Sunday, April 30, 2017

Notorious Afghan warlord calls for peace in first public speech

In his first public speech since signing a peace deal with the Afghan government, one of Afghanistan's most notorious warlords on Saturday called for the Taliban to stop fighting and begin negotiations.

"I invite you to join the peace caravan and stop the pointless, meaningless and unholy war," Gulbuddin Hekmatyar said to a gathering of his followers and Afghan politicians in Laghman province, east of the capital, Kabul.

"I want a free, proud, independent and Islamic Afghanistan," he said.

In February the United Nations Security Council agreed to drop sanctions against Hekmatyar, paving the way for him to return openly to Afghanistan.

The Afghan government requested the move as part of a peace deal with Hekmatyar and his militant group, Hezb-i-Islami, in September.

Afghan President Ashraf Ghani welcomed Hekmatyar's public return, saying the former strongman would cooperate with the government.

Hekmatyar's return "will compound the culture of impunity", Human Rights Watch researcher Patricia Gossman said of the deal, calling it an "affront" to victims of abuses.

A controversial figure from the insurgency against the Soviets in the 1980s and the civil wars of the 1990s, Hekmatyar is accused of ordering his fighters to bombard Kabul, leading to many casualties, besides other abuses.

In hiding for nearly a decade and a half, Hekmatyar had been designated a "global terrorist" by the United States, which has been leading an international military mission in Afghanistan for the past 15 years.

American and other Western leaders praised the deal with him, however, hoping it could help lead to wider peace in Afghanistan. - More, Reuters

Notorious Afghan warlord calls for peace in first public speech

The confusing balancing act between government pensions and Social Security benefits - latimes

Dear Liz: I am a public school teacher and plan to retire with 25 years of service. I had previously worked and paid into Social Security for about 20 years. My spouse has paid into Social Security for over 30 years. Will I be penalized because I have not paid Social Security taxes while I've been teaching? Should my wife die before me, will I get survivor benefits, or will the windfall elimination act take that away? It's so confusing!

Answer: It is confusing, but you should understand that the rules about windfall elimination (along with a related provision, the government pension offset) are not designed to take away from you a benefit that others get. Rather, the rules are set up so that people who get government pensions — which are typically more generous than Social Security — don’t wind up with significantly more money from Social Security than those who paid into the system their entire working lives.

Here’s how that can happen. Social Security benefits are progressive, which means they’re designed to replace a higher percentage of a lower-earner’s income than that of a higher earner. If you don’t pay into the system for many years — because you’re in a job that provides a government pension instead — your annual earnings for Social Security would be reported as zeros in those years. Social Security is based on your 35 highest-earning years, so all those zeros would make it look like you earned a lower (often much lower) lifetime income than you actually did. Without any adjustments, you would wind up with a bigger check from Social Security than someone who earned the same income in the private sector and paid much more in Social Security taxes. It was that inequity that caused Congress to create the windfall elimination provision several decades ago.

People who earn government pensions also could wind up with significantly more money when a spouse dies. If a couple receives two Social Security checks, the survivor gets the larger of the two when a spouse dies. The household doesn’t continue to receive both checks. Without the government pension offset, someone like you would get both a pension and a full survivor’s check. Again, that could leave you significantly better off than someone who had paid more into the system. - More

The confusing balancing act between government pensions and Social Security benefits

Friday, April 28, 2017

ملت افغانستان در گرو جنایتکاران ۷ و ۸ ثور - آیا محاکمۀ جنایتکاران هفت و هشت ثور به قیامت حواله میگردد؟

ماللی موسی نظام
 ۲۶/۰۴/۲۰۱۷
دو سال قبل بازهم یکی از جنایتکاران آلمان نازی که به سن باالی کهولت بیشتر از نود سال رسیده بود و گفته شد که وظیفۀ محاسب آن رژیم مخوف را بر عهده داشت، بعد از سپری شدن ۷۰ سال از سقوط آن تشکیل دوزخی، دستگیر و به محکمه ای در آلمان سپرده شد و بزودی اعالم گردید که در پهلوی وظیفه ایکه داشته، به چندین فقرۀ جنایی ای غیر بشری متهم میباشد.

گزار مینمایند، ولی تنها سرزمینی هست که »تعداد کثیری« از جانیان شناخته شده که کار نامه ها و اعمال شان نه تنها بیاد و خاطر ملیون ها سکنۀ دردمند وطن است، بلکه همه با تفصیل و استناد ثبت صفحات تاریخ جهان هم گردیده است. کافیست که از هزاران راپور، کتاب و رساله که بگذریم فقط دو اثری را که متصل منتشر گردیده و با وسایط ارتباط جمعی رو به انکشاف امروزی، هردو در البالی صفحات انترنت هم موجود هستند، به دسترس دیگر هموطنان و نسل امروز هم قرار دهیم. اثر اولی مطالعه و ارزیابی نماییم و وظیفتا »راپور ً عدالت یا دادخواهی افغانستان« است که توسط کمیتۀ غیر انتفاعی حقوق بشر در هالند بعد از مصاحبات با ۶۰۰۰ هموطن شاهد و ناظر جنگ های افغانستان »۱ »به پهنای سرزمین ویران ما با موجودیت حقوق دانان خارجی و داخلی و ترجمانان هر لسان مردم افغانستان، تهیه گردیده و توسط خانم»سیما سمر« رئیس کمسیون مستقل حقوق بشر به »حامد کرزی« رئیس جمهور وقت به منظور تأمین »عدالت انتقالی اجتماعی« پیشکش گردید.

اثر معتبر دومی همانا راپور نهایت مستند از با حیثیت ترین تشکیل حقوقی جهان یعنی »کمیتۀ نظارت بر حقوق بشر« ملل متحد تهیه و تنطیم گردیده است. این راپور که تحت عنوان »دست های آغشته بخون« از جانب مؤسسۀ منتشر شده است، همچنان در ویب سایت آن به آسانی قابل دسترسی است و دقیقاً فوق »۲ »توسط خبرنگاران خود مؤسسه که در جریان جنگ های کابل حضور داشتند، در حدود یکسال اول عصر خونین تنظیم های منکر انسانیت، اسالمیت و افغانیت را با تمام تفصیالت و رویداد های مهلک و غیر قابل باور و بیسابقه به تصویر می 3از 2 بیشترین کشتار مردم بیدفاع شهر کابل منجمله کشد. دردا که دقیقا »قتل عام افشار« که ثبت تاریخ جنایات بشری ً در عالم است، در همین زمان کوتاه صورت گرفته است. آنانیکه معتقد به فراموشی گذشتۀ تاریخ وطن و مردم آن هستند، معتقد به پامال عدالت و بازخواست از جنایتکاران این سرزمین هم می باشند.

درحالیکه ۱۵ سال از آغاز دیموکراسی وارداتی و باز شدن دروازه های افغانستان از بنیاد ویران، سپری میگردد، درد ملت تنها این نیست که چرا مجرمین جنگی و جنایت کاران ۷ و۸ ثور به عدالت سپرده نمیشوند و محاکم قانونی برای ثبوت اتهامات آنان دایر نمی گردد، بلکه درد استخوان سوز مردم افغانستان که التیامی برای آن متصور نیست، حضور و موجودیت بیشمار این مجرمین و جنایت کاران جنگ های خانمانسوز و خونین کشور در کرسی های باالی دولتی استکه در مجموع همۀ آنان با هرنوع استفاده های سوء، در رگ و پی اکثریت مقامات دولت و البته هرسه قوۀ آن اخذ موقع نموده اند

در جهان تعداد زیادی مجرمین جنگی و آنانیکه مانند جنایتگاران جنگ های افغانستان، بر علیه بشریت مرتکب جنایات استخوان سوز گردیده اند و در ممالک خودشان»به دالیلی« امکانات محکمه و بازخواست شان میسر در کشور هالند بیطرفانه و با جمع آوری اسناد و مدارک و احیاناً نمی باشد، محکمۀ بین المللی »الهه« شهود، چنین عملیۀ عدالت بشری را انجام میدهد. این دستگاه عدلی جهانی که بسیار بیطرف بوده و لست های زیادی از مجرمین جنگ های افغانستان را در اختیار دارد، یقین به اجازۀ آن دولت درین راه مفید واقع میگردد، ولی هیهات که مردم منتظر و داغ دیدۀ وطن چنین خوابی را تعبیر نمایند.

از کودتای منحوس ثور دقیقا ۳۹ سال و از هجوم تنظیم های تشنۀ قدرت تنظیمی و قاتالن شهر کابل ۲۵ سال ً میگذرد و البته از برگشت افغانستان به جامعۀ بین المللی و سقوط طالبان عصر حجر۱۵ سال، آیا صبر و حوصلۀ یک ملت رنجور جنگ دیده و عزیزان ازدست داده را تا چه زمانی باید مورد آزمایش و غفلت قرار داد؟ به تصویر گویا و عریان ضمیمه نگاهی بیندازید، قصر باشکوه داراالمان را که بدون تردید مظهر مدنیت و شگوفایی یک عصر ملی و مترقی بوده است، در عقب مظاهره چیانی که در جستجوی عدالت خواهی و بازخواست از جنایتکاران جنگ های خانمانسوز افغانستان هستند، مشاهده میفرمایید.

آیا گاهی با درنظرداشت موقعیت جغرافیایی شهر کابل و موقف دو جانب شناخته شدۀ مقتدرین جنگ های تنظیمی مهلک، یعنی »گلبدین حکمتیار« و رقیب وی در استعمال راکت و وسایل جنگی آتشبار»احمد شاه مسعود«، به این نتیجه رسیده اید که راکت و هاوانی که این بنای تاریخی را که حتی نزدیک به یک قرن قبل با چنین معماری شکوهمند و بینظیر، باالی تپه ای اخذ موقع نموده بود، کدام طرف متخاصم به چنین حالت رقتبار و مفلوکی در آورده است؟ یقین فراموش نمی نماییم که اگر عمارتی نهایت پخته کاری و مستحکم را استعمال متواتر و بی شمار 3از 3 راکت و وسائل مخرب و آتشبار به چنین حالت أسف باری در آورده است، مردمی که در پایتخت افغانستان الجرم و جبراً زندگی پر از دهشت، وحشت و مرگباری را سپری مینمودند، چه روزگاران خون و آتش را تا مغز استخوان احساس نموده اند. - Read More

ملالی موسی نظام
ملت افغانستان در گرو جنایتکاران ۷ و ۸ 

ولی احمد نوری 
فردا هفت ثور است، روز بربادی افغانستان
26.04.2017

آریانا افغانستان آنلاین Ariana Afghanistan Online

Opinions: Four steps to winning peace in Afghanistan - washingtonpost

Stephen J. Hadley, chairman of the board of the U.S. Institute of Peace, was U.S. national security adviser from 2005 to 2008. Andrew Wilder is the institute’s vice president of Asia programs, and Scott Worden is director of Afghanistan and Central Asia programs.

During a U.S. Institute of Peace visit to Pakistan and Afghanistan this month, we met with senior officials and civil society and business leaders. Based on those discussions, we believe the solution lies in Afghan and regional politics, not just on the battlefield. The United States should shift its strategy to prioritize reaching a political settlement based on the Afghan constitution among all Afghan groups, including the Taliban. In doing so, the Trump administration can move from a policy of avoiding failure to one of achieving success.

The right strategy should include four main components.

First, the United States should use its existing counterterrorism capability to destroy all Islamic State and al-Qaeda elements in Afghanistan. It must also enhance its support for the Afghan security forces so that they can deny the Taliban strategic battlefield successes. More Afghan special forces, greater close-air support capability and better intelligence capacity are needed to maintain control of Afghanistan’s major population centers and transport arteries. An Afghanistan that can clearly survive without a peace settlement is more likely to achieve one. 

Second, such military assistance must be part of a political strategy to address the drivers of conflict that have allowed the Taliban to make steady territorial gains. A modest increase in military support will not stabilize Afghanistan if the Afghan government does not take tough measures to reduce the cancer of corruption. It must win greater public support by building the economy in a way that creates jobs, and conduct credible elections that will provide greater legitimacy for the government and strengthen its position in a future peace process. The United States and Afghanistan should make mutual commitments to support these efforts. 

Third, the United States should make clear that a successful outcome will not require military defeat of the Taliban. The goal instead should be an Afghan-led and -owned peace process that produces a political settlement among all elements of Afghan society, including the Taliban. The settlement should protect the human rights of all Afghans as enshrined in the constitution and guarantee that Afghan territory will never be used to support international terrorism. This requires that the Afghans, Afghanistan’s neighbors, and the United States and its international partners agree on a framework for an inclusive peace process. As part of this process, the United States, in close coordination with the Afghan government, should consider direct talks with the Taliban.

Finally, the United States should work to rebuild a regional consensus for a stable Afghanistan. The Trump administration should revitalize an international contact group to align all relevant outside powers. The key message for Russia, China and Iran is that we want a political settlement. Our forces are there only as long as requested by the Afghan government. Once the country is stable, free of terrorist groups and able to prevent their return, we can discuss a timetable for the reduction and gradual withdrawal of our military presence. More

President Daud Khan - شهید سردار محمد داود خان


President Daud Khan - YouTube
 - More



Thursday, April 27, 2017

How to Stabilize Afghanistan - By Scott Worden

What Russia, Iran, and the United States Can Do

The Afghan military, backed by some 8,400 U.S. troops, is struggling to shore up its ranks after a devastating attack killed over 100 soldiers on a military base in Mazar-i-Sharif, marking a morbid beginning to another summer fighting season. This time around, though, the Afghans and their American partners have two more forces to contend with: Russia and Iran

Both countries stepped up their support of the Taliban over the winter, possibly as a hedge against persistent American indecision about how deeply to stay involved, and for how long. Left unchecked, Russian and Iranian support could enable the Taliban to win the long-term occupation of a provincial capital this summer, which would further erode Afghan government legitimacy. To head off such an outcome, the new Trump administration must consider an approach that brought some success in the aftermath of the 2001 U.S. invasion: rebuilding a regional consensus with Russia and Iran—as well as China, India, Pakistan, and the Gulf states—to stop funding proxies and support stability in Afghanistan.

Russia’s support for the Taliban has altered the regional dynamic that fuels the war. Since the end of 2016, Russia has reportedly been providing arms to the Taliban operating in northern Afghanistan. Russian officials have also reportedly met with Taliban representatives in Russia and Tajikistan. Meanwhile, over the past year Moscow has held discussions with Islamabad and Tehran about their mutual interests in supporting the Taliban. Russia’s sudden cooperation with the Taliban is particularly surprising, given the bloody fighting between their Soviet and Mujahedin predecessors in the 1980s. 

Russia claims that its motivation for supporting the Taliban is to fight the Islamic State’s Afghan offshoot, prevent Central Asian terrorist groups such as the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan (IMU) from destabilizing the region, and control drug trafficking through Central Asia into Russia. But the real reason may be to cause trouble for the United States. - More, foreignaffairs

Wednesday, April 26, 2017

Trump Administration Proposes 'Massive' Tax Overhaul And Tax Cut Plan

The Trump administration Wednesday put forth a proposal that it labeled a "massive" tax overhaul, that would give big tax cuts to individuals and corporations, and reduce the number of tax brackets and deductions.

Outlined at a White House press briefing by Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin and Gary Cohn, director of the president's National Economic Council, it would reduce the number of individual tax brackets to three, as well as eliminate most tax deductions, other than for home mortgages and charitable contributions.

It would double the standard deduction individuals can take, and proposes cutting the corporate tax rate from 35 percent to 15 percent.

Administration officials acknowledge the plan is a broad brush outline, with specific details yet to be determined. - Read More, NPR

Trump Administration Proposes 'Massive' Tax Overhaul And Tax Cut Plan


White House unveils dramatic plan to overhaul tax code in major test for Trump - washingtonpost

President Trump on Wednesday proposed a dramatic overhaul of the tax code, calling for sharply lower rates for individuals and businesses but also eliminating key tax breaks.

The proposal is a one-page outline – key details are left incomplete – but it presents an initial offer to begin negotiations with lawmakers, as White House officials believe reworking the tax code is one of their biggest priorities to boost economic growth.

“We have a once in a generation opportunity to do something big and important on taxes,” White House National Economic Council Director Gary Cohn said Wednesday.

White House officials are ambitious, but the path to overhauling the tax code is riddled with political landmines. Many budget experts believe the White House’s plan would reduce federal revenues by so much that it would grow the debt by trillions of dollars in the next decade, growing interest costs and slowing the economy.

And Trump’s advisers are looking to axe some tax breaks that are very popular in certain states, including the deduction Americans take for the state and local taxes they pay separately each year. Eliminating this deduction could save more than $1 trillion over 10 years, but inflame lawmakers and governors in states that have high income tax rates.

The central feature of the White House’s plan would be a big reduction in tax rates for virtually all Americans and businesses.

It would eliminate the seven existing income tax brackets and replace them with three brackets, containing new rates of 10 percent, 25 percent, and 35 percent, based on someone’s income. White House officials haven’t specified which income levels would hit the higher tax brackets, as they see that as part of ongoing discussions with Capitol Hill.

It would also roughly double the standard deduction that Americans can use to reduce their taxable income. The deduction for married couples would move from $12,600 to $24,000. This would incentivize people not to itemize their tax returns and instead use the standard deduction, simplifying the process and potentially saving taxpayers thousands of dollars each year.

The White House plan would eliminate the alternative-minimum tax and the estate tax, provisions that raise billions of dollars each year but have long been the target of Republicans seeking to rip up the tax code. Cohn, speaking of the AMT, said “we don’t think that people should have to do their taxes twice,” and added that the estate tax unfairly prevented farmers and others from passing along their businesses to the next generation.

In order to offset some of the cost of the lower rates, Trump administration officials said they were proposing to eliminate virtually all tax deductions that Americans claim, provisions that they argued primarily benefited wealthier Americans. Cohn said they would preserve tax breaks that incentivize home ownership, retirement savings, and charitable giving. But almost all others would be jettisoned.

This includes the tax deduction people can claim for the state and local taxes they pay each calendar year. These taxes can be particularly high in states with higher income taxes, such as California and New York.

“It’s not the federal government’s job to be subsidizing the states,” Mnuchin told reporters at the briefing with Cohn. “It’s the state’s independent decision as to do what they want to tax.”

Some of the White House’s tax changes would benefit the wealthy, such as the elimination of the estate tax, while other changes would benefit the middle class and lower-income Americans.

For businesses, Trump’s proposal would lower the corporate tax rate from 35 percent to 15 percent, and it would also allow smaller businesses, structured in such a way that they are affected by the individual tax rate, to also use the 15 percent threshold. There are millions of these businesses, known as “S Corporations,” and they are often small, family-owned firms. - Read More

Tuesday, April 25, 2017

Trump to propose large increase in deductions Americans can claim on their taxes

President Trump on Wednesday plans to call for a significant increase in the standard deduction people can claim on their tax returns, potentially putting thousands of dollars each year into the pockets of tens of millions of Americans, according to two people briefed on the plan.

The change is one of several major revisions to the federal tax code that the White House will propose when it provides an outline of the tax-overhaul pitch Trump will make to Congress and the American people as he nears his 100th day in office.

Trump will call for a sharp reduction in the corporate tax rate, from 35 percent to 15 percent. He will also propose lowering the tax rate for millions of small businesses that now file their tax returns under the individual tax code, two people familiar with the plan said.

These companies, often referred to as “pass throughs” or S corporations, would be subject to the 15 percent rate proposed for corporations. Many pass throughs are small, family-owned businesses. But they can also be large — such as parts of Trump’s own real estate empire or law firms with partners who earn more than a million dollars annually. The White House is expected to pursue safeguards to ensure that companies like law firms can’t take advantage of this new tax rate and allow their highly paid partners to pay much lower tax bills.

Trump’s proposed tax changes will not all be rolled out Wednesday. White House officials are also working to develop an expanded Child and Dependent Care Credit, which they hope would benefit low- and middle-income families facing substantial burdens in paying for child care. Trump had touted a tax measure for child care during the campaign, but it was criticized as not significantly benefiting families of modest means.

White House officials think these changes will give Americans and companies more money to spend, expand the economy and create more jobs.

The existing standard deduction Americans can claim is $6,300 for individuals and $12,600 for married couples filing jointly. The precise level of Trump’s new proposal could not be ascertained, but it was significantly higher, the two people said, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because the plan has not yet been made public.

During the campaign, Trump proposed raising the standard deduction to $15,000 for individuals and $30,000 for families.

A standard deduction works like this: If a couple filing jointly earns $70,000, they deduct $12,600 from their income, adjusting their income to $57,400. They then would pay taxes on the $57,400 in income, not the $70,000 they earned. Increasing the standard deduction would reduce their taxable income, ensuring that they can keep more of their money. A taxpayer who claims the standard deduction cannot also itemize deductions for items such as mortgage interest or charitable giving. But if the standard deduction is large enough, many would be likely to bypass the itemized deduction. - Read, washingtonpost

Ivanka Trump Talks Female Entrepreneurs And Her Father At W20 Summit In Berlin

First daughter Ivanka Trump discussed female entrepreneurship, her father and feminism at the W20 Summit in Berlin on Tuesday, joining a panel that included German Chancellor Angela Merkel and the Netherlands' Queen Maxima.

Merkel invited Trump to the G20-linked event during her visit with President Trump last month in Washington, D.C.

Feminism was a central topic on the panel, as the moderator, who cited a "reluctance" to use the term, asked the panel to raise their hands if they consider themselves a feminist. Trump held up her hand, as did nearly everyone else on the stage.

"I do label myself a feminist, and I do think of that in broad terms," she said later.

Discussing her father, Trump said the president agrees with her about the need to empower women, saying that he had encouraged her "to fully lean into this opportunity and come into the White House and be by his side" — and to take part in discussions like the Women20 Summit.

But Trump's earlier description of President Trump as a "tremendous champion of supporting families and enabling them to thrive" was met with groans and hisses from the audience. - Read, NPR

Ivanka Trump Talks Female Entrepreneurs And Her Father At W20 Summit In Berlin

Judge Blocks Trump Effort to Withhold Money From Sanctuary Cities - nytimes

A judge in San Francisco on Tuesday temporarily blocked President Trump’s efforts to starve localities of federal funds when they limit their cooperation with immigration enforcement, a stinging rejection of his threats to make so-called sanctuary cities fall in line.

The judge, William H. Orrick of United States District Court, wrote that the president had overstepped his powers with his January executive order on immigration by tying billions of dollars in federal funding to immigration enforcement. Judge Orrick said only Congress could place such conditions on spending.

The ruling, which applies nationwide, was another judicial setback for the Trump administration, which has now seen three immigration orders stopped by federal courts in its first 100 days. And as with the rulings halting his two temporary bans on travel from several predominantly Muslim countries, the president’s own words were used against him.

Though Justice Department lawyers argued in the case that the government did not intend to withhold significant amounts of money, the judge noted that the president and Attorney General Jeff Sessions had suggested the punishment could be far greater.

“If there was doubt about the scope of the order, the president and attorney general have erased it with their public comments,” Judge Orrick wrote.- More

Judge Blocks Trump Effort to Withhold Money From Sanctuary Cities

A CNN report: 1979 1989 Soviet - Afghan War


A CNN report: 1979 1989 Soviet - Afghan War - YouTube



Conflict-related detainees in Afghanistan tortured, ill-treated in government facilities – UN

24 April 2017 – A record number of people detained by Afghan police say that have been tortured or ill-treated in the past year, according to a new United Nations report, which notes however that the Afghan Government has committed to eliminating torture and ill-treatment in national detention facilities.

“The continuing torture and ill-treatment of conflict-related detainees is a matter of serious concern, but we acknowledge the genuine commitment and the efforts of the Government to deal with this issue,” said Tadamichi Yamamoto, the Secretary-General's Special Representative for Afghanistan.

The report, Treatment of Conflict-Related Detainees: Implementation of Afghanistan's National Plan on the Elimination of Torture, is produced by the UN Assistance Mission in Afghanistan (UNAMA) and the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR).

The findings are based on interviews with 469 conflict-related detainees conducted from 1 January 2015 to 31 December 2016 in 62 detention facilities administered by the National Directorate of Security (NDS), Afghan National Police (ANP) and other Afghan National Defence and Security Forces (ANDSF) across the country.

Some 45 per cent of the people interviewed said that they were tortured or ill-treated, according to UNAMA and OHCHR.

Among other findings, the UN reported that about 45 per cent of the child detainees – 38 out of 85 children interviewed – gave “credible” accounts of being tortured or ill-treated.

The torture appears to be linked to forcing confessions, according to the report, and stopped once detainees signed a “confession” – even in cases when the interviewed detainees did not understand or could not read what was written in the “confession.” - Read More
Conflict-related detainees in Afghanistan tortured, ill-treated in government facilities – UN

Monday, April 24, 2017

Congress Focuses On Averting Shutdown, But Trump Wants More In Budget Deal

Congress returns Tuesday from its spring recess, facing yet another down-to-the-wire spate of deal-making — and a White House anxious to claim its first major legislative win.

On Friday night, the funding measure lawmakers approved last year to keep the federal government running will expire. The timing leaves members of the House and Senate just four days to reach a new agreement to fund the government, or risk a partial shutdown of federal agencies on Saturday — the 100th day of Donald Trump's presidency.

Ever aware of the consequences, House Speaker Paul Ryan says passing a spending bill is his primary goal this week — even as the White House is urging the GOP to resuscitate last month's failed attempt to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act and the president is making a fresh push on a tax overhaul.

"Wherever we land will be a product the president can and will support," Ryan said of the spending bill during a Saturday afternoon conference call with Republican lawmakers, according to a GOP aide. - More, NPR

Congress Focuses On Averting Shutdown, But Trump Wants More In Budget Deal


Afghan defense chief quits over attack; U.S. warns of 'another tough year'

Afghanistan's defense minister and army chief of staff resigned on Monday after the deadliest Taliban attack on a military base, and U.S. Defense Secretary Jim Mattis said he was "under no illusions" about the problems facing the country.

Mattis, visiting as the United States looks to craft a new Afghanistan strategy, held talks with Afghan President Ashraf Ghani, officials and U.S. commanders, who want more troops.

"2017 is going to be another tough year for the valiant Afghan security forces and the international troops who have stood, and will continue to stand, shoulder to shoulder with Afghanistan against terrorism," Mattis said.

General John Nicholson, the head of U.S. and international forces in Afghanistan, said he was "not refuting" reports that Russia was providing support, including arms, to the Taliban.

A senior U.S. military official, speaking on condition of anonymity, told reporters that intelligence showed Russia was providing money and machine guns to the Taliban.

Russia has previously denied providing any material or financial aid to the insurgent group, but has said it maintains ties with Taliban officials in order to push for peace talks. Moscow has been critical of the United States over its handling of the war in Afghanistan. - Read More, Reuters

Afghan defense chief quits over attack; U.S. warns of 'another tough year'


Top U.S. general in Afghanistan sees Russia sending weapons to Taliban

U.S. defense chief arrives in Kabul as Afghan defense minister resigns in disgrace

 Defense Secretary Jim Mattis arrived for a surprise visit to Afghanistan on Monday as the Trump administration considers boosting U.S. military support for a conflict that commanders say has degenerated into a stalemate.

The visit, Mattis’s first as defense secretary, comes just days after a devastating Taliban attack on one of Afghanistan’s largest and most secure bases killed nearly 200 soldiers — leading to the resignation Monday of the country’s army chief and defense minister.

The brazen attack Friday was the largest ever carried out by the Taliban against the military. Gunmen dressed in army uniforms penetrated the base and gunned down unarmed servicemen returning from prayers.

The Taliban fighters were ultimately killed by a response force led by Afghan commandos. Gen. John Nicholson, commander of U.S. forces in Afghanistan, praised the elite but overworked units’ response that brought the “atrocity to an end.”

It is unclear how the attack will affect Afghan recruiting efforts, already strained by casualties and retention rates among the ranks. But the subsequent resignation of the two top military officials is a rare development in Afghan politics.

Speaking to reporters alongside Mattis, Nicholson said the level of sophistication in Friday’s attack made it “quite possible” that the gunmen were linked to the Haqqani network, a Taliban splinter faction based in Pakistan.

President Ashaf Ghani accepted the resignations of Defense Minister Abdullah Habibi and Army Chief of Staff Qadam Shah Shahim on Monday.

“No one has put pressure on me. I have resigned for the national interest of the country,” Habibi told reporters. Shahim also said he stepped down voluntarily.

Three other top commanders were replaced by Ghani, and the shake-up and resignations have been hailed as a return to government accountability. Retired general and analyst Javid Kohestani said the actions would reduce the “level of mistrust and boost the morale of the troops.”

A U.S. military official said the resignations were “not a surprise.” Following an Islamic State raid on a heavily used hospital in Kabul in March, Friday’s attack created expectations of blowback within the Afghan leadership.

“We knew there was going to be accountability,” the official said. - More, washingtonpost

U.S. defense chief arrives in Kabul as Afghan defense minister resigns in disgrace

Sunday, April 23, 2017

French Parties Unify Against Le Pen: ‘This Is Deadly Serious Now’

PARIS — Not since World War II has the anti-immigrant far right been closer to gaining power in France. With her second-place finish on Sunday in the first round of the presidential election, Marine Le Pen has dragged her National Front party from the dark fringes of its first 40 years.

But that remarkable accomplishment is so alarming to so many in France that as soon as the preliminary results were announced at 8:01 p.m., virtually all of her major opponents in the 11-person race called for her defeat in the second-round runoff on May 7. They implored their supporters to vote for the candidate projected to come out on top on Sunday, the centrist, pro-European Union former economy minister Emmanuel Macron, a political novice and outsider.

The first-round showing by Mr. Macron and Ms. Le Pen represented an earthquake, as they effectively broke the French political establishment. On the right and the left, the two parties that have governed France for more than 50 years suffered a severe defeat. They have been pushed aside in a wave of popular anger over the country’s stagnant economy and shaky security.

The rapid-fire endorsements of Mr. Macron, coming from across the political spectrum, represented a dynamic that has always prevailed in France when the National Front approaches executive power — the cross-party, anti-far right alliance the French call the “Republican Front.” The question now is whether that front can hold this time, as well.

Ms. Le Pen has oriented her appeal around what analysts and politicians call the “un-demonization” of her party — the shedding of its racist, anti-Semitic, Nazi-nostalgic roots. That strategy has scored big results. Until the last week of the campaign, when she turned even more sharply anti-immigrant, her speeches were shaped around what she depicted as regaining France’s “sovereignty,” breaking with the European Union and “restoring” France’s frontiers.

But an undercurrent of prejudice still undergirds the National Front’s fervent rallies. Anti-Muslim code still permeates her speeches. And a majority of French people, in polls, still say the party represents a threat to the country’s democracy. - More, nytimes

French Parties Unify Against Le Pen: 'This Is Deadly Serious Now ...


Germany approving far fewer Afghan asylum-seekers: newspaper

Germany approved just under 48 percent of asylum applications from Afghan migrants in the first two months of 2017, down from close to 78 percent in 2015, the Passauer Neue Presse German newspaper reported on Sunday.

The newspaper, citing a response from the German interior ministry to a parliamentary query by the Left party, said the government rejected 14,403 of the 27,639 asylum applications considered in January and February.

It said the approval rate had dropped to just over 60 percent in 2016 and fallen further this year. The rate is lower than the 55 percent identified by German Chancellor Angela Merkel this month.

News of the drop comes after a report that thousands of former Taliban fighters may have entered Germany over the past two years among an influx of more than a million migrants and refugees, prompting investigations by federal prosecutors.

Ulla Jelpke, a Left party lawmaker, criticized the government's tougher stance on asylum approvals for Afghan migrants at a time when the security situation was worsening.

"It's a result of political orders to increase deportations and send a warning signal," she told the newspaper.

Merkel's government, under fire for allowing in large numbers of migrants, especially after several militant attacks linked to migrants last year, has been actively deporting groups of rejected Afghan asylum-seekers.

Merkel, seeking a fourth term in a Sept. 24 election, this month defended increased deportations of rejected Afghan asylum-seekers, saying all other European Union countries were doing the same. More

Germany approving far fewer Afghan asylum-seekers: newspaper

Europe's populist wave stalls as Macron storms into French runoff

The populist tsunami that slammed into Britain last year, before sweeping across the Atlantic to the United States, may have faded on the shores of France on Sunday.

Despite a strong performance from far-right leader Marine Le Pen in the first round of France's presidential election, the bigger news was the success of Emmanuel Macron, an independent centrist who rode to victory with a counter-intuitive campaign that embraced globalization, immigration and the European Union.

The polls suggest Macron will beat Le Pen soundly in the second round runoff on May 7. If he does, it could open the door to more ambitious reforms of the French economy and an elusive compromise with Germany on overhauling the troubled euro zone.

Just 39 years old and with only four years of political experience under his belt, Macron represents a generational change and a break from the left-right divide that has defined French politics for over half a century.

He would face formidable challenges as president. Nearly half of French voters opted for candidates on the extreme right and left of the political spectrum. These people are unlikely to embrace Macron's liberal democratic vision, leaving France a deeply divided nation. - Read More, Reuters

Europe's populist wave stalls as Macron storms into French runoff

Can he close the deal? Inside Macron's daring run for the Elysee

France elections: Macron and Le Pen 'through to run-off' - BBC

The centrist Emmanuel Macron will face far-right leader Marine Le Pen in a run-off for the French presidency on 7 May, multiple projections indicate.
An Ipsos/Sopra Steria poll puts Mr Macron on 23.7% in first-round voting with Ms Le Pen on 21.7%.

Opinion polls have consistently predicted Mr Macron defeating his rival in the run-off.

The two fought off a strong challenge from centre-right François Fillon and hard-left Jean-Luc Mélenchon.

Another projection, from TF1/RTL, put Mr Macron and Ms Le Pen neck and neck in the first round.

With more than three-quarters of the vote counted, official results put Mr Macron on 23.23%, ahead of Ms Le Pen on 22.83%. Results are still coming in from big cities where he has greater support.

Whoever wins the next round, the voting marks a shift away from the decades-long dominance of leftist and centre-right parties in French politics.

Macron cements his rise

While Ms Le Pen has long been seen as likely to make the second round, Emmanuel Macron's rise has been swift. The BBC's Hugh Schofield says Mr Macron's likely victory is the story of the evening.

He told cheering supporters "we have changed the face of French political life in one year", calling for people to rally against "nationalists".

A former banker, Mr Macron served as economy minister under current President Francois Hollande, quitting to launch a new party.

He has never stood for election before and if he wins would become France's youngest-ever president.

A pro-European, he has called for gradual deregulation of France's economy and a multi-billion dollar public investment plan. - Read More