After a tumultuous year, Afghans face yet more uncertainty in 2019

Updated 21 December 2018
Follow

After a tumultuous year, Afghans face yet more uncertainty in 2019

  • With insurgents making territorial gains and targeting military forces and civilians, 2018 has proven the most turbulent

KABUL: At home or abroad, few people have any doubt that from a political and military standpoint, Afghanistan has been going through its most turbulent year since a US-led force toppled the Taliban government in late 2001 after it refused to hand over Osama bin Laden, the mastermind of the 9/11 Al-Qaeda attacks.

For Afghanistan, the way forward looks more uncertain than perhaps at any time since political tensions first flared more than four decades ago, with a Communist coup backed by the Soviet Union followed by a fully fledged military intervention.

With the Taliban making territorial gains and targeting Afghan soldiers and security forces in their bases and outposts, 2018 has witnessed a surge in violence across the country. The fighters have carried out a large number of attacks, starting with a bombing in January that killed more than 100 people and wounded hundreds of others in the capital Kabul.

For their part, the NATO-led international force and the US military have turned up the heat on both the Taliban and the Islamic State-Khorasan Province, also known as Daesh-KP, Daesh’s local affiliate with strongholds in some eastern provinces. But the pressure has not put an end to deadly attacks in Kabul and elsewhere, many of them involving suicide bombers.

In view of the administrative paralysis and the rising tide of violence, including the attacks that marred October’s parliamentary elections, which were held more than a year after their actual date, there are doubts that the crucial presidential vote will be held to schedule in April next year.

The election commission still has not been able to release even the preliminary results of the October ballot, which has been described by the UN as the most violent and disorganized of all elections since the overthrow of the Taliban 17 years ago.

With the incumbent president, Ashraf Ghani, seeking re-election, some of his political opponents have openly speculated that he might use his clout to divert state resources to swing the vote’s outcome in his favor.

A number of Afghan politicians and American diplomats are pushing for the formation of an interim government to give the talks between the US administration and the Taliban in Qatar time to succeed. But some analysts say that Ghani is opposed to the idea because his re-election prospects are brightest as long as he is in office.

US President Donald Trump is on record as saying that Afghans should be allowed to choose their leader according to their traditions. If they were to accept such a system, it would mean the country would be ruled by a man chosen by an assembly of tribal chiefs rather than elected by popular vote. 

Many American taxpayers are also questioning why US troops need to be in Afghanistan after so many years. Pressure is building on the Trump administration, some analysts say, to stage a complete troop pullout before it becomes obvious that the Taliban has won the war.

After years of a military stalemate, Trump hesitantly accepted a Pentagon proposal in the summer of 2017 to send additional troops and escalate the intensity of the military campaign against the Taliban and other groups as part of a new war strategy.

For a short time this year, it seemed that the Taliban was willing to give peace a chance. In June the Kabul government and the fighters observed a rare three-day cease-fire during the Eid Al-Fitr holiday. President Ghani extended the truce for several days and repeated his call for the group to enter into peace talks without preconditions. But his overture was rebuffed by the Taliban.

A month later, hopes rose again on reports that US government officials had met Taliban representatives in Doha to discuss potential talks. In Kabul, President Ghani went the extra mile in August to propose a three-month conditional cease-fire on the occasion of Eid Al-Adha. The Taliban responded with continued attacks.

During this year alone, the US is said to have dropped nearly 6,000 bombs — a very high number compared with previous years’ statistics — in Afghanistan on suspected militant hideouts and places with a high concentration of insurgents.

However, the escalation has not only failed to make a dent in the Taliban’s morale, the group has continued to gain ground across the country. In fact, the casualties on all sides — civilians, insurgents and Afghan army and security forces — have surged to unprecedented levels.

President Ghani recently put the number of security personnel killed battling the insurgency since he took office four years ago at 28,000. But observers say that the overall casualty figures are much higher as tens of thousands of Afghan families struggle with the burden of caring for the wounded. It is, after all, a conflict that mainly pits Afghans against fellow Afghans.

For the US defense department, there is no escaping the handwriting on the wall; the military strategy that they sold to a reluctant President Trump has fallen far short of delivering a victory over the Taliban and other insurgent groups. For their part, the leaders of the insurgency must also have realized that the goal of recapturing power remains well beyond reach. 

The deadlock should have convinced both sides that a negotiated settlement is the only feasible solution. But the Taliban’s insistence on total withdrawal of US forces before they agree to hold talks with the Kabul government has been a sticking point in all negotiations.

Even though the US has so far spent a trillion dollars on the Afghan war, the longest one in American history, the results of this mammoth investment are hard to see. Many Afghans now doubt that President Trump has the political will to stay committed to winning the war, and could very well decide to cut his losses, prompting NATO allies to follow suit.

The uncertainty surrounding US plans is already seen as emboldening the Taliban and other groups, prompting them to escalate their attacks. Increased meddling by regional powers bent on having a say in Afghanistan’s future political make-up could touch off an open-ended civil war, similar to the one that erupted after the Soviet withdrawal three decades ago.

In another possible scenario, the Kabul government would collapse due to infighting compounded by the disappearance of the international coalition’s security umbrella. Such an eventuality is equally likely to lead to a multi-sided civil conflict and hasten Afghanistan’s transition to a failed state.

The third possibility is that the war in Afghanistan rages on indefinitely and inconclusively with neither side able to declare victory. This of course will further fuel tribal and sectarian divisions, destabilize both society and polity, and leave in its wake a bloody wake of death and destruction.

The outcome that perhaps worries Afghans the most is one in which the insurgency overwhelms government security forces, compels foreign countries to withdraw their forces, and prompts international donors to abandon the country to its fate.

Such a scenario, though, conjures up images of the Al-Qaeda attacks on New York City’s World Trade Center and the Pentagon among other places on Sept. 11, 2001, which claimed the lives of nearly 3,000 civilians and triggered the US-led invasion of Afghanistan. Can the international community afford to forget such a painful lesson?


Air India flight makes emergency landing in Thailand after bomb threat; all passengers off plane

Updated 5 sec ago
Follow

Air India flight makes emergency landing in Thailand after bomb threat; all passengers off plane

  • Indian airlines, airports received nearly 1,000 hoax calls and messages in first 10 months of 2024
  • Incident follows Air India flight crash in Ahmedabad on Thursday, which killed over 240 people

BANGKOK: An Air India flight from Phuket in Thailand to India’s capital New Delhi received an onboard bomb threat on Friday and made an emergency landing on the island, airport authorities said.

All 156 passengers on flight AI 379 had been escorted from the plane, in line with emergency plans, an Airports of Thailand official said.

The aircraft took off from Phuket airport bound for the Indian capital at 9.30 a.m. (0230 GMT) on Friday, but made a wide loop around the Andaman Sea and landed back on the southern Thai island, according to flight tracker Flightradar24.

The incident follows the crash of an Air India flight in Ahmedabad on Thursday shortly after takeoff, in which more than 240 people were killed.

AOT did not provide details on the bomb threat. Air India did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Indian airlines and airports were inundated with hoax bomb threats last year, with nearly 1,000 hoax calls and messages received in the first 10 months, nearly 10 times that of 2023.


Mexican citizen dies in US immigration detention center

Updated 58 min 38 sec ago
Follow

Mexican citizen dies in US immigration detention center

  • The man died on June 7 at an ICE facility in the southern state of Georgia
  • US authorities notified the Mexican consulate in Georgia’s capital Atlanta of the death

MEXICO CITY: A Mexican citizen died in a US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) detention center from undetermined circumstances, Mexico’s foreign ministry has said.

The death comes amid ongoing demonstrations in several US states, most prominently in California, against immigration enforcement raids launched by US President Donald Trump’s administration.

The man died on June 7 at an ICE facility in the southern state of Georgia, where he was being held after he was transferred from a state prison, the foreign ministry said in a statement Thursday.

US authorities notified the Mexican consulate in Georgia’s capital Atlanta of the death.

“Consular staff has established communication with local and ICE authorities, as well as with the individual’s family members, to clarify the facts, confirm the official cause of death, and provide legal advice and support to the family,” the ministry said.

Mexico’s foreign ministry said consular staff had not been notified to interview the detainee while he was in custody, despite regular visits to the facility to assist Mexican nationals.

“The consulate has requested an explanation from the (detention) center’s authorities,” the ministry said.

It also said it was examining legal options and maintaining communication with the Georgia Bureau of Investigation, the state’s independent investigative body.


Japan ‘strongly condemns’ Israel’s attack on Iran

Updated 13 June 2025
Follow

Japan ‘strongly condemns’ Israel’s attack on Iran

TOKYO: Japan has joined in the condemnation of Israel’s attack on Iran with Foreign Minister Takeshi Iwaya saying the attack “escalates the situation” in the Middle East, Japan’s Foreign Ministry reported.

“We deeply regret that military force was used despite ongoing diplomatic efforts, including talks between the US and Iran, to achieve a peaceful resolution to the Iranian nuclear issue,” Iwaya said. “Our country strongly condemns this action, which escalates the situation.”

Iwaya emphasized that peace and stability in the Middle East are “extremely important” to Japan and urged all parties involved to exercise maximum restraint.

He called for de-escalation of the situation, adding that the Japanese government will spare no effort to protect Japanese nationals residing in the region.

“We will continue to take all necessary measures to prevent further deterioration of the situation,” he said.

• This article also appears on Arab News Japan


Pakistan, other nuclear states together spent $100 billion on weapons in 2024 — report

Updated 13 June 2025
Follow

Pakistan, other nuclear states together spent $100 billion on weapons in 2024 — report

  • US spent $56.8 billion in 2024, followed by China at $12.5 billion, says International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons
  • ICAN says level of nuclear weapons spending in 2024 by these nine nations could have paid UN budget almost 28 times over

GENEVA: Nuclear-armed states spent more than $100 billion on their atomic arsenals last year, the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons said Friday, lamenting the lack of democratic oversight of such spending.

ICAN said Britain, China, France, India, Israel, North Korea, Pakistan, Russia and the United States together spent nearly $10 billion more than in 2023.

The United States spent $56.8 billion in 2024, followed by China at $12.5 billion and Britain at $10.4 billion, ICAN said in its flagship annual report.

Geneva-based ICAN won the 2017 Nobel Peace Prize for its key role in drafting the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons, which took effect in 2021.

Some 69 countries have ratified it to date, four more have directly acceded to the treaty and another 25 have signed it, although none of the nuclear weapons states have come on board.

This year’s report looked at the costs incurred by the countries that host other states’ nuclear weapons.

It said such costs are largely unknown to citizens and legislators alike, thereby avoiding democratic scrutiny.

Although not officially confirmed, the report said Belgium, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands and Turkiye were hosting US nuclear weapons, citing experts.

Meanwhile Russia claims it has nuclear weapons stationed in Belarus, but some experts are unsure, it added.

The report said there was “little public information” about the costs associated with hosting US nuclear weapons in NATO European countries, citing the cost of facility security, nuclear-capable aircraft and preparation to use such weapons.

“Each NATO nuclear-sharing arrangement is governed by secret agreements,” the report said.

“It’s an affront to democracy that citizens and lawmakers are not allowed to know that nuclear weapons from other countries are based on their soil or how much of their taxes is being spent on them,” said the report’s co-author Alicia Sanders-Zakre.

Eight countries openly possess nuclear weapons: the United States, Russia, Britain, France, China, India, Pakistan and North Korea.

Israel is widely assumed to have nuclear weapons, although it has never officially acknowledged this.

ICAN said the level of nuclear weapons spending in 2024 by these nine nations could have paid the UN budget almost 28 times over.

“The problem of nuclear weapons is one that can be solved, and doing so means understanding the vested interests fiercely defending the option for nine countries to indiscriminately murder civilians,” said ICAN’s program coordinator Susi Snyder.

The private sector earned at least $42.5 billion from their nuclear weapons contracts in 2024 alone, the report said.

There are at least $463 billion in ongoing nuclear weapons contracts, some of which do not expire for decades, and last year, at least $20 billion in new nuclear weapon contracts were awarded, it added.

“Many of the companies that benefited from this largesse invested heavily in lobbying governments, spending $128 million on those efforts in the United States and France, the two countries for which data is available,” ICAN said.

Standard nuclear doctrine — developed during the Cold War between superpowers the United States and the Soviet Union — is based on the assumption that such weapons will never have to be used because their impact is so devastating, and because nuclear retaliation would probably bring similar destruction on the original attacker.


Philippines’ former leader Duterte seeks interim release from ICC

Updated 13 June 2025
Follow

Philippines’ former leader Duterte seeks interim release from ICC

  • Duterte stands accused of crimes against humanity over his years-long campaign against drug users and dealers
  • International Criminal Court prosecutors have agreed not to oppose the request, according to the filing

MANILA: Former Philippine president Rodrigo Duterte’s defense team at the International Criminal Court has filed a motion for his interim release to an unnamed country, stating the prosecution would not object.

The 80-year-old stands accused of crimes against humanity over his years-long campaign against drug users and dealers that rights groups say killed thousands.

In a filing posted to the court’s website late Thursday, defense lawyers said the involved country – the name of which was redacted – had expressed its “principled agreement to receive Mr. Duterte onto its territory.”

ICC prosecutors have agreed not to oppose the request, according to the filing, which said discussions about an interim release had been under way since Duterte’s first court appearance at The Hague on March 14.

“The Prosecution has confirmed its non-opposition to interim release to (REDACTED) (REDACTED) State Party” as long as certain conditions were met, the filing reads.

An annex spelling out the conditions for Duterte’s release was not publicly available, but the defense team’s filing noted that the octogenarian posed no flight risk and cited humanitarian concerns around his age.

Lawyers representing relatives of those killed in Duterte’s drug war condemned the application for release, citing threats made against victims’ families, and saying they had legal avenues to oppose it.

“There is still a procedure within the ICC that requires the prosecution to comment and the ICC Pre Trial Chamber (PTC) to decide on the application for provisional release,” lawyer Neri Colmenares said in a statement.

In an interview with local radio, lawyer Kristina Conti said she believed it was “50-50” the former president would be released.

“I hope the (drug war) victims can weigh in but that would be difficult if (the release is based on) humanitarian grounds, and he is reportedly sick,” she said.

Duterte was arrested in Manila on March 11, flown to the Netherlands that same night and has been held at the ICC’s detention unit at Scheveningen Prison since.

ICC deputy prosecutor Mame Mandiaye Niang is currently overseeing the case against Duterte after Karim Khan stepped aside during an investigation into alleged sexual misconduct.

Requests for comment sent to the ICC prosecutor’s office were not immediately returned.