Biden team surprised by rapid Taliban gains in Afghanistan

US President Joe Biden is seen during a meeting with VP Kamala Harris, their security team and senior officials to obtain updates on the draw down of civilian personnel in Afghanistan. (WhiteHouse/Handout via REUTERS)
Short Url
Updated 16 August 2021
Follow

Biden team surprised by rapid Taliban gains in Afghanistan

  • Unlike Obama and Trump who ultimately stood down in the face of resistance from military leaders and other political concerns against an abrupt pullout of US forces in Afghanistan, Biden has been steadfast in his refusal to change the Aug. 31 deadline

WASHINGTON: President Joe Biden and other top US officials were stunned on Sunday by the pace of the Taliban’s nearly complete takeover of Afghanistan, as the planned withdrawal of American forces urgently became a mission to ensure a safe evacuation.
The speed of the Afghan government’s collapse and the ensuing chaos posed the most serious test of Biden as commander in chief, and he was the subject of withering criticism from Republicans who said that he had failed.
Biden campaigned as a seasoned expert in international relations and has spent months downplaying the prospect of an ascendant Taliban while arguing that Americans of all political persuasions have tired of a 20-year war, a conflict that demonstrated the limits of money and military might to force a Western-style democracy on a society not ready or willing to embrace it.
By Sunday, though, leading figures in the administration acknowledged they were caught off guard with the utter speed of the collapse of Afghan security forces. The challenge of that effort became clear after reports of sporadic gunfire at the Kabul airport prompted Americans to shelter as they awaited flights to safety after the US Embassy was completely evacuated.
“We’ve seen that that force has been unable to defend the country, and that has happened more quickly than we anticipated,” Secretary of State Antony Blinken told CNN, referring to the Afghan military.
The turmoil in Afghanistan resets the focus in an unwelcome way for a president who has largely focused on a domestic agenda that includes emerging from the pandemic, winning congressional approval for trillions of dollars in infrastructure spending and protecting voting rights.
Biden remained at Camp David on Sunday, receiving regular briefings on Afghanistan and holding secure video conference calls with members of his national security team, according to senior White House officials. His administration released a single photo of the president alone in a conference room meeting virtually with military, diplomatic and intelligence experts. The next several days would be critical in determining whether the US is able to regain some level of control over the situation.
The Pentagon and State Department said in a joint statement Sunday that “we are completing a series of steps to secure the Hamid Karzai International Airport to enable the safe departure of US and allied personnel from Afghanistan via civilian and military flights.” Biden ordered another 1,000 troops into Kabul to secure the evacuation.
Discussions were underway for Biden to speak publicly, according to two senior administration officials who requested anonymity to discuss internal conversations. Biden, who is scheduled to remain at the presidential retreat through Wednesday, is expected to return to the White House if he decides to deliver an address.
Biden is the fourth US president to confront challenges in Afghanistan and has insisted he wouldn’t hand America’s longest war to his successor. But the president will likely have to explain how security in Afghanistan unraveled so quickly, especially since he and others in the administration have insisted it wouldn’t happen.
“The jury is still out, but the likelihood there’s going to be the Taliban overrunning everything and owning the whole country is highly unlikely,” Biden said on July 8.
As recently as last week, Biden publicly expressed hope that Afghan forces could develop the will to defend their country. But privately, administration officials warned that the military was crumbling, prompting Biden on Thursday to order thousands of American troops into the region to speed up evacuation plans.
One official said Biden was more sanguine on projections for the Afghan fighters to hold off the Taliban in part to prevent a further erosion in morale among their force. It was ultimately for naught.
Presidents Barack Obama and Donald Trump also yearned to leave Afghanistan, but ultimately stood down in the face of resistance from military leaders and other political concerns. Biden, on the other hand, has been steadfast in his refusal to change the Aug. 31 deadline, in part because of his belief that the American public is on his side.
A late July ABC News/Ipsos poll, for instance, showed 55 percent of Americans approving of Biden’s handling of the troop withdrawal.
Most Republicans have not pushed Biden to keep troops in Afghanistan over the long term and they also supported Trump’s own push to exit the country. Still, some in the GOP are stepping up their critique of Biden’s withdrawal strategy and said images from Sunday of American helicopters circling the US Embassy in Kabul evoked the humiliating departure of US personnel from Vietnam.
Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell deemed the scenes of withdrawal as “the embarrassment of a superpower laid low.”
Meanwhile, US officials are increasingly concerned about the potential for the rise in terrorist threats against the US as the situation in Afghanistan devolves, according to a person familiar with the matter who requested anonymity to discuss a sensitive security matter.
Gen. Mark Milley, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told senators on a briefing call Sunday that US officials are expected to alter their earlier assessments about the pace of terrorist groups reconstituting in Afghanistan, the person said. Based on the evolving situation, officials believe terror groups like Al-Qaeda may be able to grow much faster than expected.
The officials on the call told senators that the US intelligence community is currently working on forming a new timeline based on the evolving threats.
Still, there were no additional steps planned beyond the troop deployment Biden ordered to assist in the evacuations. Senior administration officials believe the US will be able to maintain security at the Kabul airport long enough to extricate Americans and their allies, but the fate of those unable to get to the airport was far from certain.
Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Connecticut, a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee who has backed the Biden administration’s strategy, said in an interview that “the speed is a surprise” but would not characterize the situation as an intelligence failure. He said it has long been known that Afghanistan would fall to the Taliban if the United States pulled out.
“Given how much we have invested in the Afghan army, it’s not ridiculous for analysts to believe that they’d be able to put up a fight for more than a few days,” Murphy said. “You want to believe that trillions of dollars and 20 years of investment adds up to something, even if it doesn’t add up for the ability to defend the country in the long run.”
In the upper ranks of Biden’s staff, the rapid collapse in Afghanistan only confirmed the decision to leave: If the meltdown of the Afghan forces would come so quickly after nearly two decades of American presence, another six months or a year or two or more would not have changed anything.
Biden has argued for more than a decade that Afghanistan was a kind of purgatory for the United States. He found it to be corrupt, addicted to America’s largesse and an unreliable partner that should be made to fend for itself. His goal was to protect Americans from terrorist attacks, not building a country.
As vice president, he argued privately against Obama’s surge of 30,000 troops into Afghanistan in a bid to stabilize the country so that the United States and its allies could then pull back their forces.
As president, Biden said in July that he made the decision to withdraw with “clear eyes” after receiving daily battlefield updates. His judgment was that Afghanistan would be divided in a peace agreement with the Taliban, rather than falling all at once.
While Biden has prided himself on delivering plain truths to the American public, his bullish assessment of the situation just a month ago could come back to haunt him.
“There’s going to be no circumstance where you see people being lifted off the roof of a embassy in the — of the United States from Afghanistan,” he said in July. “The likelihood there’s going to be one unified government in Afghanistan controlling the whole country is highly unlikely.”


State prosecution in firebombing attack on demonstration for Israeli hostages moves ahead

Updated 5 sec ago
Follow

State prosecution in firebombing attack on demonstration for Israeli hostages moves ahead

  • Federal authorities say Soliman, an Egyptian national, had been living in the US illegally with his family at the time

DENVER: A judge ruled Tuesday that Colorado prosecutors can move ahead with their case against a man accused of killing one person and injuring a dozen more in a firebomb attack on demonstrators showing support for Israeli hostages in Gaza.
A police detective had been set to testify at a hearing explaining the evidence gathered against Mohamed Sabry Soliman in the June 1 attack on the weekly event in Boulder. But Soliman’s lawyer, Kathryn Herold, told Judge Nancy W. Salomone that he gave up his right to hear the evidence.
Soliman, wearing an orange and white striped jail uniform, told Salomone that he understood he was waiving his right to a hearing following a discussion with his lawyers Monday.
Despite that, prosecutors and victims who sat across the courtroom from Soliman or watched the hearing online were caught off guard by the decision.
Salomone said the case would now move ahead to an arraignment and scheduled a Sept. 9 hearing for Soliman to enter a plea to murder, attempted murder and other charges over the defense’s objection.
Herold said Soliman would not be ready to enter a plea then because of the large amount of evidence in the case and the murder charges recently added against him following the death of Karen Diamond, an 82-year-old woman injured in the attack. Herold said she expected to ask for the arraignment hearing to be delayed and suggested that a plea deal was possible.
20th Judicial District Attorney Michael Dougherty objected to a delay, saying any discussions could happen before and after an arraignment. He declined to comment on the possibility of a deal after the hearing.
Investigators say Soliman told them he intended to kill the roughly 20 participants at the weekly event on Boulder’s Pearl Street pedestrian mall. But he threw just two of more than two dozen Molotov cocktails he had with him while yelling, “Free Palestine!” Police said he told them he got scared because he had never hurt anyone before.
Federal authorities say Soliman, an Egyptian national, had been living in the US illegally with his family at the time.
Soliman has pleaded not guilty to federal hate crime charges and is scheduled to go on trial in federal court in Denver in September. However, his lawyers told US District Judge John L. Kane last week that they expect to ask for a delay.
Additional charges related to Diamond’s death could also slow down the federal proceedings. Assistant US Attorney Laura Cramer-Babycz told Kane that prosecutors have not decided yet whether to file additional charges against Soliman.
Federal prosecutors allege the victims were targeted because of their perceived or actual connection to Israel. But Soliman’s federal defense lawyers say he should not have been charged with hate crimes because the evidence shows he was motivated by opposition to Zionism, the political movement to establish and sustain a Jewish state in Israel.
An attack motivated by someone’s political views is not considered a hate crime under federal law.
State prosecutors have identified 29 victims in the attack. Thirteen of them were physically injured, and the others were nearby and are considered victims because they could have been hurt. A dog was also injured in the attack, so Soliman has also been charged with animal cruelty.

 


Pentagon ends deployment of 2,000 National Guard troops in Los Angeles

California National Guard are positioned at the Federal Building, June 10, 2025, in downtown Los Angeles. (AP)
Updated 16 min 12 sec ago
Follow

Pentagon ends deployment of 2,000 National Guard troops in Los Angeles

  • A day later, police officers used flash bangs and shot projectiles as they pushed protesters through Little Tokyo, where bystanders and restaurant workers rushed to get out of their way

LOS ANGELES: The Pentagon said Tuesday it is ending the deployment of 2,000 National Guard troops in Los Angeles, accounting for nearly half of the soldiers sent to the city to deal with protests over the Trump administration’s immigration crackdown.
Roughly 4,000 National Guard soldiers and 700 Marines have been in the city since early June. It wasn’t immediately clear what prompted the 60-day deployment to end suddenly, nor was it immediately clear how long the rest of the troops would stay in the region.
In late June, the top military commander in charge of troops deployed to LA had asked Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth for 200 of them to be returned to wildfire fighting duty amid warnings from Newsom that the Guard was understaffed as California entered peak wildfire season.
The end of the deployment comes a week after federal authorities and National Guard troops arrived at MacArthur Park with guns and horses in an operation that ended abruptly. Although the US Department of Homeland Security wouldn’t explain the purpose of the operation or whether anyone had been arrested, local officials said it seemed designed to sow fear.
“Thanks to our troops who stepped up to answer the call, the lawlessness in Los Angeles is subsiding,” Chief Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell said in a statement in announcing the decision.
On June 8, thousands of protesters took to the streets in response to Trump’s deployment of the Guard, blocking off a major freeway as law enforcement used tear gas, rubber bullets and flash bangs to control the crowd. Photos captured several Waymo robotaxis set on fire.
A day later, police officers used flash bangs and shot projectiles as they pushed protesters through Little Tokyo, where bystanders and restaurant workers rushed to get out of their way.
Mayor Karen Bass set a curfew in place for about a week that she said had successfully protected businesses and helped restore order. Demonstrations in the city and the region in recent weeks have been largely small impromptu protests around arrests.
Bass applauded the troops’ departure.
“This happened because the people of Los Angeles stood united and stood strong. We organized peaceful protests, we came together at rallies, we took the Trump administration to court — all of this led to today’s retreat,” she said in a statement, adding that “We will not stop making our voices heard until this ends, not just here in LA, but throughout our country.”
On Tuesday afternoon, there was no visible military presence outside the federal complex downtown that had been the center of early protests and where National Guard troops first stood guard before the Marines were assigned to protect federal buildings. Hundreds of the soldiers have been accompanying agents on immigration operations.
President Donald Trump ordered the deployment against the wishes of Gov. Gavin Newsom, who sued to stop it.
Newsom sued to block Trump’s command of the California National Guard, arguing that Trump violated the law when he deployed the troops despite his opposition. He also argued that the National Guard troops were likely violating the Posse Comitatus Act, which prohibits troops from conducting civilian law enforcement on US soil.
Newsom won an early victory in the case after a federal judge ruled the Guard deployment was illegal and exceeded Trump’s authority. But an appeals court tossed that order, and control of the troops remained with the federal government. The federal court is set to hear arguments next month on whether the troops are violating the Posse Comitatus Act.
The deployment of National Guard troops was for 60 days, though Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth had the discretion to shorten or extend it “to flexibly respond to the evolving situation on the ground,” the Trump administration’s lawyers wrote in a June 23 filing in the legal case.
Following the Pentagon’s decision Tuesday, Newsom said in a statement that the National Guard’s deployment to Los Angeles County has pulled troops away from their families and civilian work “to serve as political pawns for the President.”
He added that the remaining troops “continue without a mission, without direction and without any hopes of returning to help their communities.”
“We call on Trump and the Department of Defense to end this theater and send everyone home now,” he said.
 

 


Trump unveils investments to power AI boom

Updated 16 July 2025
Follow

Trump unveils investments to power AI boom

PITTSBURGH: US President Donald Trump went to Pennsylvania on Tuesday to announce $92 billion in energy and infrastructure deals intended to meet big tech’s soaring demand for electricity to fuel the AI boom.
Trump made the announcement at the inaugural Pennsylvania Energy and Innovation Summit at Carnegie Mellon University, with much of the talk about beating China in the global AI race.
“Today’s commitments are ensuring that the future is going to be designed, built and made right here in Pennsylvania and right here in Pittsburgh, and I have to say, right here in the United States of America,” Trump said at the event.
The tech world has fully embraced generative AI as the next wave of technology, but fears are growing that its massive electricity needs cannot be met by current infrastructure, particularly in the United States.
Generative AI requires enormous computing power, mainly to run the energy-hungry processors from Nvidia, the California-based company that has become the world’s most valuable company by market capitalization.
Officials expect that by 2028, tech companies will need as much as five gigawatts of power for AI — enough electricity to power roughly five million homes.
Top executives from Palantir, Anthropic, Exxon and Chevron attended the event.
The funding will cover new data centers, power generation, grid infrastructure, AI training, and apprenticeship programs.
Among investments, Google committed $25 billion to build AI-ready data centers in Pennsylvania and surrounding regions.
“We support President Trump’s clear and urgent direction that our nation invest in AI... so that America can continue to lead in AI,” said Ruth Porat, Google’s president and chief investment officer.
The search engine giant also announced a partnership with Brookfield Asset Management to modernize two hydropower facilities in Pennsylvania, representing 670 MW of capacity on the regional grid.
Investment group Blackstone pledged more than $25 billion to fund new data centers and energy infrastructure.
US Senator David McCormick, from Pennsylvania, said the investments “are of enormous consequence to Pennsylvania, but they are also crucial to the future of the nation.”
His comments reflect the growing sentiment in Washington that the United States must not lose ground to China in the race to develop AI.
“We are way ahead of China and the plants are starting up, the construction is starting up,” Trump said.
The US president launched the “Stargate” project in January, aimed at investing up to $500 billion in US AI infrastructure — primarily in response to growing competition with China.
Japanese tech investor SoftBank, ChatGPT-maker OpenAI, and Oracle are investing $100 billion in the initial phase.
Trump has also reversed many policies adopted by the previous Biden administration that imposed checks on developing powerful AI algorithms and limits on exports of advanced technology to certain allied countries.
He is expected to outline his own blueprint for AI advancement later this month.


UK union leaders say Met police charges against Palestine activists an attack on right to protest

Updated 15 July 2025
Follow

UK union leaders say Met police charges against Palestine activists an attack on right to protest

  • In January, the Metropolitan Police arrested over 70 people in a pro-Palestine protest, including several prominent activists
  • Union leaders called for the Met to drop charges against former NEU executive member, general secretary of the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament

LONDON: Over 20 prominent union leaders in the UK have raised concerns about the erosion of the right to peaceful protest in the country and about the Metropolitan Police’s handling of pro-Palestinian marches.

The 22 trade union leaders criticized in a joint statement on Tuesday the Met’s decision to charge former union members who were arrested during a London protest in solidarity with Palestine.

The Met arrested over 70 people in a pro-Palestine protest on Jan. 18 in London. Among those detained were Alex Kenny, a former executive member of the National Education Union; Sophie Bolt, the general secretary of the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament; Ben Jamal, the director of the Palestine Solidarity Campaign; and Chris Nineham, the vice-chair of the Stop the War Coalition.

The union leaders referred to the arrests and charges against Kenny and Bolt as a threat to the right to protest.

“Alex Kenny is a long-standing, and widely respected, trade union activist who has organised peaceful demonstrations in London for decades,” they said in a statement.

“We believe these charges are an attack on our right to protest. The right to protest is fundamental to trade unions and the wider movement. The freedoms to organise, of assembly and of speech matter; we must defend them,” they added.

They called for the Met to drop charges against Kenny, Bolt, Nineham, and Jamal.

The signatories include Paul Nowak from the Trades Union Congress, Christina McAnea from Unison, Daniel Kebede from the NEU, Matt Wrack from the Teachers’ Union, Dave Ward of the Communication Workers Union, Mick Whelan of the train drivers’ union ASLEF, and Eddie Dempsey from the National Union of Rail, Maritime and Transport Workers.

They said the decision to charge Kenny and Bolt follows the prosecution of Nineham and Jamal.

Amnesty International, along with dozens of legal experts, expressed concerns over the Met’s handling of the pro-Palestine protest in January, with some describing the arrests as “a disproportionate, unwarranted and dangerous assault on the right to assembly and protest.”

At the protest, former Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn and former shadow chancellor John McDonnell were interviewed under caution and released pending further investigations. MPs and peers have also called on Home Secretary Yvette Cooper to review protest legislation introduced by the former Conservative government.


Europeans open to buying US arms for Ukraine under Trump plan but need details 

Updated 15 July 2025
Follow

Europeans open to buying US arms for Ukraine under Trump plan but need details 

  • “Of course we can’t do it on our own, we need others to partner up,” Rasmussen told reporters
  • European ministers said they would now need to examine how new purchases of US weapons could be paid for

BRUSSELS: Several European countries said on Tuesday they were willing to buy US arms for Ukraine under a scheme announced by US President Donald Trump, although arrangements still needed to be worked out.

Trump said on Monday that Washington will supply Patriot air defense systems, missiles and other weaponry to Ukraine for its war against Russia’s invasion and that the arms would be paid for by other NATO countries.

But much remains undisclosed, including the amounts and precise types of weapons to be provided, how quickly they would be supplied and how they would be paid for.

US officials have suggested that European countries will be willing to give up some of their own stocks of weapons for Ukraine and then buy replacements from the United States. But some of the countries involved say they still don’t even know what is being asked of them.

Such a move would get weapons to Ukraine more quickly but would leave donor countries’ defenses more exposed until new systems are ready.

“We are ready to participate. Of course we can’t do it on our own, we need others to partner up – but we have a readiness,” Danish Foreign Minister Lars Lokke Rasmussen told reporters in Brussels on Tuesday ahead of a meeting of European Union ministers.

Speaking alongside Trump at the White House on Monday, NATO chief Mark Rutte said that Germany, Finland, Denmark, Sweden, Norway, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands and Canada want to be part of the new initiative.

Many of those countries have been among the biggest military aid donors to Ukraine, either overall or per capita.

Asked whether Denmark could give US arms from its own stocks as part of the scheme, Rasmussen said: “We don’t have these kind of systems – the Patriot systems – so if we should lean in, and we are absolutely ready to do so, it will be (with) money and we have to work out the details.”

European ministers said they would now need to examine how new purchases of US weapons could be paid for. In many cases, that seems likely to involve countries teaming up to buy US weapons systems.

“Now we need to see how together we can go in and finance, among other things, Patriots, which they plan to send to Ukraine,” Sweden’s Foreign Minister Maria Malmer Stenergard told Swedish radio.

In Brussels, Dutch Foreign Minister Caspar Veldkamp said his country is looking into the plan “with a positive inclination”.

Asked about the scheme, Norwegian Defense Minister Tore Sandvik told Reuters that Oslo was “in close dialogue with Ukraine” on military aid and “air defense remains a high priority for Ukraine and for the Norwegian military support”.

“Norway has contributed to significant amounts of air defense for Ukraine, including co-financing the donation of a Patriot system and missiles,” he said.

The Finnish Defense Ministry said Helsinki “will continue to provide material support to Ukraine”.

“The details of the US initiative ... are not yet known and we are interested to hear more about them before we can take more concrete lines on this issue,” it said.