Did Afghan minerals change Trump's mind about Afghanistan?

• 
  Author Waslat Hasrat-Nazimi

Going against his election promise, Donald Trump decided to keep US troops in Afghanistan for an indefinite period of time. To what extent is this policy change a result of Trump's interest in Afghan mineral wealth?

While presenting his much-awaited Afghanistan policy last week, US President Donald Trump said he decided against a complete withdrawal of US forces from the war-torn country purely on his "instinct." The main reason he cited for an indefinite US presence in Afghanistan was, of course, to defeat Islamist terrorists in the country, where the US has been engaged in a bloody war for 16 years. But experts say there is more to his decision than meets the eye.

According to The New York Times, Trump, who was not in favor of sending more American soldiers to Afghanistan, discussed Afghanistan's mineral deposits with President Ashraf Ghani, who "promoted mining as an economic opportunity in one of their first conversations."

"... this could be one justification for the United States to stay engaged in the country," the newspaper reported last month.

"Last week [in July], as the White House fell into an increasingly fractious debate over Afghanistan policy, three of Mr. Trump's senior aides met with a chemical executive, Michael N. Silver, to discuss the potential for extracting rare-earth minerals. Mr. Silver's firm, American Elements, specializes in these minerals, which are used in a range of high-tech products," The New York Times said.

Obviously, the extraction of Afghanistan's untapped minerals would benefit Afghanistan also. And Trump could use this economic opportunity to compensate for a costly war for his country.

Afghanistan's mineral wealth is estimated to be between $1 trillion and $3 trillion. The landlocked country has huge reserves of copper, iron, chromite, mercury, zinc, precious gems as well as gold and silver, and, most importantly, lithium and rare earth elements that are used in batteries.

Good for Afghan economy

Last week, in a speech welcoming the new US strategy, Afghan President Ghani underlined the importance for a joint US-Afghanistan economic cooperation.

"We need to end the 14-year-long Afghan conflict so that our future generations can benefit from the treasures our country possesses," Ghani said.

Ghani pointed out that Afghanistan's most disadvantaged regions are rich in natural resources and said his government would pay more attention to the mining sector.

Commenting on whether the US and Afghanistan have chalked out a plan for mineral extraction, Mir Ahmad Jawid Sadat, deputy minister of mines and petroleum, says there is no official declaration on that.

"These decisions are made by the highest officials in the Afghan government," Sadat told DW.

Sayed Ikram Afzali, executive director of the Integrity Watch Afghanistan organization, says Kabul should take a cautious approach to the mining issue.

"If the US policy on mining is beneficial for both Afghanistan and American companies, it will create more jobs in our country and boost economic growth," Afzali told DW.

"But if President Trump considers our mining sector as 'war booty' and doesn't approach it in a transparent way, it will add fuel to the fire," he said, adding that it could trigger more violence in Afghanistan and more attacks on US troops stationed in the country.

Jihadists want their share

Afghanistan's mineral deposits attracted global interest in 2007 when a report by US Geological Survey declared the country a treasure trove. However, the idea of using Afghan minerals to lift the country out of poverty and war has remained a dream.

The corruption-mired Afghan mining sector is the second-largest source of funding for the Taliban and one of the reasons behind violence in mineral-rich areas. According to a report by the United States Institute of Peace, a bulk of looted minerals is smuggled openly across the Afghan border through government checkpoints.

"If the US starts getting mining contracts in Afghanistan, the Taliban will use it for their propaganda. Islamists will use it as proof that Western countries are in Afghanistan only to plunder its wealth. Moreover, they will not give up on their funding source without a fight," Stephen Carter, the Afghanistan campaign leader for the Global Witness organization, told DW.

Apart from the Taliban and "Islamic State" (IS) jihadists, the Afghan warlords also want their share in the mineral wealth.

"We have tried to prevent armed groups from illegally mining our natural resources," said deputy mines and petroleum minister Sadat.

Corruption

Carter believes a lack of security is not the only obstacle to US-Afghanistan mining cooperation.

"Corruption in Afghanistan undermines the effectiveness of Afghan forces and the legitimacy of the Afghan government. It is a big impediment to any realistic path to stability," he told DW.

"If President Trump wants to change things around in Afghanistan, there needs to be a radical change in the way Washington and Kabul approach governance issues. They need to be given the same importance as military strategies," Carter added.

Despite many difficulties and hurdles, economic experts say the mining sector can help boost the country's economy. But with large-scale corruption across ministries and government sectors, it will not be easy for either Ghani or Trump to tap these resources. A few thousand extra US troops will not be able to change the situation.

Is Pakistan Willing to Lose America?

By MOSHARRAF ZAIDI

For the past 16 years, whenever the United States has been faced with the reality of a failing war in Afghanistan, it has blamed Pakistan. Efforts to bring freedom to the valleys of Afghanistan, this narrative claims, have been thwarted by a double-dealing “ally” that takes American aid while supporting its enemies.

The narrative inadvertently casts American presidents, generals, diplomats, spies and others who have been part of the war effort as credulous dupes and casts poor light on the American military, stuck in a quagmire despite having the world’s most advanced weapons and largest financial resources. It also assumes that Pakistan has a clear interest in harming both the United States and Afghanistan.

Those assumptions are wrong.

Pakistan joined President George W. Bush’s war on terrorism reluctantly but proved itself an effective ally in the fight against Al Qaeda and helped decimate its ranks. That contribution was sullied by Pakistan’s failure to locate Osama bin Laden in Abbottabad.

After the Sept. 11 attacks, the United States established a partnership with Pakistan over a decade and a half — handing out substantial amounts of aid, sophisticated weapons and the status of major non-NATO ally. Pakistan continues to require American military hardware, and middle-class Pakistani children continue to dream of attending American universities and of working on Wall Street. The United States is the biggest market for Pakistani exports, and Pakistani-Americans form its seventh-largest diaspora group.

China’s rising global status, and its explicit push for regional influence, has reduced Pakistan’s dependence on the United States, but the rumors of the demise of America’s importance in Pakistan are greatly exaggerated.

Despite these factors, neither the United States nor Pakistan has gained all that it would like from the relationship. Pakistan has not been able to convince the United States of the validity of its primary interest in Afghanistan — preventing it from becoming a “proxy for India” and stemming fears of “encirclement” in Pakistan despite India’s proclamations of merely offering economic assistance to Afghanistan.

Afghanistan’s leaders have recently taken to brazenly welcoming an ever-increasing Indian footprint in Kabul and beyond. Pakistani hawks used to be merely suspicious of collusion between the most anti-Pakistan Afghans and the Indian establishment. In the past two years, that suspicion has turned into conviction.

For its part, the United States has failed to convince Pakistan of the urgency of its primary interest in Afghanistan — shutting down the Haqqani network, the principal planner and executor of the most lethal terrorist attacks in Afghanistan over the past decade. Pakistanis have hemmed and hawed, offering up low-level Haqqani operatives and occasionally trimming the space available to them.

And the Haqqanis have evolved from a relatively minor player in the Taliban world to being the dominant operational group. The United States doesn’t believe that the rise of the Haqqanis was possible without support from Pakistan.

Neither Pakistan nor the United States has been able to convince the Taliban to negotiate in good faith for a peaceful settlement in Afghanistan — the one supposed issue on which there is a complete convergence between the two countries.

The torturous United States-Pakistan relationship has seen several dramatic lows. It is only the American grievances that have been registered; the humiliations seem reserved for Pakistan. Everyone remembers the killing of Bin Laden in 2011 and the subsequent embarrassment of Pakistan. Few recall the killing of 24 Pakistani soldiers on the border with Afghanistan by American forces later that year.

American military leaders have publicly heaped scorn on Pakistan. But American spies have killed ordinary people on the streets of Pakistani cities, while the United States government has dissembled about their status. American officials who have appealed for a more nuanced understanding of the country have been forced out of their jobs and even investigated by federal agents. Pakistan is hardly innocent of its own failures. Terrorists facing sanctions from the United Nations freely cross borders to attack neighboring countries without any fear of being intercepted, and some even appear on television, conferred with a respect most politicians would crave. Pakistan has a damning ability to behave in ways that has often left even its friends shaking their heads in disbelief.

President Trump’s threats and his unpredictability have filled Pakistan with anxiety about what may be coming despite a difficult history. American drones have already dropped tons of ordnance; Navy SEALs have already dropped in to assassinate terrorists; American military and civilian assistance has already dropped to a trickle of what it was. And the trust between Pakistani generals and American commanders in Afghanistan is already at a historical low.

President Trump’s speech has only aggravated the concerns that motivate Pakistan’s behavior in Afghanistan. Mr. Trump’s call for greater Indian involvement in Afghanistan has stoked the fire that burns deepest in Pakistan. On this, it is not the Pakistanis who are irrational but those who attempt to minimize Pakistan’s concerns. Pakistan would not risk the wrath of the United States if its concerns were imaginary. Pakistan’s willingness to lose American patronage is the clearest indicator that its interests in Afghanistan are not a product of ambition, or grandeur, but of deep and existential fears about the damage an unchecked India can do to Pakistan.

Until Americans learn how to have an honest conversation with India about what Pakistan sees as its proxy warfare in Afghanistan and its brutal occupation of Kashmir, no amount of threats to Pakistan will help. Countries can be weaned from many things, but not from protecting themselves. Pakistan is definitely a problem in Afghanistan, but it is a problem of America’s making.

Bilawal Bhutto hails reopening of Women Crisis Centers in KPK by apex court

Chairman Pakistan Peoples Party Bilawal Bhutto Zardari has hailed the Supreme Court of Pakistan verdict directing Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa government to reopen the four Women Crisis Centers shut down by the provincial government previously.

In a statement, the PPP Chairman said depriving the women of their rights and deserved facilities was the sign best described as the worst example of governance by the apex court for KPK government.

Bilawal Bhutto Zardari said that from casting their votes to.representation in the elected bodies, the women of KPK provinces are the worst victims at the hands of political parties governing the
province. “It is time that women of KPK province rise up for snatching their due rights back and the PPP shall always stand for their emancipation and well-being,” he added.

PPP Chairman asked the KPK government to reopen the four closed Women Crisis Centers without any further delay stressing that any option for further litigation on the issue would be resisted.

It may be recalled that a three-member bench of the apex court, headed by Justice Dost Muhammad Khan, upheld the Peshawar High Court’s (PHC) verdict and discarded the KP government’s appeal against reopening of the Women Crisis Centers.

The KP government had appealed to the apex court against the PHC order. The PHC had given the order after women
working in the centres had petitioned for the centres’ reopening.

https://mediacellppp.wordpress.com/

Pakistan - Mismanagement of Rs3.12 Trillion

It is no secret that the organs of the Pakistani state are plagued with corruption and the pursuance of personal interest over the interest of the state is prevalent. During every fiscal year, the work and inflow of cash in federal ministries is audited. There are a total of 40 ministries and out of those, some are randomly selected and their work is monitored. For the year 2016-17, 36 ministries were selected for the process; and out of this “selective” audit the Auditor General of Pakistan (AGP) discovered that around Rs3.12 trillion of public money has been mismanaged – imagine what number would emerge if all the ministries were completely audited.

Rs 3.12 trillion are a huge sum to just be casually ignored. For the longest time, the government in power has been trying to convince people of the increment in economic prosperity and the increase in revenue collection, but it is hard for them to make a case for it – even if we buy their initial assertions – when it is being spent in such a mismanaged manner

This is not just bad bookkeeping practices, but criminal violations of financial regulations in several cases. 123 cases have been highlighted where Rs876 billion were lost due to irregular expenditure and violation of rules. Rs1.9 trillion has been lost due to weak financial management. 52 cases point out that unsound asset management has resulted in a loss of Rs9.5 billion. Rs1.5 trillion are gone because of weak internal financial control, and Rs730 billion due to overpayments.

The Finance Ministry has not been able to reconcile expenditure since June and the amount is around Rs656 billion. The ministry has been using supplementary grants to have access to more money, despite knowing that supplementary grants can and should only be used in cases of extreme emergency. Even if they do decide to utilise that money, it should be brought to the parliament; which is conveniently ignore. More than 76 percent (Rs838 billion) of all supplementary grants have not been approved by the parliament. It is quite obvious that for such a large scale activity to take place, a lot of key players are involved. And when the people at the top (in this case they are the heads of government spending and Accountant General of Pakistan Revenue (AGPR) do not impose financial control, the rest can siphon off funds.

Irreconcilable audits are not meant to just alarm us – they require that action be taken against offenders and procedures tightened. The government’s promise of economic prosperity will never be realised or believed if the federal ministries are a leaking ship where revenue disappears into an unaccounted void.

Pakistan’s population growth is a ticking time bomb: Joanna Reid

Benazir Shah

The United Kingdom’s Department for International Development (DfID) has been working in Pakistan for the last 57 years, in areas of education, poverty alleviation, women’s rights and health, amongst other things. 

We spoke to Joanna Reid, the head of DfID Pakistan, about the country’s most urgent needs and the challenges international aid workers face. 

Benazir Shah: Pakistan is one of the largest recipients of the United Kingdom’s development investment. Could you tell us why?

Joanna Reid: Over the years, Pakistan has grown to become DfID's biggest overseas program. Now, there are two reasons for this; one is that the need is enormous. Over 60 million people in Pakistan live in poverty. Which means that one in three people live on 80 pence (Rs. 108) a day. One in 11 children die before their fifth birthday and 44 percent of children in the country are stunted. Those are pretty stark figures. Also, there is now an opportunity for change. Pakistan's people want change. Our aid is working and we can see its impact.

Shah: What is the DfID's commitment to Pakistan this year?

Reid: The Department for International Development is a United Kingdom government department responsible for administering overseas aid. In 2017, we have committed 370 million pounds for Pakistan.

Shah: Has this budget allocation increased over the years?

Reid: It has increased. Our relationship with the country is extremely strong. We have had a long development partnership. What you see today is a virtuous circle of programs that continue to be more effective. This is primarily why we are bringing more money to the table. But ultimately, it should decrease because Pakistan should not be, and is not currently, dependent on overseas aid. We should help that transition so that Pakistan is able to and willing to pay for its own basic services.

Shah: One the focus areas listed on DfID's website is "strengthening democracy and governance in Pakistan." How is the organisation facilitating democracy?

Reid: Now that means a number of different things. But our program is about the system and the processes. We work to ensure that the elections, for example, are free and fair and seen by the outside world to be free and fair. That is very important for Pakistan and its place in the international community. For us, it also means that everyone gets the chance to vote. Women and disabled people are registered and are provided with the opportunity to cast their ballots. Everyone should have a say in how his or her country works.

Shah: How do political happenings in Pakistan impact aid work?

Reid: The UK has been a friend of Pakistan for many years. Over time, we have seen many political changes. Some of the changes happening right now are a matter for Pakistan and the Pakistani people. The DfID works with institutions, to build their capacity. We watch the processes but it is not for us to comment on.

Shah: DfID is assisting education programs in both Punjab and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. Which of the two provinces has performed better in the last four years?

Reid: Both programs are sort of mirrors of each other. They are very similar. What we are doing in the two provinces, is building systems. We have moved beyond just getting children enrolled in schools. Now we must make sure that the children and their children’s children also have access to schooling. It is no longer about building classrooms. DfID is helping departments that are going to build the schools that provide quality education. We have to answer these questions: How long will these children be in school for? Will they actually be able to do something with their learning? Can they read? Can they write?

Shah: According to a media report, in April, DfID slashed the funding for school construction and rehabilitation in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa.

Reid: I understand that such kind of things always makes for good headlines, don’t they? It is not about slashing budgets. It is about working with the people and the concerned departments to see what is possible in a time period. We need to understand how many schools can be built in a certain time period. The money is then adjusted accordingly.

Shah: Coming to your family planning initiative. At a recent summit hosted by the British government, Pakistan made strong commitments to providing better family planning services. Our minister of health, recently said that population growth in the country is a bigger concern than terrorism. Would you agree?

Reid: Absolutely. It is a time bomb. The population growth is of extreme concern to Pakistan. We are going to be getting the consensus result fairly soon. That should tell us exactly how big the population is. But we also know that Pakistan cannot sustain the kind of population growth that it has at the moment. It is a time bomb in terms of future employment, resources and food. Family planning is extremely important to help people choose. Family planning is also a woman’s rights. There is a very strong economic argument that if you have productive women - therefore the families are smaller, the spacing between children is better - then there will be more money to go around in that family.

Shah: What is the current percentage of contraceptive used in Pakistan?

Reid: That is what we call the contraceptive prevalence rate. Around 35 to 40 percent of people here have access to contraceptives. But for a country the size of Pakistan, getting to 50 percent means at least seven to eight million more women need to be provided access. That is a lot of people. Again, there are two aspects to this; part of it is about working with the health department and making sure that through the public health system women are able to access family planning services. This means that basic health units are open 24 hours to give advice, so if a woman does not want to get pregnant too quickly she has options available. The other thing we support is social marketing. It is fascinating how in the hardest to reach areas you can still find a sachet of shampoo and a soft drink. These kinds of small stores can pop up anywhere. That is good marketing. So we need to get on the back of this kind of marketing. This way we can get more condoms and pills out there.

Shah: There must be some resistance to the initiative?

Reid: That is a good point. It is not just about making sure that supplies are readily available, we must also ensure that appropriate advice is also being provided. So the shopkeeper can provide some advice when needed on the products they are selling because people are worried about using them. They don’t know what the health risks are or how they work, or if they do at all. We have worked with religious leaders to assure people that it is okay, it is allowed and family planning is a good thing.

Shah: The Punjab government recently rolled out a family planning advertising campaign on the TV and print media that enlisted the help of religious leaders.

Reid: The movement is all across Pakistan, not just Punjab. Everyone is coming together to say this is a big issue and we need to do something about it. Part of that is public messaging and getting important figures onboard. But we must remember that even if you do an effective campaign, it is important for a woman to know that she can go and buy the needed supplies without resistance.