The National  Memo Logo

Smart. Sharp. Funny. Fearless.

Monday, December 09, 2019 {{ new Date().getDay() }}

Kabul (AFP) – A planned deal to let U.S. forces stay in Afghanistan beyond 2014 to fight Al-Qaeda remnants is under threat because of disagreement over the Americans’ right to conduct military operations, Kabul says.

President Hamid Karzai is now directly leading the talks after they ground to a halt despite U.S. pressure to complete the security agreement by the end of this month, said Karzai’s spokesman Aimal Faizi.

The U.S. plans to pull out the bulk of its 57,000 troops in Afghanistan by the end of 2014, but it has tentative plans to retain some bases and a smaller force of around 10,000 after that.

“The U.S. wants the freedom to conduct military operations, night raids and house searches,” Faizi told reporters late Tuesday.

“According to them, there are 75 Al-Qaeda operatives in Afghanistan, which is very strange as this agreement will be for 10 years to have the right to conduct military operations anywhere in the country.

“Unilaterally having the right to conduct military operations is in no way acceptable for Afghans.”

Faizi also said the two sides could not agree on how the bilateral security agreement (BSA) should define an attack on Afghanistan that would trigger U.S. protection.

“We believe that when terrorists are sent to commit suicide attacks here, that is also aggression,” Faizi said in a reference to Pakistan-based militants whom Afghanistan believes are supported by Pakistani intelligence services.

“We are a strategic partner of the US and we must be protected against foreign aggression. For us and for the U.S., that’s the conflicting point. We are not of the same opinion and we need clarity from the U.S. side,” he said.

Karzai has repeatedly said he will not be rushed into signing the pact, and that it may not be finalised until after his successor is chosen in April elections.

“If signed by the current president, he will be definitely held accountable in the history of Afghanistan if things go wrong,” Faizi said.

On Monday U.S. Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel described the pact as “critically important” as the U.S. and its NATO allies plan the drawdown that will see most foreign troops leave the country by December 2014.

“I hope we’ll have that agreement by the end of October, because we just can’t move without it,” Hagel said.

The collapse of a similar pact with Iraq in 2011 led to the U.S. pulling all its troops out of the country.

Photo Credit: AFP/Noorullah Shirzada

Advertising

Start your day with National Memo Newsletter

Know first.

The opinions that matter. Delivered to your inbox every morning

Supreme Court of the United States

YouTube Screenshot

A new analysis is explaining the disturbing circumstances surrounding the overturning of Roe v. Wade and how the U.S. Supreme Court has morphed into an entity actively working toward authoritarianism.

In a new op-ed published by The Guardian, Jill Filipovic —author of the book, The H-Spot: The Feminist Pursuit of Happiness—offered an assessment of the message being sent with the Supreme Court's rollback of the 1973 landmark ruling.

Keep reading... Show less

Billionaires

YouTube Screenshot

After a year of reporting on the tax machinations of the ultrawealthy, ProPublica spotlights the top tax-avoidance techniques that provide massive benefits to billionaires.

Last June, drawing on the largest trove of confidential American tax data that’s ever been obtained, ProPublica launched a series of stories documenting the key ways the ultrawealthy avoid taxes, strategies that are largely unavailable to most taxpayers. To mark the first anniversary of the launch, we decided to assemble a quick summary of the techniques — all of which can generate tax savings on a massive scale — revealed in the series.

1. The Ultra Wealth Effect

Our first story unraveled how billionaires like Elon Musk, Warren Buffett and Jeff Bezos were able to amass some of the largest fortunes in history while paying remarkably little tax relative to their immense wealth. They did it in part by avoiding selling off their vast holdings of stock. The U.S. system taxes income. Selling stock generates income, so they avoid income as the system defines it. Meanwhile, billionaires can tap into their wealth by borrowing against it. And borrowing isn’t taxable. (Buffett said he followed the law and preferred that his wealth go to charity; the others didn’t comment beyond a “?” from Musk.)

Keep reading... Show less
{{ post.roar_specific_data.api_data.analytics }}