cable, the business secretary, said he was willing to look at how to expand off-quota places through company sponsorships, but he did not support children of the rich being given priority access to university. In a sign of the Liberal Democrats’ determination to assert more directly their differences with the Tories following the election debacle, Tim Farron, the party’s president and Liberal Democrat MP for Westmorland and Lonsdale, said higher education should be “free at the point of use” for everyone who can benefit from a university education. Farron, whose party took a hit at the polls last Thursday for their U-turn on tuition fee rises, told BBC News any proposal that looked like increasing university access for the rich would not get his backing: “I hugely regret that there are tuition fees at all, never mind the higher ones we currently have. It’s right that we should explore ways that people from less well-off backgrounds have the best possible access to higher education.” The proposal was welcomed by some university representatives, which said it could lead to more innovative ways of paying for a degree. Off-quota places could be provided for undergraduates who do not wish to take out government loans but need a flexible way to finance their studies. Andy Westwood, chief executive of GuildHE, which represents smaller and specialist institutions, said universities might adopt a “mix-and-match” approach in which students who were debt-averse could study part-time for part of their degree then opt for the full student experience in their final year. “Providing off-quota places can be socially progressive. GuildHE institutions recruit many students who might be worried about the new [fee] arrangements, such as those from lower income backgrounds, those based at home, part-time and mature students. “With the right incentives, this could lead to more innovative and flexible choices such as part-time, intensive and modular courses, with ‘pay as you go’ options.” Westwood said that GuildHE institutions, which include the Royal Agricultural College and Norwich University College of the Arts, had seen a 9% increase in student numbers in 2009/10, while demand for places continues to grow. “Off-quota flexibilities could ease the pressure on university places and allow more qualified people of every background to go to higher education.” Les Ebdon, vice-chancellor of Bedforshire University and chair of the university thinktank Million+, said: “There is one very obvious pro, and that is, it’s a source of additional money at a time when the sector is being squeezed very hard. “We’ve been very successful in this university in recruiting full-fee international students, and because you can recruit for the full fee you can create another place for them. It’s a tragedy, when there are people who are qualified and want to go to university that they can’t do it here.” However, the proposal was criticised by the NUS, and the University and College Union, which represents lecturers. Shadow business secretary John Denham said: “Ability and ambition should be the only factors that determine which students can get into the most sought-after universities. This Tory government believes that access to wealth and privilege should trump ability. “Middle-class, middle-income families whose children don’t get into selective universities at first shot are going to feel terrible pressure to raise private finance, to take out bank loans, to remortgage their homes or feel that they’ve betrayed their children.” Sir Peter Lampl, chairman of the Sutton Trust, the charity which campaigns to improve social mobility, said that the proposal would deal “a serious blow to social mobility”. “Students from privileged backgrounds are already way overrepresented at our top universities and this will make matters worse,” he said. Richard Taylor, director of corporate affairs at Leicester University, said that allowing wealthy British students to pay high fees for off-quota places threatened to create a two-tier system. “How you make an admissions process needs-blind is incredibly challenging if you introduce the concept of off-quota. You assume that the selection process ends at the point the offer is made. It doesn’t – it ends at the point that a student turns up and registers. If you’re only going to find a student is off-quota after they arrive, I’m OK with that. If you’re going to know before, then it’s going to influence your thinking. “The one advantage is that if you had a really needs-blind process, you would release additional places. That’s the main advantage both for the sector and for students.” Education policy Tuition fees Higher education David Willetts Students University funding David Cameron Jeevan Vasagar Hélène Mulholland Patrick Wintour guardian.co.uk

Continue reading …
Willetts on back foot over higher fees

Cameron and Cable insist rich students won’t be able to buy university places, but critics warn of ‘serious blow’ to social mobility Universities minister David Willetts has defended proposals to create extra places on degree courses that would not be publicly funded after critics warned that the plans could deal a “serious blow” to social mobility. British students who take the extra places could be charged the same fees as overseas undergraduates. Employers and charities will also be encouraged to sponsor places outside the quota that English universities are set every year. The government was engulfed in a row over the plans after critics claimed it would allow the rich to “buy advantage”. Willetts said: “We will only consider allowing off-quota places where it contributes to the coalition commitment to improve social mobility and increase fair access. There is no question of wealthy students being able to buy a place at university. Access to a university must be based on ability to learn, not ability to pay.” Ministers have insisted that off-quota students would still have to meet entry requirements for their course and there is no question of the rich being able to “buy their way” into university. Willetts says an overall expansion of places would increase social mobility by freeing up more spaces for students from poorer homes. Despite the furore, Whitehall sources confirmed that a version of the proposal, first outlined in the Guardian on Tuesday , will still appear in the universities white paper, due to be published in June. Speaking during a series of TV interviews, the prime minister David Cameron insisted that the proposal would not create a privileged route of access to universities for rich students. “University access is about being able to learn, not about being able to pay,” he said. “There is no question of people being able to buy their way into university.” Number 10 stressed no proposal would be backed if it reduced social mobility. Vince Cable, the business secretary, said he was willing to look at how to expand off-quota places through company sponsorships, but he did not support children of the rich being given priority access to university. In a sign of the Liberal Democrats’ determination to assert more directly their differences with the Tories following the election debacle, Tim Farron, the party’s president and Liberal Democrat MP for Westmorland and Lonsdale, said higher education should be “free at the point of use” for everyone who can benefit from a university education. Farron, whose party took a hit at the polls last Thursday for their U-turn on tuition fee rises, told BBC News any proposal that looked like increasing university access for the rich would not get his backing: “I hugely regret that there are tuition fees at all, never mind the higher ones we currently have. It’s right that we should explore ways that people from less well-off backgrounds have the best possible access to higher education.” The proposal was welcomed by some university representatives, which said it could lead to more innovative ways of paying for a degree. Off-quota places could be provided for undergraduates who do not wish to take out government loans but need a flexible way to finance their studies. Andy Westwood, chief executive of GuildHE, which represents smaller and specialist institutions, said universities might adopt a “mix-and-match” approach in which students who were debt-averse could study part-time for part of their degree then opt for the full student experience in their final year. “Providing off-quota places can be socially progressive. GuildHE institutions recruit many students who might be worried about the new [fee] arrangements, such as those from lower income backgrounds, those based at home, part-time and mature students. “With the right incentives, this could lead to more innovative and flexible choices such as part-time, intensive and modular courses, with ‘pay as you go’ options.” Westwood said that GuildHE institutions, which include the Royal Agricultural College and Norwich University College of the Arts, had seen a 9% increase in student numbers in 2009/10, while demand for places continues to grow. “Off-quota flexibilities could ease the pressure on university places and allow more qualified people of every background to go to higher education.” Les Ebdon, vice-chancellor of Bedforshire University and chair of the university thinktank Million+, said: “There is one very obvious pro, and that is, it’s a source of additional money at a time when the sector is being squeezed very hard. “We’ve been very successful in this university in recruiting full-fee international students, and because you can recruit for the full fee you can create another place for them. It’s a tragedy, when there are people who are qualified and want to go to university that they can’t do it here.” However, the proposal was criticised by the NUS, and the University and College Union, which represents lecturers. Shadow business secretary John Denham said: “Ability and ambition should be the only factors that determine which students can get into the most sought-after universities. This Tory government believes that access to wealth and privilege should trump ability. “Middle-class, middle-income families whose children don’t get into selective universities at first shot are going to feel terrible pressure to raise private finance, to take out bank loans, to remortgage their homes or feel that they’ve betrayed their children.” Sir Peter Lampl, chairman of the Sutton Trust, the charity which campaigns to improve social mobility, said that the proposal would deal “a serious blow to social mobility”. “Students from privileged backgrounds are already way overrepresented at our top universities and this will make matters worse,” he said. Richard Taylor, director of corporate affairs at Leicester University, said that allowing wealthy British students to pay high fees for off-quota places threatened to create a two-tier system. “How you make an admissions process needs-blind is incredibly challenging if you introduce the concept of off-quota. You assume that the selection process ends at the point the offer is made. It doesn’t – it ends at the point that a student turns up and registers. If you’re only going to find a student is off-quota after they arrive, I’m OK with that. If you’re going to know before, then it’s going to influence your thinking. “The one advantage is that if you had a really needs-blind process, you would release additional places. That’s the main advantage both for the sector and for students.” Education policy Tuition fees Higher education David Willetts Students University funding David Cameron Jeevan Vasagar Hélène Mulholland Patrick Wintour guardian.co.uk

Continue reading …
‘They are the toughest people I’ve ever met’

After many critical periods over the past decade, Afghans now face their most important yet – and the problems are huge The building used to be the Russian Officers’ Club, and its position on top of a hill 10 miles to the east of Kabul would have given them the best possible view of the capital that their forces captured more than 30 years ago. It is derelict and empty now, but the view still tells a story about the country past and present; just beneath it is a newly built barracks for the Afghan National Army, where more than 1,000 trainees are put through combat exercises by Afghan and British instructors. Beyond it are the bombed and burned out relics of the former royal palaces, and then the capital itself. The population has grown to an estimated 4 million in recent years – up by a quarter – and beneath the relentless chaos on the roads and in the markets, there are currents that suggest that a degree of confidence is returning to the people. Watching over all this activity are the mountains of the Hindu Kush, whose peaks loom on the horizon like a set of giant sharks’ teeth. Kabul is a long way from where most of the fighting will take place this summer, but it is where the architecture of the new Afghanistan is being hastily designed by ministers, generals, diplomats and aid workers. In recent months there has been frustration among coalition partners, particularly in the military, that the progress that has been made over the last year has not been properly recognised. That has been supplemented in recent weeks by a more general concern – which became acute with the death of Osama bin Laden – about the commitment of the international community in the years ahead. Corruption How the coalition defines success in Afghanistan is changing all the time. Expectations are being managed about what the country will look like, with warnings that many in the west may not like what they see. Nobody in Nato talks about being able to defeat the Taliban any more. The best that can be hoped for is that the political and security situation can be made good enough to give the Afghan government a chance to go it alone after 2014. But nobody believes the country will be ready to stand on its own feet through the transition phase and thereafter without considerable support. Who will give that help, how long will it be needed, and who will pay? Afghanistan remains one of the most corrupt countries in the world. It has a life expectancy of 44 and only 12% of women are literate. None of those problems will be solved in three years. “This is a developing country, starting from a very low base, with shooting attached,” said one western official. Unlike Iraq, “it doesn’t have an educated middle class and it doesn’t have oil to pay for everything”. The British ambassador in Kabul, Sir William Patey, says it will take two generations for Afghans to see real transformation. Some aid workers estimate it is a 25-year project. The civilians are looking to people such as General James Bucknall, a British Coldstream Guards officer who is second in command of the International Security and Assistance Force (Isaf). Bucknall knows – as do they – that real progress can only be achieved if the country is not in a state of permanent conflict. In his office on the first floor of Isaf’s heavily fortified headquarters in Kabul, Bucknall, a veteran of Iraq, Northern Ireland and the Balkans, concedes that this is “the most complex and demanding theatre I have ever worked in”. But he sets out why he thinks a corner has now been turned, nodding to the surge in American troop numbers that has made it possible. “We have halted the insurgents’ momentum. And in some areas where we have really applied resources we have regained the initiative. We have successfully removed a number of safe havens in Afghanistan, some of which the insurgents have held for a long time, particularly around Kandahar. We have also removed substantial munitions, far greater than we ever have before.” Special forces operations, he says, are being conducted on a “nightly basis” against mid-level insurgent leaders. “Those insurgents that went away for the winter are coming back to a changed environment. I think that in certain cases they are finding that communities are more prepared to stand up and reject them than they have before. “The key is now to make those gains, hang on to them and expand them where we can and make them irreversible. The people of Afghanistan have tasted the Taliban before and I don’t think there is any evidence that they enjoyed what they experienced.” Bucknall argues that it is unfair to judge the military campaign against the Taliban over the decade that coalition forces have been here. “There is this narrative that we have been at it for 10 years. As I say, we haven’t. We have only really been playing this sensibly, or properly, with the right resources, from last year.” He will not readily admit that mistakes have been made, though he comes very close. “I think that it would be … not credible for us to say that we have got this campaign right from the start. We clearly haven’t. Patience is important. We have to earn that patience. We have asked a lot of the British people. We have committed an enormous amount to this campaign. What we have to do is show that we are making progress, which we are. Now is not the time to blink.” Even if Afghan security forces take over the fight against the insurgency in 2014, Bucknall warns that British troops will be here for “many years”. He likens the situation to Iraq, Saudi Arabia and other countries where UK forces still have a presence. “I expect us still to be training the Afghan national security forces, to be mentoring and advising them in their ministries and having a commitment that goes some time beyond that. “How long that is, we will work out in due course. “It will be years – absolutely, yes. That signal of long-term commitment is an essential part of our short-term success of this campaign. There is a lot at stake – not just our national security, but our influence in a region of strategic importance to this country.” As Bucknall continues overseeing the fighting, an American general – William Caldwell – has responsibility for getting the Afghan Security Forces (ASF) in shape for the handover. Caldwell has been in Afghanistan since autumn 2009 and was given a job that he initially thought was impossible. The problems went far deeper than he had imagined, and he was so horrified he was prepared to break military etiquette to say so – first to the late Richard Holbrooke, who was then America’s special envoy to Pakistan and Afghanistan, and then to General Stanley McChrystal, the former overall commander of Isaf. “Mr Holbrooke said to me, ‘you’ve got to do something about literacy, General Caldwell.’ I looked at him and said, with all due respect, I am a military man. I don’t do literacy. I’m not running a nation-building exercise.” Within 60 days, Caldwell says, he was eating his words. Only 14% of recruits to the Afghan army and police are literate. “I can’t even begin to tell you what that means,” he says. “I couldn’t comprehend it until I got here on the ground. I told my guys, if we don’t instil some literacy into the force, it will never be self-sustaining. Without literacy, they can’t even account for their equipment because they cannot read the serial numbers. How can they call in air strikes, artillery fire? We have bought them 45,000 vehicles already, 56 airframes. We are buying a lot of equipment that requires basic reading to do maintenance on them.” Caldwell recalls one incident that sums it up. “[There was] a very sad story of an Afghan unit out on a military operation. They had all the proper equipment. They rang in and said ‘we need a medivac’. We said, where are you, give us the co-ordinates. They started describing the place. Nobody could read a map in the entire company.” With an initial target of recruiting and training a force of 305,000, Caldwell started a huge literacy programme to run alongside basic military training. He also told his boss to provide more professional military trainers, or risk putting the whole enterprise in jeopardy. “This is mission impossible. In fact I wrote that in December of 2009 to McChrystal. I sent him a classified memo and said I cannot accomplish this mission with the resources you have currently allocated me. It’s impossible – you can’t do it.” Officer class Since then, the number of trainers under his command has quadrupled to 4,000, and the target for security force recruitment has been reached. Last year, Caldwell hired 100 teachers. Now he has 2,100. New recruits do two hours’ reading and writing every day during eight weeks’ basic training. Those likely to rise up the ranks are given extra tuition. “On any given day we now have 34,000 in training programmes in Afghanistan. The magnitude is almost overwhelming,” says Caldwell. “When we started here, if you wanted to be a soldier in the Afghan army, as long as you were there the day you started, and the day you graduated, you graduated. Could you shoot your weapon, accurately? It didn’t matter.” An Afghan officer class is slowly emerging, with 600 being taken on as cadets at a national military academy this year. Up to 4,600 had applied for the posts. “We are really pushing them, driving these kids hard,” said Caldwell. “We are not going to allow them to progressively learn, we are going to leap them forward to the 21st century. We’ve given every one of them a laptop. Most of these kids have never driven a car, they may not know how to flush a toilet.” President Hamid Karzai had hoped to increase the total number for the ASF to 378,000, but the US has said it will only fund an increase up to 352,000. “We have built an army and police force that still needs help,” Caldwell explains. “If we don’t grow beyond 305,000 there will still be a dependence on Nato military forces – 352,000 will do what is necessary.” Inevitably, the growth of the Afghan military has not been free of problems. There have been 20 incidents in the last six years when insurgents have managed to breach the security checks and embed themselves in the Afghan army, causing havoc – three British soldiers from the Royal Gurkhas were killed last year by one such insurgent. The US has trained a covert force of Afghan counter-intelligence officers to sniff out infiltrators and impersonators. Keeping the police and army ethnically balanced has also proved difficult, but the ratio is roughly right, though they would like more Pashtuns from the south. The Afghan army is made up of kandaks (battalions). One of them – the 2nd battalion second brigade of the 205th corps – has just been declared the first to be totally independent of coalition forces. Another 157 kandaks need to reach that standard by 2014 for Nato troops to be able to withdraw from all combat duties. One way to shortcut the fighting would be for the Taliban to negotiate a settlement of some kind with the Afghan government. Efforts are being made through different ministries, foreign intelligence agencies and even the UN to make contact with leaders of the movement. There are varying descriptions of how successful these efforts have been; some officials say they haven’t even reached talks about talks, but others are more optimistic. Tribal leaders Turkey is emerging with a potentially pivotal role; one idea now gathering momentum is for the Taliban to have a political base there, allowing face to face talks to take place about how a resolution can be found. The initiative, which has the support of Karzai, is partly tactical: the Taliban leadership would probably refuse to conduct negotiations in Afghanistan or elsewhere in the region for safety reasons. It would be more difficult to refuse talks so far away from the fighting. Karzai has problems too. The tribal leaders in the northern provinces who fought against Taliban rule are against any move that gives the movement political legitimacy or, worse still, offers it the appearance of being a government in exile. The death of Bin Laden has, however, given some political and military leaders in Kabul the hope that Mullah Omar, the Taliban leader, will separate from al-Qaida – one of the key requirements for any kind of settlement. “The message to the Taliban is that there is an opportunity to come in from the cold,” said Patey, the British ambassador. “You have to abandon international terrorism, abandon your former allies in al-Qaida, work within a constitutional framework, lay down your arms. Peace is open.” Patey is also pragmatic about what support the Taliban may have in the country after 2014. “The Afghans will be in charge. And that will be frustrating for some people in Europe because things might happen here that they won’t like. This is an Islamically conservative country and will remain Islamically conservative. It will have a value system different from ours.” There is hope that Pakistan could help bring the Taliban leadership to negotiations. Like Bin Laden, Mullar Omah is assumed to be hiding there, somewhere on the border between the two countries. If the Pakistani government were to make it clear that his presence in the country was no longer acceptable, that might push him into diplomacy. That’s what the optimists believe, anyway. They also hope Omar’s hand may be forced by the number of insurgents who appear to be giving up the fight. Nine months ago, the Afghans started a reconciliation and reintegration process, offering insurgents the chance to lay down their weapons and go back to their communities with honour intact. In the first seven months, 700 fighters and some of their commanders signed up. In the past six weeks, another 700 have applied. Two thousand more have registered an interest by filling out the forms. “As the fighting season has started, the number of people formally in the programme has doubled, and the expressions of interest from communities, elders, and fighting groups themselves has quadrupled,” said General Phil Jones, the British director of Isaf’s force reintegration cell. “People are voting with their feet in places like Kandahar and Helmand.” Those who join the process have a three-month cooling off period during which they are paid $120 (about £75) a month while their communities work out how best to bring them home. The rules have been made deliberately vague so that local elders and tribal leaders can decide how best this is done, and whether any crimes they have committed should be taken into consideration. “Thus far, the vast majority [of those who have signed up] are low-level fighting groups that have been bruised into insurgency over recent years and have become affiliated with the Talibs,” said Jones. “They have become prey for the more fundamentalist networks, supporting them with intelligence, planting improvised explosive devices (IEDs),” he said. “They don’t necessarily think of themselves as ideological fundamentalists who are fighting against the government. This is the nature of much of the insurgency. “In years past, either economic or political exclusion, or poor governance, or predatory behaviour by the police years ago – these sort of issues forced them to defend themselves. Life has changed and this gives them an option to step out.” He added: “One would hope that as the dust settles, there would be a much stronger desire to reach out and accelerate the process of peace amongst the senior leadership of the Taliban. There is already is an increasingly vibrant dialogue – can that solidify into something like a peace process?” Until that happens, the coalition will continue to try to rush Afghanistan into political and military self-sufficiency. In July, seven of the country’s 34 provinces will become self-governing. In another six months, seven more will attempt to stand on their own. The hope is that people will start to trust the new institutions and leaders. Simon Gass, the former British ambassador in Iran who is now Nato’s senior civilian representative in Afghanistan, said people should not overburden transition with unrealistic expectations. “We hope that we can show improvements, and make sure that there is a level of confidence in basic services that will encourage the support of the institutions of governance. Transition does not mean that we can solve all Afghanistan’s problems,” he said. The quality of provincial governors had improved, said Gass, but there were “still real problems of capacity beneath them”. Corruption remains a huge issue at all levels of society and in the police. The idea that Afghanistan will be free of corruption by handover is deemed ridiculous, though concerted efforts are being made. I don’t expect Afghanistan in 2015 to be a paragon of virtue, free of corruption with the best governance,” said Patey. “But I do expect it to be better and I expect the Afghans to have built some institutions that can deal with corruption.” Critical period Although Afghanistan has had many critical periods over the last decade, it faces perhaps the most important yet. This summer’s fighting season should show whether the military surge has been as successful as Bucknall hopes. Within weeks, a number of Afghan provinces will be running themselves. The US and Afghanistan are negotiating a strategic partnership that will inform how America sees its commitment to the country in the second half of the decade; and in July President Barack Obama will set out how many American troops are to withdraw from the country this year. Some observers say too much is being done too soon, that the timeline is bogus, and that the new institutions are being overburdened. Isaf generals and diplomats recognise that there is a fear among the population that they will be abandoned after 2014, but nobody knows what will happen for sure yet. The problems are considerable, and across a number of fronts, but the price of failure is huge. “The Afghans have not just looked into the abyss, they have been in the abyss,” said General John Nicholson, deputy chief of staff of operations in Isaf. “They are the toughest people I have ever met.” Afghanistan Taliban US military US foreign policy Military Foreign policy United States Nick Hopkins guardian.co.uk

Continue reading …
‘They are the toughest people I’ve ever met’

After many critical periods over the past decade, Afghans now face their most important yet – and the problems are huge The building used to be the Russian Officers’ Club, and its position on top of a hill 10 miles to the east of Kabul would have given them the best possible view of the capital that their forces captured more than 30 years ago. It is derelict and empty now, but the view still tells a story about the country past and present; just beneath it is a newly built barracks for the Afghan National Army, where more than 1,000 trainees are put through combat exercises by Afghan and British instructors. Beyond it are the bombed and burned out relics of the former royal palaces, and then the capital itself. The population has grown to an estimated 4 million in recent years – up by a quarter – and beneath the relentless chaos on the roads and in the markets, there are currents that suggest that a degree of confidence is returning to the people. Watching over all this activity are the mountains of the Hindu Kush, whose peaks loom on the horizon like a set of giant sharks’ teeth. Kabul is a long way from where most of the fighting will take place this summer, but it is where the architecture of the new Afghanistan is being hastily designed by ministers, generals, diplomats and aid workers. In recent months there has been frustration among coalition partners, particularly in the military, that the progress that has been made over the last year has not been properly recognised. That has been supplemented in recent weeks by a more general concern – which became acute with the death of Osama bin Laden – about the commitment of the international community in the years ahead. Corruption How the coalition defines success in Afghanistan is changing all the time. Expectations are being managed about what the country will look like, with warnings that many in the west may not like what they see. Nobody in Nato talks about being able to defeat the Taliban any more. The best that can be hoped for is that the political and security situation can be made good enough to give the Afghan government a chance to go it alone after 2014. But nobody believes the country will be ready to stand on its own feet through the transition phase and thereafter without considerable support. Who will give that help, how long will it be needed, and who will pay? Afghanistan remains one of the most corrupt countries in the world. It has a life expectancy of 44 and only 12% of women are literate. None of those problems will be solved in three years. “This is a developing country, starting from a very low base, with shooting attached,” said one western official. Unlike Iraq, “it doesn’t have an educated middle class and it doesn’t have oil to pay for everything”. The British ambassador in Kabul, Sir William Patey, says it will take two generations for Afghans to see real transformation. Some aid workers estimate it is a 25-year project. The civilians are looking to people such as General James Bucknall, a British Coldstream Guards officer who is second in command of the International Security and Assistance Force (Isaf). Bucknall knows – as do they – that real progress can only be achieved if the country is not in a state of permanent conflict. In his office on the first floor of Isaf’s heavily fortified headquarters in Kabul, Bucknall, a veteran of Iraq, Northern Ireland and the Balkans, concedes that this is “the most complex and demanding theatre I have ever worked in”. But he sets out why he thinks a corner has now been turned, nodding to the surge in American troop numbers that has made it possible. “We have halted the insurgents’ momentum. And in some areas where we have really applied resources we have regained the initiative. We have successfully removed a number of safe havens in Afghanistan, some of which the insurgents have held for a long time, particularly around Kandahar. We have also removed substantial munitions, far greater than we ever have before.” Special forces operations, he says, are being conducted on a “nightly basis” against mid-level insurgent leaders. “Those insurgents that went away for the winter are coming back to a changed environment. I think that in certain cases they are finding that communities are more prepared to stand up and reject them than they have before. “The key is now to make those gains, hang on to them and expand them where we can and make them irreversible. The people of Afghanistan have tasted the Taliban before and I don’t think there is any evidence that they enjoyed what they experienced.” Bucknall argues that it is unfair to judge the military campaign against the Taliban over the decade that coalition forces have been here. “There is this narrative that we have been at it for 10 years. As I say, we haven’t. We have only really been playing this sensibly, or properly, with the right resources, from last year.” He will not readily admit that mistakes have been made, though he comes very close. “I think that it would be … not credible for us to say that we have got this campaign right from the start. We clearly haven’t. Patience is important. We have to earn that patience. We have asked a lot of the British people. We have committed an enormous amount to this campaign. What we have to do is show that we are making progress, which we are. Now is not the time to blink.” Even if Afghan security forces take over the fight against the insurgency in 2014, Bucknall warns that British troops will be here for “many years”. He likens the situation to Iraq, Saudi Arabia and other countries where UK forces still have a presence. “I expect us still to be training the Afghan national security forces, to be mentoring and advising them in their ministries and having a commitment that goes some time beyond that. “How long that is, we will work out in due course. “It will be years – absolutely, yes. That signal of long-term commitment is an essential part of our short-term success of this campaign. There is a lot at stake – not just our national security, but our influence in a region of strategic importance to this country.” As Bucknall continues overseeing the fighting, an American general – William Caldwell – has responsibility for getting the Afghan Security Forces (ASF) in shape for the handover. Caldwell has been in Afghanistan since autumn 2009 and was given a job that he initially thought was impossible. The problems went far deeper than he had imagined, and he was so horrified he was prepared to break military etiquette to say so – first to the late Richard Holbrooke, who was then America’s special envoy to Pakistan and Afghanistan, and then to General Stanley McChrystal, the former overall commander of Isaf. “Mr Holbrooke said to me, ‘you’ve got to do something about literacy, General Caldwell.’ I looked at him and said, with all due respect, I am a military man. I don’t do literacy. I’m not running a nation-building exercise.” Within 60 days, Caldwell says, he was eating his words. Only 14% of recruits to the Afghan army and police are literate. “I can’t even begin to tell you what that means,” he says. “I couldn’t comprehend it until I got here on the ground. I told my guys, if we don’t instil some literacy into the force, it will never be self-sustaining. Without literacy, they can’t even account for their equipment because they cannot read the serial numbers. How can they call in air strikes, artillery fire? We have bought them 45,000 vehicles already, 56 airframes. We are buying a lot of equipment that requires basic reading to do maintenance on them.” Caldwell recalls one incident that sums it up. “[There was] a very sad story of an Afghan unit out on a military operation. They had all the proper equipment. They rang in and said ‘we need a medivac’. We said, where are you, give us the co-ordinates. They started describing the place. Nobody could read a map in the entire company.” With an initial target of recruiting and training a force of 305,000, Caldwell started a huge literacy programme to run alongside basic military training. He also told his boss to provide more professional military trainers, or risk putting the whole enterprise in jeopardy. “This is mission impossible. In fact I wrote that in December of 2009 to McChrystal. I sent him a classified memo and said I cannot accomplish this mission with the resources you have currently allocated me. It’s impossible – you can’t do it.” Officer class Since then, the number of trainers under his command has quadrupled to 4,000, and the target for security force recruitment has been reached. Last year, Caldwell hired 100 teachers. Now he has 2,100. New recruits do two hours’ reading and writing every day during eight weeks’ basic training. Those likely to rise up the ranks are given extra tuition. “On any given day we now have 34,000 in training programmes in Afghanistan. The magnitude is almost overwhelming,” says Caldwell. “When we started here, if you wanted to be a soldier in the Afghan army, as long as you were there the day you started, and the day you graduated, you graduated. Could you shoot your weapon, accurately? It didn’t matter.” An Afghan officer class is slowly emerging, with 600 being taken on as cadets at a national military academy this year. Up to 4,600 had applied for the posts. “We are really pushing them, driving these kids hard,” said Caldwell. “We are not going to allow them to progressively learn, we are going to leap them forward to the 21st century. We’ve given every one of them a laptop. Most of these kids have never driven a car, they may not know how to flush a toilet.” President Hamid Karzai had hoped to increase the total number for the ASF to 378,000, but the US has said it will only fund an increase up to 352,000. “We have built an army and police force that still needs help,” Caldwell explains. “If we don’t grow beyond 305,000 there will still be a dependence on Nato military forces – 352,000 will do what is necessary.” Inevitably, the growth of the Afghan military has not been free of problems. There have been 20 incidents in the last six years when insurgents have managed to breach the security checks and embed themselves in the Afghan army, causing havoc – three British soldiers from the Royal Gurkhas were killed last year by one such insurgent. The US has trained a covert force of Afghan counter-intelligence officers to sniff out infiltrators and impersonators. Keeping the police and army ethnically balanced has also proved difficult, but the ratio is roughly right, though they would like more Pashtuns from the south. The Afghan army is made up of kandaks (battalions). One of them – the 2nd battalion second brigade of the 205th corps – has just been declared the first to be totally independent of coalition forces. Another 157 kandaks need to reach that standard by 2014 for Nato troops to be able to withdraw from all combat duties. One way to shortcut the fighting would be for the Taliban to negotiate a settlement of some kind with the Afghan government. Efforts are being made through different ministries, foreign intelligence agencies and even the UN to make contact with leaders of the movement. There are varying descriptions of how successful these efforts have been; some officials say they haven’t even reached talks about talks, but others are more optimistic. Tribal leaders Turkey is emerging with a potentially pivotal role; one idea now gathering momentum is for the Taliban to have a political base there, allowing face to face talks to take place about how a resolution can be found. The initiative, which has the support of Karzai, is partly tactical: the Taliban leadership would probably refuse to conduct negotiations in Afghanistan or elsewhere in the region for safety reasons. It would be more difficult to refuse talks so far away from the fighting. Karzai has problems too. The tribal leaders in the northern provinces who fought against Taliban rule are against any move that gives the movement political legitimacy or, worse still, offers it the appearance of being a government in exile. The death of Bin Laden has, however, given some political and military leaders in Kabul the hope that Mullah Omar, the Taliban leader, will separate from al-Qaida – one of the key requirements for any kind of settlement. “The message to the Taliban is that there is an opportunity to come in from the cold,” said Patey, the British ambassador. “You have to abandon international terrorism, abandon your former allies in al-Qaida, work within a constitutional framework, lay down your arms. Peace is open.” Patey is also pragmatic about what support the Taliban may have in the country after 2014. “The Afghans will be in charge. And that will be frustrating for some people in Europe because things might happen here that they won’t like. This is an Islamically conservative country and will remain Islamically conservative. It will have a value system different from ours.” There is hope that Pakistan could help bring the Taliban leadership to negotiations. Like Bin Laden, Mullar Omah is assumed to be hiding there, somewhere on the border between the two countries. If the Pakistani government were to make it clear that his presence in the country was no longer acceptable, that might push him into diplomacy. That’s what the optimists believe, anyway. They also hope Omar’s hand may be forced by the number of insurgents who appear to be giving up the fight. Nine months ago, the Afghans started a reconciliation and reintegration process, offering insurgents the chance to lay down their weapons and go back to their communities with honour intact. In the first seven months, 700 fighters and some of their commanders signed up. In the past six weeks, another 700 have applied. Two thousand more have registered an interest by filling out the forms. “As the fighting season has started, the number of people formally in the programme has doubled, and the expressions of interest from communities, elders, and fighting groups themselves has quadrupled,” said General Phil Jones, the British director of Isaf’s force reintegration cell. “People are voting with their feet in places like Kandahar and Helmand.” Those who join the process have a three-month cooling off period during which they are paid $120 (about £75) a month while their communities work out how best to bring them home. The rules have been made deliberately vague so that local elders and tribal leaders can decide how best this is done, and whether any crimes they have committed should be taken into consideration. “Thus far, the vast majority [of those who have signed up] are low-level fighting groups that have been bruised into insurgency over recent years and have become affiliated with the Talibs,” said Jones. “They have become prey for the more fundamentalist networks, supporting them with intelligence, planting improvised explosive devices (IEDs),” he said. “They don’t necessarily think of themselves as ideological fundamentalists who are fighting against the government. This is the nature of much of the insurgency. “In years past, either economic or political exclusion, or poor governance, or predatory behaviour by the police years ago – these sort of issues forced them to defend themselves. Life has changed and this gives them an option to step out.” He added: “One would hope that as the dust settles, there would be a much stronger desire to reach out and accelerate the process of peace amongst the senior leadership of the Taliban. There is already is an increasingly vibrant dialogue – can that solidify into something like a peace process?” Until that happens, the coalition will continue to try to rush Afghanistan into political and military self-sufficiency. In July, seven of the country’s 34 provinces will become self-governing. In another six months, seven more will attempt to stand on their own. The hope is that people will start to trust the new institutions and leaders. Simon Gass, the former British ambassador in Iran who is now Nato’s senior civilian representative in Afghanistan, said people should not overburden transition with unrealistic expectations. “We hope that we can show improvements, and make sure that there is a level of confidence in basic services that will encourage the support of the institutions of governance. Transition does not mean that we can solve all Afghanistan’s problems,” he said. The quality of provincial governors had improved, said Gass, but there were “still real problems of capacity beneath them”. Corruption remains a huge issue at all levels of society and in the police. The idea that Afghanistan will be free of corruption by handover is deemed ridiculous, though concerted efforts are being made. I don’t expect Afghanistan in 2015 to be a paragon of virtue, free of corruption with the best governance,” said Patey. “But I do expect it to be better and I expect the Afghans to have built some institutions that can deal with corruption.” Critical period Although Afghanistan has had many critical periods over the last decade, it faces perhaps the most important yet. This summer’s fighting season should show whether the military surge has been as successful as Bucknall hopes. Within weeks, a number of Afghan provinces will be running themselves. The US and Afghanistan are negotiating a strategic partnership that will inform how America sees its commitment to the country in the second half of the decade; and in July President Barack Obama will set out how many American troops are to withdraw from the country this year. Some observers say too much is being done too soon, that the timeline is bogus, and that the new institutions are being overburdened. Isaf generals and diplomats recognise that there is a fear among the population that they will be abandoned after 2014, but nobody knows what will happen for sure yet. The problems are considerable, and across a number of fronts, but the price of failure is huge. “The Afghans have not just looked into the abyss, they have been in the abyss,” said General John Nicholson, deputy chief of staff of operations in Isaf. “They are the toughest people I have ever met.” Afghanistan Taliban US military US foreign policy Military Foreign policy United States Nick Hopkins guardian.co.uk

Continue reading …