Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

SFRC Kerry questioning Afghan NATO GEneral

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » DU Groups » Democrats » John Kerry Group Donate to DU
 
TayTay Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-21-06 09:34 AM
Original message
SFRC Kerry questioning Afghan NATO GEneral
Edited on Thu Sep-21-06 09:44 AM by TayTay
Kerry stating AFghanistan is the central location for WOT

What is going on there, what's up with the opium sales, etc.

Is Afghanistan a narco-economy?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
TayTay Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-21-06 09:36 AM
Response to Original message
1. If drugs are the center of everything there, what will change?
Edited on Thu Sep-21-06 09:45 AM by TayTay
Gen: 50% of economy tied to drugs, then you are on your way to being a narco-state. Drugs touch all aspects of the Afghan state. We should be very worried about this.

JK: Why no effort to take out the crops?

Gen: We need international help. Ahm, if we wipe out the economy, then we piss off the locals.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
whometense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-21-06 09:37 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. Thanks!!
got it!!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TayTay Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-21-06 09:42 AM
Response to Reply #1
3. Afgah is a narco-state
Edited on Thu Sep-21-06 09:45 AM by TayTay
JK: Karzai says that the same enemies who blew themselves up in America in 9/11 are still around. The London Airline plot was hatched in Afghan. Ahm, 40% of Afghan. is unemployed, and the Bushies have 1/4th of the reconstruction funds for Afghan as Iraq. (And it was cut 30% this year.)

Gen: Completely agree. Military aspects are important but long-term reconstruction efforts are critical.

JK: Ahm, how we aren't doing this then

Gen: We have 6 million Afghanis going to school, including girls. we rebuilt roads, 80% of Afghan people have access to health care

JK: Good work and you deserve praise for it. But, what everyone is saying is that there is a huge risk narco, economy, etc,

30,000 Afghani trained for army? (yes)

Ahm, the economy is lost to the other effort. 30,000 is not enough to police the country.,

GEn: Agreed. We need more. NATO commander and I stop at after some reconstruction missions. We need judicial reform. More international focus to Afghanistan. Ahm, if we get all these things we need then we can succeed.

JK: If we do this. BTW, what happened with OBL? Ahm, he is still there. Are you able to do everything you can to capture/kill OBL?

GEN: Ahm, I have to fudge that one. I assist the Afghanis as a NATO guy. This is not my jurisdiction
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-21-06 09:49 AM
Response to Reply #3
7. Can you put this up in GD - please?
Edited on Thu Sep-21-06 10:03 AM by blm
Nice for everyone to stay abreast of what's really going on.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TayTay Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-21-06 09:53 AM
Response to Reply #7
8. With all due respect, I can't
I left a meeting and not 1 minute later heard Sen. KErry speak. I had time to write this and then I have another meeting. (Apparently luck only favored me for a few moments.)

I cannot babysit a thread in GD and did not hear enough of this SFRC hearing to answer questions. I'm sure there will be a transcript later, but I only got a teensy bit of it and am not comfortable being 'point' on this. (I don't know enough.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-21-06 10:05 AM
Response to Reply #8
12. Gotcha. But it sounds pretty damn good to me.
Maybe I'm used to the way you speak - heh - you make perfect sense to me. ;)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TayTay Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-21-06 09:43 AM
Response to Original message
4. More hearing
Edited on Thu Sep-21-06 09:46 AM by TayTay
Gen: OBL not my concern unless he falls into my lap.

JK: Would you be able to do all you want to get him? (Subtle dig here.)

Gen: We are doing everything we can to get him and others and to shore up the borders. Again, I am NATO not CentCom (US) Says next 36 days will be extremely interesting.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
whometense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-21-06 09:46 AM
Response to Reply #4
5. I have no idea how to read this
Edited on Thu Sep-21-06 09:49 AM by whometense
(wonk muscle evidently needs more exercise).

Is this guy credible? How do you read what he said about OBL hunting being out of his jurisdiction?

Thurston Howell's up now.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TayTay Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-21-06 09:48 AM
Response to Reply #5
6. It's technically accurate
Edited on Thu Sep-21-06 09:51 AM by TayTay
He is allied with NATO and it is not in NATO's mission to take out OBL. NATO's mission to to help the Afghan government, assist in reconstruction and try to upgrade the police, the army and so forth. He is questionable on the narco-economy as that would fall under NATO international efforts to monitor the country. Technically, he doesn't have the mission to 'get' OBL. But this is a subtle game. Kerry was asking him, as a US Gen to comment on this and he was ducking the question. (In as much as JK would let him.)

Big Headline (and I came in just as Sen. KErry started asking questions) was the fragile state of Afghanistan. The General stated that more than 50% of Afghanistan's economy is based on or touched by the drug trade. It infects every level of AFghani society and is funding the terrorist activities. The Gen stopped short of calling Afghanistan a narco-state, but it is almost there. The Gen then tap danced around a positive message, but this is extremely bad and KErry, in as much as he could 'nail' a NATO Gen, did so. This is very, very bad news, particularly in light of the confession that Afghanistan has only 30,000 trained troops and 1/4th the amount of money for reconstruction that Iraq has. Read between the lines on what the NATO guy can actually speak to and this is very, very bad news.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
whometense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-21-06 09:53 AM
Response to Reply #6
9. I'm having trouble with the normal
senate politesse right now. My inner two year old wants to see someone leap across a table and strangle one of these guys. Not this NATO guy. I'm realllly antsy about the McCain/Warner/Graham monstrosity and what kinds of boxes are being constructed for trapping dem senators.

It's hard work to be mature when everything seems to be crashing down in chaos. My inner two year old was laughing her ass off yesterday when Chavez referred to the sulphurous odor W had left at the UN.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-21-06 09:56 AM
Response to Reply #6
10. It's good to get them on record
because it demonstrates that there is no clear policy and Bush is just making up stuff (lying) as he goes along. Example, this flip flop on bin Laden and Pakistan:

Bush says would go after bin Laden in Pakistan
Wed Sep 20, 6:13 PM ET

WASHINGTON (Reuters) -
President George W. Bush said on Wednesday if he had firm intelligence that Osama bin Laden was in Pakistan, he would issue the order to go into that country after the al Qaeda leader.

His statement drew an immediate response from Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf, who said Pakistan would handle such a situation itself. Musharraf is extremely sensitive about possible foreign military intervention inside his borders.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060920/pl_nm/bush_binladen_dc_1


Q Thank you, Mr. President. Earlier this week, you told a group of journalists that you thought the idea of sending special forces to Pakistan to hunt down bin Laden was a strategy that would not work.

THE PRESIDENT: Yes.

Q Now, recently you've also --

THE PRESIDENT: Because, first of all, Pakistan is a sovereign nation.

Q Well, recently you've also described bin Laden as a sort of modern day Hitler or Mussolini. And I'm wondering why, if you can explain why you think it's a bad idea to send more resources to hunt down bin Laden, wherever he is?

THE PRESIDENT: We are, Richard. Thank you. Thanks for asking the question. They were asking me about somebody's report, well, special forces here -- Pakistan -- if he is in Pakistan, as this person thought he might be, who is asking the question -- Pakistan is a sovereign nation. In order for us to send thousands of troops into a sovereign nation, we've got to be invited by the government of Pakistan.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/09/20060915-2.html


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-21-06 10:34 AM
Response to Reply #4
14. Whether he speaks for the U.S. or not,
IMO, that response is atrocious!

Q: Someone else would be reporting to you, you mean, as the ISAF -- (off mike)?

GEN. JONES: Well, there would be a U.S. -- there will be a U.S. major general who will be in charge of security for Afghanistan , writ large. He will have two hats. On -- in his NATO hat, he would be working for the NATO commander, and he will be in charge of security writ large. In his CENTCOM hat, he will be working for General Abizaid, and he will be directing the more offensive operations, for instance, along the border or wherever you need to go after -- to continue the search for bin Laden and those things. So that's the only slight distinction, but it will be a much more cohesive effort, and we will essentially have one headquarters.

http://www.nato.int/shape/news/2006/03/060307b.htm


Isn't this a global war on terror?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TayTay Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-21-06 10:01 AM
Response to Original message
11. Gen testifying is
Edited on Thu Sep-21-06 10:04 AM by TayTay
General James L. Jones, Jr., USMC
Supreme Allied Commander Europe (SACEUR)
Supreme Headquarters, Allied Powers Europe
Mons, Belgium

This guy, who could speak for the US and not NATO, did not make it to the hearing.

Lieutenant General Karl W. Eikenberry
Commander, Combined Forces Command (CFC)
Kabul, Afghanistan
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
karynnj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-21-06 10:23 AM
Response to Original message
13. The current witness is great
I don't know who he is - Dr Rubin (?) but he is really laying things out:

- The hdqtrs of the Taliban is generally considered to be in Qetta (sp?) Pakistan, a capital city of one of the provinces - not a cave

- We helped the poppy growers and didn't help Karzi when he wanted to stop it

- wants to work with Iran to stop poppy growth
- says Pakistan, not Iran is destabalizing Afghanistan (Musharif speaks good English and wear a suit, that doesn't make him good.)
- Afghanistan nearly the poorest country in the world

His comments are very very interesting and I can't remember enough to do them justice. (I admire Tay Tay and WT2 - who do this so much better.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
karynnj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-21-06 10:40 AM
Response to Reply #13
15. Sarbanes up
says: Diverted resources away from Afghanistan too early.
Q: Why Taliban resurgence -
A: They weren't defeated they were displaced, always a Pak/Afg group - DC didn't make Pak get them.
They are coming back - suicide attacks up astronomicly - hitting allies (rather than primarily US)

Q: what would you do
A: Iraq not related to 911, contaminated Pak/afg droe Taliban even closer to jihadis. Need to change mideastern policies. Need to challange Pak, who we give lots of aid to. Double reconstruction $ through Afg govt budget. strengthen police and judiciary using existing organizations. Work with UN to get list of Afg drugpins - sanctions - and offer of amnesty to druglords willing to bring in money and stop. rural development

Q: Govt is workable, coalition effort etc
A: Afg govt needs reform - they have a 5 yr compact to implement. Coalition - not mil analyst - initially not enough forces and not the right mandate - shifted to better footing - political and economic problem, not military
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
karynnj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-21-06 10:50 AM
Response to Reply #15
16. Voinivich
Edited on Thu Sep-21-06 10:57 AM by karynnj
Do you agree we should have done Iraq later - answer: there was no reason to go to war against Iraq. when we were against totolitarian govt (Germany etc) we didn't attact the USSR. The Iraq war made us fit AlQada's image of us that we attacked an oil rich Islamic country.

Musharif is courageous, but Pak is complicated. Afghan and Pak do not agree on border. Pak was funded terrorists to tie down India in Kasmir and to deal with AFghanistan.

Do allies have vested reasons to be there, like we do? Our allies have given a HIGHER priority relative to other things - Netherlands, Canada, UK, Germany, Spain.

Will they stay, now that people are dying? - controversy, but they are working at explaining to their people (novel idea - didn't we used to do things like this) Karzi speaking to Canadian parliment

Said the FBI head in Cinncinnati says that the drug problem is a bigger threat that terrorism with much involvement of the Russsian mafia. (Afghan opium goes to Pak and Iran the most.)

Hearing adjouned.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TayTay Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-21-06 11:34 AM
Response to Original message
17. Partial transcript for today
KERRY: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

General, thanks. Welcome. Thanks for the job you're doing. And thank you also for the time to visit the other day on the telephone. I appreciate it very, very much -- and I see the five pillars here and it's part of the public testimony.

I've always felt that Afghanistan is the real center of the war on terror, not Iraq. And it's troubling to me that we have seven times the numbers of troops in Iraq that we do in Afghanistan and that suicide attempts I think are up, triple; roadside bombs are up double.

And you yourself have said, General, that narcotics is at the core of everything that can go wrong in Afghanistan if not properly tackled.

But we're not making progress -- we're losing ground.

President Karzai has said that our approach to the narcotics, counternarcotics, have failed. And the U.N.'s top counternarcotics official said yesterday that NATO forces have to somehow help the Afghan army to fight the opium trade.

When I was in Afghanistan and met with President Karzai earlier in the year, I asked him about the narco-situation and whether or not Afghanistan is now a narco-economy.

MORE

KERRY: And he said yes. He agreed.

I think our experts agree, I think you would agree, it is a narco-economy.

At what point does it become a narco-state? And if our efforts have currently failed, and that's the center of everything that could go wrong, what's going to change?

JONES: I don't know what the tip-over point is, but when over 50 percent of your economy is tied to the narco-trafficking portion of it, you're well on your way. I don't know exactly when you become a narco-state by definition, but it's clear that the influence of narcotics on all organs of emerging Afghan society is there.

It fuels the insurgency. It contributes to the corruption. It is omni-present. And it's something that, frankly, the family of nations ought to be worried about.

I think one of the things I mentioned to you in our conversation was that 90 percent of the products are sold in European capitals.

KERRY: Well, with all of the troop level that we have there, what is the problem in engaging in a massive crop destruction effort? Are they afraid of the instability that that will incur on the population, so they're, in a sense, locked?

JONES: It is a vicious circle, because I think what is needed is a comprehensive international plan that everybody signs up to that's multi-faceted.

If we simply focus on crop eradication, then you're affecting the livelihood of a significant portion of the country, and so you have to have crop substitution, you have to have means of getting alternative crops to the markets, which means you have to build roads that may not exist.

There's a whole series of dominoes that line up. But absent a clearly defined, well thought-out, agreed-upon finance and resource plan, you wind up doing a little bit of everything and nothing very well.

KERRY: That's what really concerns me, General. Here we are. President Karzai said, quote, The same enemies that blew up themselves -- that's his quote -- in the Twin Towers in America are still around.

The plot against these airliners that was stopped in London was hatched in Afghanistan. Yet the center of changing this is to have economic success and reform success.

And yet 40 percent of the Afghan population is unemployed right now, before you even do crop destruction. Ninety percent lack regular electricity. And yet this administration has appropriated nearly four times more in reconstruction funds for Iraq than Afghanistan. And, in fact, aid money was cut by 30 percent this year.

So I would assume that greater construction efforts and greater focus in pulling together this comprehensive eradication or substitution plan would significantly bolster your efforts of our troops on the ground.

MORE

JONES: I completely agree. I think that the military aspect of what we're doing is important. But the long-term reconstruction is tied to how well we do in those pillars.

KERRY: So if the stakes are as high as everybody says, if the president says this is a battle for civilization and so forth, why aren't we doing this?

JONES: I think we're doing quite a bit. I mean, just to put a positive spin on this, we have 6 million Afghan children who are going to school today, 2 million of them are girls. We've rebuilt over 3,000 kilometers of roads. Eighty percent of the Afghan people now have access to some form of health care.

There are interesting measures of progress out there.

KERRY: Can I just interrupt one second? I don't mean to cut you off at all, but the time is limited.

I agree -- and I want to pay tribute to that. I think you and efforts on the ground have really been quite remarkable in a lot of respects.

But what you're telling us, what President Karzai is telling us, what experts are telling us on the ground is that all of that -- and it's good -- is at huge risk because of what's happening with the three pillars of the five that are affected by the narcotics, by the criminality, by the lack of judicial reform, the lack of competency within the police force.

And I think you said you have something like, was it 40,000 troops now?

JONES: There's 20,000 NATO troops and 20,000...

KERRY: No, of the Afghan army, trained.

JONES: Oh, I'm sorry. About 30,000.

KERRY: Thirty thousand now.

That's not going to be able to do what's necessary if your economy is lost to this other effort, correct?

JONES: That's correct. I think you do need an Afghan army. I think you need the internal police force. That's got to be fixed. Judicial reform -- you've got to be able to prosecute the people who are causing these difficulties in the narcotics.

But to me I think that talking about this is important. I think it will have the effect in the international community to focus those people whose jobs it is to bring this about.

I appear today as a NATO commander. My NATO responsibilities stop at stability and security and the management of the provincial reconstruction teams.

There is an entire other sector that I talk about, but I don't have an assigned mission in, for instance, judicial reform. But I know that if we don't have judicial reform, the security of the country is going to be jeopardized, so we have to talk about it.

And I think we have to bring more international focus and energy to it. And I must say that if we do that, I'm optimistic that this will be a success story.

So I'm optimistic about where Afghanistan can be in a few years.

KERRY: If we do this, now.

JONES: If we do this. If we do this. And if we're successful at doing this.

KERRY: What about the effort on Osama bin Laden? The Waziristan deal seems really troubling, and a lot of people seem troubled by it, and most believe that while some things are stated about what will happen, the expectations are considerably lower that they will, in fact.

MORE

KERRY: Are you satisfied that you're able to do everything that you want to do, would like to do, believe is necessary to capture or kill Osama bin Laden?

JONES: This is the delicate part of my appearance here. As a NATO commander, my mission from the North Atlantic Treaty Organization is to assist the government of Afghanistan in providing a safe and secure environment for reconstruction.

KERRY: I know CENTCOM is doing that.

JONES: And that's why I need to make that distinction that the ISAF mission and the Operation Enduring Freedom mission, led by CENTCOM, that's the one that has the more kinetic counterterrorist mission.

And so I am not involved in the active border participations. NATO's focus is more on security, stability and reconstruction. Which isn't to say that if we ever came across Mr. bin Laden, that we wouldn't apprehend him; we would. If we had indications that he might be in one of our areas, would we go try to get him? We probably would.

KERRY: And you don't want to venture to share with the committee, just from your experience and judgment, whether or not you think we're able to do all that is necessary or we would like to do?

JONES: Well, I can tell you that I know General Abizaid has spent a considerable amount of time working with the Pakistani authorities. We have large numbers of troops up in the border areas. And I think we're doing everything we can to locate him and locate other leaders and to discourage the border from being a sieve through which Taliban fighters come across to Afghanistan and contribute to the problems that we have there.

So I think that, over the next 30 to 60 days, while we give the Pakistani authorities a chance to test their new agreements in the border regions, I think the next 30, 60 days will be interesting to see how effective we're going to be.

KERRY: Thank you, General.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

LUGAR: Thank you, Senator Kerry.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-21-06 11:48 AM
Response to Reply #17
18. Excellent! Thanks Tay!
In context, Gen. Jones was ducking the questions. Everyone is trying to cover their butts!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fedupinBushcountry Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-21-06 11:07 PM
Response to Original message
19. This Hearing is on
C-Span now. General Jones is giving his opening statement.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JI7 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-21-06 11:11 PM
Response to Reply #19
20. anyone know how long into it Kerry comes on ?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fedupinBushcountry Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-21-06 11:17 PM
Response to Reply #20
21. I have no idea
I missed it this morning.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JI7 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-21-06 11:56 PM
Response to Reply #21
22. he is on now
looking really cute.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-04-06 06:32 PM
Response to Original message
23. Uh!
Edited on Wed Oct-04-06 06:33 PM by ProSense

NATO Official Says Counternarcotics Strategy Needed to Stabilize Afghanistan

Author: Robert McMahon

October 4, 2006
Council on Foreign Relations

(NOTE: This is a news brief of an October 4, 2006, meeting at the Council on Foreign Relations.)

WASHINGTON – NATO’s Supreme Allied Commander, Gen. James Jones, says the alliance has sufficient manpower to fulfill its mission in Afghanistan but faces ultimate failure unless counternarcotics and reconstruction efforts improve.

“Anything we do militarily is perishable if it’s not accompanied by reconstruction,” Jones told a briefing at the Council on Foreign Relations on Wednesday. “I think there is a requirement to do more and to bring more focus, more clarity, more purpose, and more results in a shorter period of time. And fundamentally, this is the exit strategy for Afghanistan.”

Jones called drug trafficking—the Afghan opium trade accounts for some 60 percent of the country’s GDP—the “Achilles heel” of Afghanistan. Money from the drug trade, he said, fuels the resurgent Taliban insurgency, worsens corruption, and undermines economic development.

NATO does not have a formal role in fighting the drug traffickers. Jones said the matter requires a strategy that involves elements of security, improving the choices for poor farmers as well as spurring infrastructure development.

more...

http://www.cfr.org/publication/11600



Kerry was right!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TayTay Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-04-06 08:00 PM
Response to Reply #23
24. Kerry was right on this one years ago
maybe at least a full decade ago when he called for help in dealing with the drug production problem in Afghanistan. Interesting to see what two Presidents in that time have done, in light of the Senator's requests, in writing and in the Congressional Record. Hmmmmmmm.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Apr 30th 2024, 04:45 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » DU Groups » Democrats » John Kerry Group Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC