DTN News - AFGHAN WAR NEWS: ISAF Condemns 'Despicable' Suicide-Bomber Attack

Asian Defense News: DTN News - AFGHAN WAR NEWS: ISAF Condemns 'Despicable' Suicide-Bomber Attack

Source: DTN News - - This article compiled by Roger Smith from reliable sources ISAF Joint Command News Releases ~ American Forces Press Service
(NSI News Source Info) TORONTO, Canada - July 14, 2012: The International Security Assistance Force condemned today's "senseless and cowardly" suicide-bomber attack at a wedding in Afghanistan's northern Samangan province that killed at least 19 people, including a member of the country's parliament, and wounded more than 43 others, military officials reported.

A suicide attacker blew himself up at the entrance to a wedding hall in Aybak, the province's capital, officials said, noting the blast killed at least 19 people and wounded more than 43 others.

Ahmad Khan Samangani, a member of the Afghan parliament; Mohammad Khan, the provincial director of the National Directorate of Security; and Lt. Gen. Said Ahmad Samse were among those killed in the attack, officials said.

Regional Command-North is providing medical and surgical assistance to the injured, according to a RC-North news release issued today.

The International Security Assistance Force stated in a release issued today that it "strongly condemns this senseless and cowardly act of insurgent terror that resulted in the murder of innocent civilians. These despicable acts continue to disrupt peace and demonstrate an utter lack of respect for Afghan lives."

"Once again the Taliban have murdered Afghans in cold blood with complete disregard for innocent life or to the sanctity of a wedding," ISAF commander Marine Corps Gen. John R. Allen stated in the release. "Their depravity clearly knows no bounds. The disgust of the Afghan people for these criminals only continues to grow.

"ISAF continues to stand with the noble people of Afghanistan and we offer our assistance in solving this crime," Allen continued. "I offer my sincerest condolences and prayers to the family and friends who are suffering from the loss of their loved ones."

ISAF "remains committed to stopping acts of terror together with Afghan National Security Forces in order to build a secure environment that promotes lasting peace and a secure way of life for the Afghan people," the command's release said.

*Link for This article compiled by Roger Smith from reliable sources ISAF Joint Command News Releases ~ American Forces Press Service
*Speaking Image - Creation of DTN News ~ Defense Technology News 
*This article is being posted from Toronto, Canada By DTN News ~ Defense-Technology News Contact:dtnnews@ymail.com 
©COPYRIGHT (C) DTN NEWS DEFENSE-TECHNOLOGY NEWS 

DTN News - AFGHAN WAR NEWS: U.S.-Pakistan Military Negotiations ‘Very Positive’ According Gen. John R. Allen

Asian Defense News: DTN News - AFGHAN WAR NEWS: U.S.-Pakistan Military Negotiations ‘Very Positive’ According Gen. John R. Allen
Source: DTN News - - This article compiled by Roger Smith from reliable sources By Karen Parrish - American Forces Press Service
(NSI News Source Info) TORONTO, Canada - May 23, 2012: Military-to-military talks between the U.S. and Pakistan, which recently resumed after a lapse, are going well, the commander of NATO and U.S. forces in Afghanistan said today.

Marine Corps Gen. John R. Allen, International Security Assistance Force commander, acknowledged during a Pentagon press briefing that the issue of reopening Pakistani ground supply routes to NATO is still unresolved. Pakistan closed the routes after a late-November 2011 cross-border attack by NATO forces near a border coordination center in Afghanistan’s Kunar province accidently killed 24 Pakistani soldiers.

“I have recently led a team to Islamabad to renew our conversation with the Pakistani military,” Allen said, noting the participants had “a very positive conversation about taking steps and measures necessary to prevent a recurrence of the events of 25 and 26 November.”

He said Lt. Gen. Shir Mohammad Karimi, general staff chief of operations for the Afghan National Army, also traveled to Islamabad for the two-day military talks with Gen. Ashfaq Parvez Kayani, the Pakistani army chief of staff.

“We committed ourselves to recurring meetings … with the idea of creating a constructive long-term relationship between Afghanistan and Pakistan,” Allen said.

Allen noted Pakistan has many challenges along its border with Afghanistan. Pakistan’s forces are also fighting an insurgency, he said, and they have taken more casualties in the last two years than the U.S. has in 10 years of combat in Afghanistan.

“Where we can find intersection of our interests, we should leverage those,” the general said. “And I think we're to the point where that conversation can occur.”

Since the ground supply routes through Pakistan into Afghanistan closed in November, Allen said, military cargo has moved through the northern distribution network, a set of logistic arrangements connecting Baltic and Caspian ports with Afghanistan via Russia, Central Asia and the Caucasus.

Immediately after Pakistan closed off the ground supple routes, the U.S. Air Force and U.S. Transportation Command ramped up transport schedules to maintain the flow of supplies, Allen said.

“One of the great resources of the United States is the United States Air Force,” the Marine Corps general noted. The United States’ strategic logistics capabilities ensured the campaign and the supply chain supporting it continued uninterrupted, he added.

Supply stocks in Afghanistan are greater today than they were November 25, Allen said. At no point, he said, had gasoline dropped to less than a 30-day supply, the lowest level any supply stock had reached since the closure.

Allen noted the current routes are about twice as expensive and take more time than did supplies arriving through the ground route from Pakistan.

Allen emphasized he is not involved in government or policy discussions with Pakistan. But, he said, reestablishing communications among U.S., Pakistani and Afghan military leaders is “a very positive step” toward reopening supply routes.

“It is a negotiation, and negotiations take time, so I can't predict what the outcome will be and how soon that will be,” he said.

*Link for This article compiled by Roger Smith from reliable sources By Karen Parrish - American Forces Press Service
*Speaking Image - Creation of DTN News ~ Defense Technology News 
*This article is being posted from Toronto, Canada By DTN News ~ Defense-Technology News Contact:dtnnews@ymail.com 
©COPYRIGHT (C) DTN NEWS DEFENSE-TECHNOLOGY NEWS 

DTN News - OBAMA IN AFGHANISTAN: Obama’s Afghanistan Plan - Echoes of Vietnam In The U.S. Exit Strategy

Asian Defense News: DTN News - OBAMA IN AFGHANISTAN: Obama’s Afghanistan Plan - Echoes of Vietnam In The U.S. Exit Strategy
Source: DTN News - - This article compiled by Roger Smith from reliable sources By Tony Karon - Time (Blog)
(NSI News Source Info) TORONTO, Canada - May 2, 2012: To understand the historical significance of President Barack Obama’s visit to Afghanistan on Tuesday, imagine that President Richard Nixon had, in the spring of 1972, flown to Saigon to signal American voters that the Vietnam war was coming to an end — and to ink a deal with President Nguyen Van Thieu codifying a long-term U.S. relationship with the Republic of South Vietnam, which would shortly be left responsible for its own security. 

“Today, I signed a historic agreement between the United States and Afghanistan that defines a new kind of relationship between our countries – a future in which Afghans are responsible for the security of their nation, and we build an equal partnership between two sovereign states; a future in which the war ends, and a new chapter begins,” Obama said Tuesday.  Nixon might have said something similar on that imaginary 1972 visit. Except, of course, everyone knew that Vietnam’s future would not be defined by an agreement between Washington and Thieu, as much as by the one signed in Paris, two months after Nixon’s reelection, between Henry Kissinger and Le Duc Tho, representing the Democratic Republic of Vietnam (a.k.a. “North Vietnam”). Even that deal collapsed, of course, with the DRV and its supporters in the south finishing off the Thieu regime 19 months after U.S. troops withdrew.

Any deal between Presidents Obama and Karzai premised on the ability of the current political order in Kabul to protect itself independently of foreign troops is hardly likely to be the last word, pleasing as the spectacle may be for presidential campaign purposes. The key — but by no means the only — conversation shaping Afghanistan’s future will be the one conducted on the battlefield, and at the negotiating table, between the U.S., its Afghan interlocutors and the Taliban. That point seemed to be underscored by a Taliban car bomb attack near U.S. bases in Kabul just hours after Obama’s departure, which served as a counterpoint to the President’s insistence in his speech that the insurgents’ momentum has been broken. 

Sure, the U.S. has made important tactical gains against the Taliban in designated operational areas in southwestern Afghanistan, but tactical gains in an expeditionary counterinsurgency war tend to be just that; the insurgents know that, as Henry Kissinger famously put it, guerrilla armies win by not losing. They know that the civilian population has little faith in Western forces or in the government those forces protect, and they know the U.S. and its allies are seeking an expeditious exit from Afghanistan. The brutal truth of the Afghanistan equation is that time is still on the side of the Taliban.

The U.S. plans to drawn down troop levels from the current 90,000 to less than 20,000 by the end of 2014, while helping Afghan security forces “surge” to an anticipated 352,000 troops this year. The new agreements seemed to signal a ten-year commitment to maintain an unspecified number of troops for training, intelligence and logistics purposes, and to conduct operations against al-Qaeda. (More importantly, the U.S., as well as other NATO countries, will commit later this month to a decade-long financial package to the government in Kabul worth over $4 billion a year, a sum some say Karzai considers insufficient.)

“We will not build permanent bases in this country, nor will we be patrolling in cities and mountains,” Obama said. “That will be the job of the Afghan people.” But so narrow is the political base of the Karzai regime, which was elected by a small minority of Afghans and whose corruption is endemic, that its ability to lead a credible counterinsurgency fight against the Taliban remains seriously in doubt. The problem is not simply that the Afghan forces lack sufficient training, or that the Afghan government can’t afford to pay for the indigenous army that NATO has created to keep it alive; the problem is fundamentally one of motivation. How many Afghan troops are really ready to fight and die to keep President Karzai in power? One troubling indicator might be the by-now routine incidence of Afghan friendlies turning their weapons on their U.S. and other Western mentors — an incidence the AP claims the military is systematically underreporting.

President Obama did, of course, acknowledge that negotiations with the insurgency were underway. “My Administration has been in direct discussions with the Taliban,” he said. “We have made it clear they can be part of this future if they break with al-Qaida, renounce violence and abide by Afghan laws.” The Taliban may negotiate, and they may not — for a range of reasons ranging from mistrust of the U.S. to the fact that they feel the wind at their backs and because they know the Americans will leave, and also because the Taliban is no longer a single hierarchical entity, but a series of networks, with many of the younger commanders who have replaced those killed by U.S. forces in recent years adopting an even more militant and intractable position. The longer the fighting rages on, analysts of the Taliban warn, the less likely it becomes that those more inclined to negotiate a compromise are able to prevail in the movement’s internal debates over those who believe they will win a bigger victory by fighting on.

Still, even if the Taliban was willing to negotiate a political settlement, it’s a relative certainty that the insurgents won’t accept the terms laid down by President Obama: Even if the Taliban was willing to commit to preventing Afghan territory being used to stage international terror attacks, it’s unlikely to accept Afghan laws and a constitution adopted on the back of a Western invasion. Afghanistan had been engaged in a civil war for a decade before the U.S.-led invasion prompted by the 9/11 attacks, and the invasion didn’t change that; it simply tipped the balance in that civil war against the Pakistan-backed and predominantly Pashtun Taliban and in favor of the Northern Alliance, dominated by ethnic Tajiks, Uzbeks and Hazaras, and backed by India, Iran and Russia. It is the Northern Alliance that forms the basis of the current order in Kabul, but take Western troops out of the equation, and the equation changes. The Taliban would only be likely to accept the Karzai order in Kabul if it had lost the war; right now, that’s not happening, meaning that a political solution is unlikely without a substantial renegotiation of the distribution of power. The likelihood that the Taliban will reconcile itself to a lesser role in the Karzai order is about as remote as those of the North Vietnamese being willing to accept Thieu’s authority.

Nor is it simply a case of Karzai reaching an accommodation with the Taliban: Key elements in the Northern Alliance are deeply mistrustful of any deals with the Taliban, and mistrust Karzai — and what they see as his effort to juggle the interests of competing warlords. His regime is brittle, at best, and could easily collapse — particularly because 2014 is also the year in which his tenure expires

Then again, right now the insurgents may be more likely to wait out 2014 and test the proposition that the Karzai regime will be able to defend itself without U.S. forces making the decisive difference — just like the Vietcong did in the period between the Paris agreement and the fall of Saigon.

Related Images;

 


*Link for This article compiled by Roger Smith from reliable sources By Tony Karon - Time (Blog)
*Speaking Image - Creation of DTN News ~ Defense Technology News 
*This article is being posted from Toronto, Canada By DTN News ~ Defense-Technology News Contact:dtnnews@ymail.com 
©COPYRIGHT (C) DTN NEWS DEFENSE-TECHNOLOGY NEWS 

DTN News - DEFENSE NEWS: U.S., Japan Unveil Revised Plan For Okinawa

Asian Defense News: DTN News - DEFENSE NEWS: U.S., Japan Unveil Revised Plan For Okinawa
Source: DTN News - - This article compiled by Roger Smith from reliable sources Reuters
(NSI News Source Info) TORONTO, Canada - April 27, 2012: The United States and Japan announced on Thursday a revised agreement on streamlining the U.S. military presence on Okinawa that will shift 9,000 Marines from the southern Japanese island to Guam and other Asia-Pacific sites.

The new plan, unveiled days before Japanese Prime Minister Yoshihiko Noda meets President Barack Obama in Washington, helps the allies work around the central but still-unresolved dispute over moving the Futenma air base from a crowded part of Okinawa to a new site that has vexed relations for years.

"I am very pleased that, after many years, we have reached this important agreement and plan of action. I applaud the hard work and effort that went into crafting it," U.S. Defence Secretary Leon Panetta said in a statement.

"Japan is not just a close ally, but also a close friend."

Under the agreement, 9,000 U.S. Marines will be relocated. Five thousand will go to Guam and the rest to other sites such as Hawaii and Australia, a joint U.S.-Japanese statement said.

The updated version of a long-delayed 2006 plan was needed to achieve "a U.S. force posture in the Asia-Pacific region that is more geographically distributed, operationally resilient and politically sustainable," the statement said.

Snags over Okinawa had raised questions about the viability of the Obama administration's strategy of shifting U.S. forces from other regions to the Asia-Pacific to deal with nuclear saber-rattling by North Korea, the rapid military buildup of China and territorial disputes in the South China Sea.

Friction over U.S. bases intensified after the 1995 gang rape of a Japanese schoolgirl by U.S. servicemen. The case sparked widespread protests by Okinawans, who had long resented the American presence due to crime, noise and deadly accidents.

There are about 47,000 U.S. troops in Japan under a 1960 bilateral security treaty.

Okinawa, occupied by the United States from 1945-72, accounts for less than 1 percent of Japan's total land but hosts three-quarters of the U.S. military facilities in the country in terms of land area.

"This has been ... bogged down for years, but now we have been able to come up with a new approach de-linking the Futenma relocation from other elements, like moving out Marine forces to Guam and returning some parts of Okinawa," said Ichiro Fujisaki, Japan's ambassador to the United States.

"Things are going to start moving," he told a gathering at a think tank in Washington.

Kurt Campbell, assistant secretary of state for East Asian and Pacific Affairs, said the deal was discussed widely with U.S. lawmakers, who had refused to fund the overhaul on Okinawa until the Futenma deadlock was resolved and the administration fully explained how the move would fit overall U.S. strategy.

"We think it breaks a very long stalemate ... that has plagued our politics, that has clogged both of our systems," said Campbell.

"REBALANCING" TOWARD ASIA-PACIFIC

A senior State Department official said: "This is really a key component of our strategic rebalancing toward the Asia-Pacific region."

The new policy has also entailed closer U.S. military ties with the Philippines, Australia and Singapore.

The agreement includes a $3.1 billion cash commitment from Japan for the move to Guam as well as for developing joint training ranges on Guam and on Tinian and Pagan in the U.S.-controlled Northern Mariana Islands.

The previous agreement on the move to Guam had Japan providing $6.1 billion in support, with $2.8 billion in cash and the rest in financing arrangements. The two sides agreed to limit that to $3.1 billion from Japan because of the smaller footprint the Marines will have in Guam

Campbell acknowledged that more work needed to be done, including finding a replacement for Futenma.

Proposed replacement sites for Futenma on the subtropical island that lies between Japan's main islands and Taiwan have met strong local opposition. At the same time Tokyo was in political disarray, with six prime ministers in six years.

"Does this agreement answer every question? It does not. Is there more programmatic and technical work that is necessary? Yes," said Campbell.

"But at a fundamental level, we think this agreement moves the ball very substantially down the field in a way that no one would have anticipated a few months ago," he said.

Separating the move to Guam from the Futenma issue frees up the allies to work more on cyber security, space, intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance operations and ballistic missile defence, a senior U.S. Defence Department official said.

Senators Carl Levin, John McCain and Jim Webb - top members of the U.S. Senate Armed Services Committee who had frozen Okinawa funding until their budgetary and strategic questions were answered - said some of their concerns had been addressed.

"We still have many questions about the specific details of this statement and its implications for our force posture in the Asia-Pacific region," they said in a statement, which also vowed to keep working on "a mutually beneficial, militarily effective, and fiscally sustainable agreement" on Okinawa and Guam.

(Additional reporting by David Alexander; Editing by Peter Cooney, Todd Eastham and Paul Tait)


*Link for This article compiled by Roger Smith from reliable sources Reuters
*Speaking Image - Creation of DTN News ~ Defense Technology News 
*This article is being posted from Toronto, Canada By DTN News ~ Defense-Technology News Contact:dtnnews@ymail.com 
©COPYRIGHT (C) DTN NEWS DEFENSE-TECHNOLOGY NEWS 

DTN News - CHINA DEFENSE NEWS: Chinese Navy Goes Unmanned For The First Time

Asian Defense News: DTN News - CHINA DEFENSE NEWS: Chinese Navy Goes Unmanned For The First Time
Source: DTN News - - This article compiled by Roger Smith from reliable sources By Carlo Munoz - The Hill
(NSI News Source Info) TORONTO, Canada - April 10, 2012: The Chinese military has added sea-based unmanned aircraft to its rapidly growing arsenal, with the first of those aircraft already deployed. 

The People's Liberation Navy (PLN) has begun fielding unmanned surveillance aircraft aboard its fleet of warships, according to recent news reports. 

Foreign intelligence agencies have already confirmed the existence of one Chinese-built maritime aerial drone aboard PLN ships, United Press International reported Monday. 

Other state media reports coming from Beijing claim other versions of unmanned intelligence aircraft are already under construction. 

Chinese military leaders allegedly requested information from Iran on the highly-secretive RQ-170 Sentinal drone Tehran captured from U.S. forces last December. 
Military or intelligence agencies in Beijing have also been attempting to breach Defense Department networks, in an attempt to gain more information on U.S. unmanned aircraft operations. 

That information from Iran and the Pentagon may have informed China's work on this latest- sea-worthy drone. 

Iran is also attempting to build its own fleet of aerial drones, based on what it learned from the so-called "Beast of Kandahar" aircraft, into a new surveillance aircraft of their own. 

But it's unlikely that Iranian or Chinese engineers can incorporate any of the technology from the stealthy American drone. It will likely take months, or even years, before Iran can take anything its learned from the Sentinel drone and work it into a functioning weapons system.

The new Chinese drones will likely be used to track American and foreign warships and submarines traveling in the Pacific. 

News of their existence comes as the United States prepares to shift its focus from the Middle East to Asia. 

This strategic shift, announced by President Obama in February, was driven mainly by a need to check Chinese and North Korean aggression in the region. 

Interest in unmanned technology has increased dramatically among foreign countries in recent years. Autonomous drones, operated by the Pentagon and CIA, have played a key role in ongoing U.S.-led counterterrorism operations around the world. 

Currently, U.S. defense firms lead the world in development of unmanned intelligence aircraft. But Beijing claims its new sea-worthy drone is the first step in breaking into that market. 

*Link for This article compiled by Roger Smith from reliable sources By Carlo Munoz - The Hill
*Speaking Image - Creation of DTN News ~ Defense Technology News 
*This article is being posted from Toronto, Canada By DTN News ~ Defense-Technology News Contact:dtnnews@ymail.com 
©COPYRIGHT (C) DTN NEWS DEFENSE-TECHNOLOGY NEWS 

DTN News - DEFENSE NEWS: North Korea Threatens Retaliation Over South's War Games

Asian Defense News: DTN News - DEFENSE NEWS: North Korea Threatens Retaliation Over South's War Games
*Analysis - Lately the global media coverage has been basically on Syrian unrest and Iran nuclear factor. North Korea felt neglected and swept aside by South Korea, U.S. and rest of the world, as urgently needed aid is required in several sectors. 
North Korea, to attract global attention, issue's its usual warning to attack South Korea on pretext of joint military exercises between U.S. forces on the Korean peninsula.  By DTN News ~ Defense-Technology News
Source: DTN News - - This article compiled by Roger Smith from reliable sources Reuters
(NSI News Source Info) TORONTO, Canada - February 19, 2012:  North Korea warned South Korea on Sunday that it would shell islands close to their disputed sea border if the South violates its territorial waters during a military drill reported to begin in the Yellow Sea this week.

The official KCNA news agency also quoted the North's military as urging civilians living on five islands near the disputed area to evacuate before the start of the military exercises on Monday.

The North has repeatedly threatened armed retaliation against the South's military exercises but it is rare for Pyongyang to mention in advance about evacuation of civilians over such drills.

The North's military said that if the South "starts a reckless military provocation in those waters, trespassing on the DPRK's inviolable marine demarcation line,.... the KPA will promptly make merciless retaliatory strikes."

DPRK stands for Democratic People's Republic of Korea and KPA for Korean People's Army.

South Korean media last week reported the South Korean and U.S. troops will stage a joint five-day anti-submarine exercise in the Yellow Sea from Monday.

There was no official confirmation of the exercises.

Both Koreas regularly conduct exercises near their disputed maritime border, raising the riskof a miscalculation by either side which could ignite a wider war.

In its warning on Sunday, North Korea said the South "should not forget" its shelling on the southern island of Yeonpyeong in November 2010, in which four people including two civilians were killed.

The attack on the island was the first on civilians since the end of the 1950-53 Korean War. The North at the time said the South's military drill near the disputed western maritime border triggered its bombardment.

(Reporting by Sung-won Shim; Editing by Sanjeev Miglani)

*Link for This article compiled by Roger Smith from reliable sources Reuters
*Speaking Image - Creation of DTN News ~ Defense Technology News 
*This article is being posted from Toronto, Canada By DTN News ~ Defense-Technology News Contact:dtnnews@ymail.com 
©COPYRIGHT (C) DTN NEWS DEFENSE-TECHNOLOGY NEWS