Friday
Apr032009
Bond “cautiously optimistic” over Obama approach to Pakistan
by Christina Lovato, University of New Mexico-Talk Radio New Service
This morning at a discussion on issues related to Afghanistan and Pakistan, Senator Christopher “Kit” Bond (R-MO) broke away from his Republican colleagues by praising one of President Barack Obama’s policies.
The plan that was unveiled last Friday would increase U.S. support in Afghanistan and Pakistan. Bond says the only way to address the long-term threat of terrorism in the region is to take a “smart power-counter insurgency approach.”
Recent attacks in Pakistan “underscore that the threats emanating from the region are one of the greatest national security threats and challenges of our time,” Bond said.
“The reason my optimism is guarded is because the President has split the baby between two competing camps in Washington and I believe in the White House today. The first camp focuses strictly on counter terrorism, or CT, and the second which takes a counter insurgency or coin strategy approach,” Bond said.
“We will not have success eliminating extremist elements in Afghanistan if we cannot confront them in western Pakistan. To do this we must fully engage Pakistan,” he said, adding that cooperation from the North Atlantic Treaty Organization is vital to success.
“NATO must supply more military and civilian assistance personal and remove cumbersome constraints on their people in the field,” Bond said.
But, Bond said, the U.S. “must work with Pakistan to find out what will be required to achieve genuine and measurable progress against terrorists and insurgents in the federally administered tribal areas and other border regions in Pakistan.
“There are three legs of the stool that need to be addressed in the region; security, development and governance,” said Bond, adding that security will only be truly established when local Afghan and Pakistan security forces are able to hold territory themselves and when they have the incentives to do so.
Additionally, “We need to have USAID and other development organizations coordinate better with our military forces to provide what local leaders want and not just deliver to them, one year later, what we tell them they need. This means working with local councils or tribal gurges to insure we are meeting their needs.”
This morning at a discussion on issues related to Afghanistan and Pakistan, Senator Christopher “Kit” Bond (R-MO) broke away from his Republican colleagues by praising one of President Barack Obama’s policies.
The plan that was unveiled last Friday would increase U.S. support in Afghanistan and Pakistan. Bond says the only way to address the long-term threat of terrorism in the region is to take a “smart power-counter insurgency approach.”
Recent attacks in Pakistan “underscore that the threats emanating from the region are one of the greatest national security threats and challenges of our time,” Bond said.
“The reason my optimism is guarded is because the President has split the baby between two competing camps in Washington and I believe in the White House today. The first camp focuses strictly on counter terrorism, or CT, and the second which takes a counter insurgency or coin strategy approach,” Bond said.
“We will not have success eliminating extremist elements in Afghanistan if we cannot confront them in western Pakistan. To do this we must fully engage Pakistan,” he said, adding that cooperation from the North Atlantic Treaty Organization is vital to success.
“NATO must supply more military and civilian assistance personal and remove cumbersome constraints on their people in the field,” Bond said.
But, Bond said, the U.S. “must work with Pakistan to find out what will be required to achieve genuine and measurable progress against terrorists and insurgents in the federally administered tribal areas and other border regions in Pakistan.
“There are three legs of the stool that need to be addressed in the region; security, development and governance,” said Bond, adding that security will only be truly established when local Afghan and Pakistan security forces are able to hold territory themselves and when they have the incentives to do so.
Additionally, “We need to have USAID and other development organizations coordinate better with our military forces to provide what local leaders want and not just deliver to them, one year later, what we tell them they need. This means working with local councils or tribal gurges to insure we are meeting their needs.”
Iraqi Refugees need U.S. help, advocates say
America must invest more time, money, and human resources to help those displaced by the ongoing Iraq War, according to human rights advocates from the Washington, D.C.-based Refugees International.
The presence of 2.6 million displaced Iraqis persons is overwhelming to neighboring Middle East countries and is “undermining” to the social fabric of Iraq, said Ken Bacon, President of Refugees International, at a speech made today at the National Press Club.
President Barack Obama talked about displacement with Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki during his surprise visit to Iraq on Tuesday.
Bacon is happy at what is being seen as a distinct change from the “little attention” that the Bush Administration paid to Iraqi displacement.
It is estimated that since the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003, 2.6 million Iraqi’s have lost their homes and have fled other parts of the country. An additional 2 million have fled to neighboring countries, including Syria, Jordan and Egypt.
Bacon said that greater American and international support in receiving refugees and providing financial-aid can help stop the crisis.
Displacement of that many people “affects the whole region”, said Bacon, which results in educated citizens and specialized workers fleeing the country.
There are only 18,000 practicing doctors in Iraq, down from 32,000 doctors in 2002. There are more Iraqi doctors in Jordan than in Iraq’s capitol city of Baghdad, Bacon said.
Last year Democratic Senators Robert Casey (PA) and Benjamin Cardin (MD) introduced a bill to increase aid to Iraqi refugees and allow more of them to enter the United States. Since the FY2010 Budget has been approved by Congress, any appropriated funds to help Iraqi citizens would have to come through additional legislation, Bacon said.
A spokesman for Senator Cardin said it has not been decided yet if similar legislation would be introduced in this Congress.
Refugee International’s Field Report on the Iraqi refugee situation said that the Iraqi government is trying to keep more of its citizens from fleeing their homeland. It is feared by the Iraqi government that the existence of so many refugees tarnishes the image of overall security within the country.
The report also said Iraq violated international refugee laws in 2007 by asking Syria not to accept any more Iraqi refugees.
Many refugees have fears of returning home, the report says, because many of those that returned already have been killed.
Kristele Younes, an advocate with Refugees International, says that security is a major issue in Iraqi neighborhoods, with each little borough acting as its own walled off “fiefdom”.
Younes said that the United Nations is trying to place a tourniquet on the flow of persons out of the country by the end of the year, but significant challenges remain in Iraq, including budgetary shortcomings due to low oil prices, corruption within the government and sectarianism.
The Refugees International’s report on Iraq can be found here.