Sabtu, 29 Februari 2020

Cory Mills: Taliban peace deal historic, not just 'optics' – Take it from someone who served in Afghanistan - Fox News

President Donald Trump has demonstrated yet again his art of negotiation as the United States, Taliban, and Afghan government execute a joint declaration to solidify a reduction of violence agreement with the Taliban.

Following a successful seven day violence-free test period, the U.S. has made a decisive move towards a negotiated peace plan in Afghanistan.

This is not only a good step towards ending America’s longest war but for the Taliban and Afghan government to work towards peace and stability within Afghanistan, too.

US SIGNS HISTORIC PEACE DEAL WITH TALIBAN, POMPEO STRIKES CAUTIOUS TONE

It also represents a triumph of the American blood and treasure spent in Afghanistan – the Taliban agreed to the same key demand that they were offered shortly after 9-11, 19 years ago: to prevent their country from being used as a base for terrorists to launch attacks against the United States or its allies.

Having spent a year in Afghanistan in various combat detachments, this agreement is a welcome development for our warfighters, door-kickers and trigger-pullers.

This joint declaration demonstrates the U.S. continued support for peace and notes that the Taliban will end their relationship with international terrorists and ensure Afghan soil cannot be used to threaten the U.S. or our allies again.

The trial one-week reduction of violence was not a ceasefire but a step forward as the U.S. worked towards a plan for a longer reduction in violence.

The U.S.’s judgment of Taliban compliance with commitments will determine the pace of our condition-based withdrawal. Should we see an increase in violence against the Afghan government or U.S. troops then this will obviously slow the delay.

We have seen the president walk away from deals where the other party changes the terms at the last minute or does not comply with the agreement.

More from Opinion

U.S. and Taliban negotiators, along with Secretary of State Mike Pompeo signed the historic agreement Saturday in Qatar. This signifies that both the U.S. and Taliban have expressed a willingness and interest for peace in Afghanistan

If successful, the settlements in Afghanistan will be more stable, restoration of all services including cell phones will be included and that will ensure communication channels with the Taliban.

Additionally, the Taliban has also committed to entering an intra-Afghan negotiation with the Afghan government, other political leaders, and civil society groups that include women.

This joint declaration demonstrates a strong partnership with Afghanistan and could not have been achieved without President Trump and his administration.

Even the Afghan government describes the U.S.-Taliban agreement as a historic step towards ending the war and establishing national teams to participate in intra-Afghan talks.

Many Democrats will undoubtedly take the opportunity to attack the president, but they know that even former President Obama did not (and could not) pull this off or achieve such as monumental deal.

This agreement will also see a troop reduction to around 8,600 troops by the 2020 elections in November, which also fulfills the president’s campaign promises to end America’s longest wars and return troops home safely.

Make no mistake however, this is not optics, it’s historic!

A political settlement is the most feasible way to establish peace after 19 years of fighting and thousands of lives lost in Afghanistan. The U.S. will still support fighting against terror groups such as Haqqani and ISIS in the country if needed but that should be dealt with primarily by the Afghan National Army.

This historic deal that President Trump has achieved with his top cabinet members, Special Envoy Amb. Khalilzad and Doha’s ability to open communication channels is a historic success that will keep America safe and reduces our Afghan burden.

This is unprecedented development because never before has the U.S. signed a peace agreement with the Taliban.

Our U.S. diplomatic engagement with the Taliban comes after more than a year of continual negotiation and efforts. The president has also received support from our NATO allies, the European Union, Russia, China and partners in the region.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

Having worked in Afghanistan to support diplomatic missions across the country, I fully understand the historic significance of this agreement.

After 19 years, the Taliban have agreed to the same thing that the U.S. asked them for at the beginning of this conflict, which was to prevent any terrorist organization to use Taliban territory to attack the United States or our allies.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM CORY MILLS

Let's block ads! (Why?)


https://news.google.com/__i/rss/rd/articles/CBMiSWh0dHBzOi8vd3d3LmZveG5ld3MuY29tL29waW5pb24vdGFsaWJhbi1wZWFjZS1kZWFsLWFmZ2hhbmlzdGFuLWNvcnktbWlsbHPSAU1odHRwczovL3d3dy5mb3huZXdzLmNvbS9vcGluaW9uL3RhbGliYW4tcGVhY2UtZGVhbC1hZmdoYW5pc3Rhbi1jb3J5LW1pbGxzLmFtcA?oc=5

2020-02-29 17:10:24Z
52780629907270

Afghanistan's Taliban, US sign peace deal - Al Jazeera English

[unable to retrieve full-text content]

  1. Afghanistan's Taliban, US sign peace deal  Al Jazeera English
  2. US signs historic peace deal with Taliban, Pompeo strikes cautious tone  Fox News
  3. US signing a historic deal with the Taliban  ABC News
  4. Afghanistan peace plan: Don’t assume the Taliban aren’t serious. Test them.  USA TODAY
  5. How Afghans Can Work Together to End the War  The New York Times
  6. View Full Coverage on Google News

https://news.google.com/__i/rss/rd/articles/CBMiK2h0dHBzOi8vd3d3LnlvdXR1YmUuY29tL3dhdGNoP3Y9dmRid1poUC1CQWPSAQA?oc=5

2020-02-29 16:20:41Z
52780629907270

Coronavirus continues to spread as disease rattles global economy - CBS News

The World Health Organization says the risk of the new coronavirus expanding worldwide is now "very high." New cases of the disease it causes, COVID-19, are continuing to emerge globally. 

Overnight, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) said it is aware of four new "presumptive positive cases" of COVID-19 in the United States. Four patients tested positive for the new coronavirus using the CDC-developed rRT-PCR, it said.

"They are considered presumptive positive cases pending CDC confirmatory testing," the CDC said. "However, CDC and State and local public health authorities are proceeding with public health investigations and response activities as if these were confirmed cases."

According to the CDC, the four suspected cases are in:

  • California, which announced a second possible instance of community spread, defined as the spread of an illness for which the infection's source is unknown.
  • Oregon, which announced its first possible instance of community spread.
  • Washington state, which announced two presumptive cases – one that is likely linked to travel and one that marks the state's first possible instance of community spread.

If confirmed, the four cases will be among a handful of other cases detected in the United States through the U.S. public health system.

There are now more than 85,000 cases globally – most of them in China, where the virus originated – and more than 2,900 deaths. As health officials try to contain the virus, it continues to put millions of people in the U.S. on edge and rattle the markets.

SKOREA-China-health-virus
Medical members wearing protective gear take samples from a driver with suspected symptoms of the COVID-19 coronavirus, at a "drive-through" virus test facility in Goyang, north of Seoul, on February 29, 2020. JUNG YEON-JE/AFP via Getty Images

Let's block ads! (Why?)


https://news.google.com/__i/rss/rd/articles/CBMib2h0dHBzOi8vd3d3LmNic25ld3MuY29tL2xpdmUtdXBkYXRlcy9jb3JvbmF2aXJ1cy1vdXRicmVhay1kZWF0aC10b2xsLWluZmVjdGlvbnMtbGF0ZXN0LW5ld3MtdXBkYXRlcy0yMDIwLTAyLTI5L9IBc2h0dHBzOi8vd3d3LmNic25ld3MuY29tL2FtcC9saXZlLXVwZGF0ZXMvY29yb25hdmlydXMtb3V0YnJlYWstZGVhdGgtdG9sbC1pbmZlY3Rpb25zLWxhdGVzdC1uZXdzLXVwZGF0ZXMtMjAyMC0wMi0yOS8?oc=5

2020-02-29 15:55:00Z
52780639670258

U.S. Signs Peace Deal With Taliban After Nearly 2 Decades Of War In Afghanistan - NPR

Members of the Taliban delegation gather ahead of Saturday's signing ceremony with the United States in the Qatari capital of Doha. Giuseppe Cacace/AFP via Getty Images hide caption

toggle caption
Giuseppe Cacace/AFP via Getty Images

U.S. Special Representative Zalmay Khalilzad signed a deal with the head of the Taliban's negotiating team, Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar, that paves the way for eventual peace in Afghanistan. The accord was signed in Doha, Qatar, where the two sides spent many months hashing out the agreement.

It comes at the end of a seven-day "Reduction in Violence" in Afghanistan that was agreed to earlier this month.

According to the deal, "the United States is committed to withdraw from Afghanistan all military forces of the United States, its allies, and Coalition partners, including all non-diplomatic civilian personnel, private security contractors, trainers, advisors, and supporting services personnel within fourteen (14) months."

The deal stipulates that the U.S. will begin the process of drawing down troops 8,600 in the first 135 days and withdraw forces from five bases. All further reductions in troops will be conditioned-based and related to counter-terrorism needs and the Taliban upholding its commitments to not allowing Afghan soil to be used as a base for terrorism in the future.

The Afghan government also will release up to 5,000 Taliban prisoners as a gesture of goodwill, in exchange for 1,000 Afghan security forces held by the Taliban.

Along with members of the United Nations Security Council, the U.S. intends to "remove members of the Taliban from the sanctions list with the aim of achieving this objective by May 29, 2020." And Washington aims to remove the group from U.S. sanctions by Aug 27, 2020.

The Taliban "will not allow any of its members, other individuals or groups, including al-Qa'ida, to use the soil of Afghanistan to threaten the security of the United States and its allies."

The U.S. will "request the recognition and endorsement of the UN Security Council for this agreement."

The Afghan government will also begin negotiations with the Taliban to map out a political settlement which would establish the role the Taliban would play in a future Afghanistan. These negotiations are expected to start next month. One of the first tasks in these intra-Afghan talks will be to achieve a lasting ceasefire in Afghanistan.

Separately, in Kabul, Afghanistan, U.S. Defense Secretary Mark Esper and NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg signed a joint declaration with the Afghan government – represented by President Ashraf Ghani – that commits the Afghans to these up-coming negotiations with the Taliban and to provide Afghanistan with security guarantees as this process unfolds.

This deal has been worked out by US Special Representative Zalmay Khalilzad and the Taliban over months of negotiations in Doha, Qatar. The U.S. and Taliban had reached an agreement last summer. President Trump walked away from that near-deal after a U.S. servicemember was killed in a September car bombing in Kabul, Afghanistan.

The possibly historic agreement has been 18 months in the making. It follows nine rounds of on-again, off-again talks in Doha — the Qatari capital where the Taliban maintains an office — that began in 2018. An earlier agreement that was to be signed last September was scuttled by the Trump administration after a U.S. service member was killed in Afghanistan.

Only the U.S., led by Special Representative for Afghanistan Reconciliation Zalmay Khalilzad, and the Taliban have taken part in the negotiations, an arrangement that New York University's Barnett Rubin says was designed by the Taliban and resisted until recently by the U.S.

"Since 2010 [the Taliban] always insisted there would be two stages: international and then intra-Afghan," says Rubin, who served from 2009-2013 as special advisor to the State Department's Special Representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan and now directs the Afghanistan Pakistan Regional Program at NYU's Center on International Cooperation.

The Taliban's rule in Afghanistan, which lasted just five years, ended abruptly with the invasion of a U.S.-led military coalition shortly after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. Their overthrow was in reprisal for having harbored Osama bin Laden, the leader of al-Qaida, whose militants hijacked and crashed four American airliners in those attacks.

Over the past three years, the Taliban have fought U.S. and Afghan forces to what Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Gen. Mark Milley calls "a state of strategic stalemate."

President Trump has repeatedly vowed to end America's involvement in the war in Afghanistan, the most prolonged of all U.S. conflicts. Yet, within months of assuming the presidency, Trump added 4,000 U.S. troops to the 8,900 American forces already deployed there.

More than 2,400 Americans have died in Afghanistan during nearly 18 years of fighting at an estimated cost to the U.S. Treasury of nearly $1 trillion.

The deal signed in Doha follows a week-long "reduction in violence" period, during which Taliban fighters promised to suspend major attacks and U.S. forces agreed to suspend offensive operations, except attacks against Islamic State insurgents. Local observers have described an 80% drop in violence since the lull in warfare began last Sunday.

"We have seen just these last six days a significant reduction in violence in Afghanistan," Secretary of State Mike Pompeo told the House Committee on Foreign Affairs on Friday, shortly before flying to the Doha signing ceremony. Earlier in the week, Pompeo called the partial truce "imperfect," but said "it's working."

Here are some of the key elements in that political resolution:

1. A withdrawal of U.S. troops

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, left, meets with Qatari Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman al-Thani ahead of Saturday's signing ceremony between the U.S. and the Taliban in Qatar's capital, Doha. Giuseppe Cacace/AFP via Getty Images hide caption

toggle caption
Giuseppe Cacace/AFP via Getty Images

It's not clear how quickly U.S. forces will leave Afghanistan under the Doha agreement. Initially, there is a reported 135-day window from the time of the pact's signing for the U.S. to begin a troop withdrawal, which has been a central demand of the Taliban.

"There is an initial drawdown where there is a date and there's a number," says a senior State Department official, speaking on condition of anonymity. "There is also an aspirational timeline for withdrawal that is entirely conditions-based, and it will depend on [the Taliban's] performance as we judge their performance."

The success of February's seven-day partial truce is seen as a crucial first step.

"That sets the stage for the other elements, which include the United States promising to draw down from roughly 13,000 American troops in Afghanistan to about 8,600, which would be the same number we had when President Obama left office," says Michael O'Hanlon, a Brookings Institution scholar and longtime supporter of the U.S. intervention in Afghanistan. "So, it's not a huge change. It's just a reduction from the sort of mini-Trump buildup."

In the initial stages of the deal, U.S. troops would also be evacuated from five forward operating bases.

O'Hanlon warns this agreement cannot repeat what the U.S. signed with the North Vietnamese in the 1973 Paris peace talks, "where we basically take on faith that the enemy is going to behave itself once we're gone."

But a State Department official insists the Taliban will continue to be subject to an edifice of sanctions imposed over the years by both the U.S. and the United Nations Security Council.

"Part of the process of making peace is to begin to take down the edifice, but the language [in the peace accord] is carefully constructed to be conditional, depending on Taliban performance," says the official. "If the Taliban don't do what we hope they'll do, our requirements to begin to take down that edifice are vitiated."

A senior Afghan official tells NPR that the U.S. forces that do remain would focus on the three missions they are currently carrying out: counter-terrorism operations, training of Afghan forces and air support for Afghan ground forces.

A drawdown of the approximately 7,000 forces from other NATO member states in Afghanistan would take place in tandem with the departure of U.S. troops.

2. A commitment by the Taliban to end support for U.S.-deemed "terrorist organizations"

U.S. officials insist the troop withdrawal timeline will depend primarily on one condition: the degree to which the Taliban fulfills its commitment in the peace deal not to allow Afghanistan to be used as a base of operations by insurgencies such as al-Qaida and the Islamic State.

"The Taliban must respect the agreement, specifically regarding their promises of severing ties with terrorists," Pompeo said earlier this week at the State Department. "We have our deep counterterrorism interest there, making sure that the homeland is never attacked. It's one of the central underpinnings of what President Trump has laid before us."

The Taliban's renunciation of ties with al-Qaida, though, may be more easily said than done.

"This is a complex issue because the Haqqani network is often seen as a strong affiliate of al-Qaida and it's also part of the Taliban leadership," says the Brooking Institution's O'Hanlon. "So we don't really quite know what that means, but presumably, core al-Qaida and the Taliban would not be allowed to speak [to each other] and we would be listening with all of our electronic capabilities to make sure that was the case."

The Haqqani network is one of Afghanistan's most experienced insurgent groups, long thought to be responsible for some of the more sophisticated and large scale attacks, especially in the capital, Kabul. It's leader, Sirajuddin Haqqani, is the Taliban's current deputy and recently penned an op-ed in the New York Times.

The State Department recognizes there are concerns about the Taliban's historical bonds with al-Qaida. "We think this is a decisive and historic first step in terms of their public acknowledgment that they are breaking ties with al-Qaida," says one official. "That's going to be a work in progress."

Just as the withdrawal of U.S. forces from Afghanistan is the Taliban's main demand in this agreement, the U.S. has made the Taliban's forswearing of ties to other insurgencies its top ask.

"We went into Afghanistan with NATO after 9/11 because of the threat to the United States and our allies," the State Department official says. "We are still there because we are concerned about the terrorist threat."

But one former senior U.S. official suggests the Trump administration may be exaggerating that threat.

"In my estimation, we have largely achieved our counter-terrorism objective today. Al-Qaida is much diminished in Afghanistan and Pakistan, with most of its senior leaders killed and those who remain marginalized," retired Army General Douglas Lute, who served as point man for the Afghan war effort in both the Bush and Obama White Houses, recently wrote in prepared Congressional testimony. "There is a branch of the so-called Islamic State in Afghanistan, but I have seen no evidence that it presents a threat to the U.S. and it is under pressure from the Afghans, including from the Taliban."

3. Maintaining a communications channel

Mullah Abdul Salam Zaeef, the Taliban's former ambassador to Pakistan, speaks to the press ahead of Saturday's signing ceremony with the United States in Qatar. Giuseppe Cacace/AFP via Getty Images hide caption

toggle caption
Giuseppe Cacace/AFP via Getty Images

The U.S. and the Taliban are expected to continue the lines of communications they have already established during the talks in Doha, both to support implementation of the agreement and to de-conflict their respective military operations against ISIS in eastern Afghanistan.

Suspicions that there was a secret annex to the deal that also involved sharing intelligence with the Taliban prompted a cautionary letter to Pompeo and Defense Secretary Mark Esper this week from 22 House Republicans. They demanded that any deal between the U.S. and the Taliban be made public with no secret annexes or side deals, including one for intelligence sharing or a joint counterterrorism center with the Taliban.

"This would be a farce," the lawmakers wrote, "and put American lives at risk."

A State Department official on Thursday denied the U.S. was entering into any kind of "cooperative partnership" with the Taliban.

4. Prisoner swaps

The Afghan government has also agreed to release 5000 Taliban prisoners as a goodwill gesture in exchange for a 1000 Afghan security forces held by the Taliban.

"We have absolutely committed to helping mediate and resolve this tough issue," says a State Department official, referring to the release of Taliban prisoners. "There are some people that we're not concerned about. There's some people we may be more concerned about."

The same official expressed admiration for the care Taliban leaders have shown for freeing their fighters, while adding, "The agreement makes explicit that those who are released need to make commitments that they won't go back to the battlefield and that they will support the agreement."

While noting the need for early action on releasing prisoners to build confidence among the Taliban in the peace process, the official said both the numbers of prisoners and the timeline for their release are "aspirational" and will depend on "Taliban performance."

5. Intra-party talks among Afghans

A second phase of the peace process would bring together Afghan government officials, opposition figures, civil society representatives and the Taliban to discuss a political roadmap for bringing an end to the war.

The talks are expected to take place in Oslo, Norway, to begin around mid-March. The U.S. will be present along with others, including Germany, Indonesia and the U.N., but only in the role of supporting and facilitating the talks.

"It's not like the Taliban are endlessly evil or that this will bring flowers and roses and doves overnight," says one U.S. official. "We've reached a point where there's a critical mass on all sides where people want to change, want a better future, want a better option, and our job is to continue to create the incentives, continue to create the momentum for people to move forward and change the negative trajectory."

A host of difficult issues are to be addressed in the intra-Afghan talks, including:

a. A long-term cease-fire

The reduction in violence of the past week is intended to be a step toward an overall cessation of hostilities to be worked out in Oslo.

"The agreement explicitly calls on the Taliban to sit down with the other Afghans in the intra-Afghan negotiations, where they will discuss the modalities and the timing of a comprehensive and permanent cease-fire," says a State Department official. "There's a lot of mistrust, decades of fighting, so it's not going to be easy."

This would likely entail a dismantling of the Taliban's military force with the aim of either demobilizing or integrating its members into the Afghan security forces — a goal O'Hanlon considers daunting.

"I think the only realistic way to handle the security forces is that you keep all the different forces more or less in place," he says. "The Taliban continue to hold the parts of the country where they're most influential in certain rural areas, the Afghan army and police control the cities and major highways, and maybe there's a U.N. observation force making sure they don't fight each other."

b. Power sharing

Yet to be determined is the role the Taliban might play in Afghanistan's political future.

The nation continues to roil over results of the disputed September presidential election. President Ashraf Ghani was declared the winner in mid-February, but that result is not recognized by his challenger, Chief Executive Abdullah Abdullah, and a planned swearing-in of Ghani for a second term has been postponed until March 10, at the request of the U.S.

"You have a very fragmented country right now within Afghanistan, even apart from the Taliban and the central government who are clearly at war," says Bahar Jalali, who directs the women's mentoring program at the American University of Afghanistan. "There's a lot of consternation with the Taliban coming back and re-emerging as viable political actors. What's going to happen with that?"

c. Women's rights

After women were prohibited under Taliban rule from attending school, working or appearing in public without a male relative as escort, they've won back those rights and gained others in areas no longer dominated by the Taliban.

In his New York Times opinion piece last week, deputy Taliban leader Sirajuddin Haqqani appeared to play down concerns that women would lose their restored freedoms.

"I am confident that, liberated from foreign domination and interference, we together will find a way to build an Islamic system in which all Afghans have equal rights," Haqqani wrote, "where the rights of women that are granted by Islam — from the right to education to the right to work — are protected, and where merit is the basis for equal opportunity."

But many are skeptical of the Taliban's intentions and doubt such assurances.

"We saw what the Taliban's version of Islam looked like in the late 1990s and early 2000s, right before the U.S. military intervention," says Jalali. "That gives nobody any good sense of comfort about the Taliban upholding the rights of women under Islamic law."

Jalali fears the U.S. is simply looking for a way out of Afghanistan before November's election.

"That really speaks to Trump's burning desire to exit from Afghanistan and to say, hey, I ended the Forever War, you know, I can claim credit for that," she says. "I keep saying [it's a] low threshold for peace and a low threshold for ending the war."

For O'Hanlon, the Doha peace agreement is only a start.

"It's a tiny step forward," he says. "It's a good step forward, but it doesn't really mean that phase two or round two is going to follow naturally."

Let's block ads! (Why?)


https://news.google.com/__i/rss/rd/articles/CBMid2h0dHBzOi8vd3d3Lm5wci5vcmcvMjAyMC8wMi8yOS84MTA1Mzc1ODYvdS1zLXNpZ25zLXBlYWNlLWRlYWwtd2l0aC10YWxpYmFuLWFmdGVyLW5lYXJseS0yLWRlY2FkZXMtb2Ytd2FyLWluLWFmZ2hhbmlzdGFu0gEA?oc=5

2020-02-29 13:20:00Z
52780629907270

U.S., Taliban set to sign peace deal, a turning point in 18-year war in Afghanistan - The Washington Post

Parwiz Reuters Afghan men celebrate in anticipation of a U.S.-Taliban agreement in Jalalabad, Afghanistan, on Friday.

KABUL — The United States is set to sign a peace deal Saturday with the Taliban, its adversary in Afghanistan’s 18-year war. The deal marks a turning point in a conflict marred by years of both military and diplomatic stalemate.

One provision of the agreement is the full withdrawal of American troops that is “heavily conditions based,” according to two U.S. officials who have been briefed on the deal. The officials declined to elaborate on the conditions. They spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the deal publicly.

Separate from the provision for a full withdrawal, the signing of the deal will begin an initial drawdown to 8,600 U.S. troops upon President Trump’s orders. The top U.S. commander in Afghanistan, Gen. Austin “Scott” Miller said several times this week that he is prepared for such orders as he traveled across Afghanistan to visit soldiers. Current U.S. troop levels are at around 12,000 in Afghanistan.

In exchange, the deal stipulates that the Taliban will pledge to enter into talks with the Afghan government and not to harbor terrorist groups intent on attacking the West.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/video/world/the-signing-of-a-us-taliban-peace-deal-would-be-historicbut-might-not-end-the-war-in-afghanistan/2020/02/26/85361381-ed59-42c1-8ba4-8af1282006d3_video.html

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo is in Doha, Qatar, to witness the signing. Defense Secretary Mark T. Esper is in Kabul for a ceremony there with NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg and Afghan President Ashraf Ghani.

“From the first day that Americans came, neither we wanted them to stay for centuries, nor they wanted that,” acting Afghan defense minister Asadullah Khalid said ahead of the ceremony in Kabul. He said the departure of a “few thousand” U.S. troops would not affect security in Afghanistan.

Afghan national security adviser Hamdullah Mohib said the timeline for the complete withdrawal of U.S. forces is 18 months, “but it is conditional on the agreement between the Taliban and the U.S. If those conditions are not met, this date [could] also obviously change.”

Both officials spoke to the press in remarks that were carried by Afghan state television.

After the deal is signed, the Afghan government must assemble a negotiating team and navigate a planned prisoner exchange.

The Taliban provided U.S. negotiators a list of 5,000 Taliban prisoners currently held in detention by the Afghan government. And the militants announced 1,000 members of the Afghan security forces in Taliban captivity would be released in exchange.

“This is a test for the Americans,” said former senior Taliban official Abdul Salam Zaeef. “When this step is taken properly, then we’ll go to negotiations.” Afghan government officials have said that such an exchange would only occur during inter-Afghan talks or after they are complete.

Another potential obstacle after the deal is signed is the formation of an inclusive negotiating team to represent the Afghans who are not aligned with the Taliban. The announcement of disputed election results earlier this month has left the government in Kabul deeply divided and has the potential to undermine Ghani’s mandate to form that team.

An unofficial Afghan government delegation tried to meet Taliban officials in Doha Friday, but the Taliban declined the meeting. Suhail Shaheen, a Taliban spokesman, said “We have neither invited nor will meet the delegation,” according to Radio Mashaal.

A peace deal with the Taliban has been a critical foreign policy goal for President Trump, who campaigned on ending the war.

In a statement Friday, Trump called the deal “a powerful path forward to end the war in Afghanistan and bring our troops home.” But the president has faced fierce criticism from the Afghan government as well as from fellow Republicans at home.

Afghan officials have repeatedly criticized the United States for excluding them from talks with the Taliban. Any significant withdrawal of U.S. forces from the country is expected to place increased pressure on Afghan government forces, whose casualty rates continue to rise.

On Thursday, a group of Republican lawmakers released a letter warning that the Taliban has “a history of extracting concessions in exchange for false assurances.”

“A full-scale U.S. withdrawal” would “allow terrorist groups in Afghanistan to grow stronger and establish safe havens from which to plot attacks against us,” the letter continued.

Trump’s Friday statement said “ultimately it will be up to the people of Afghanistan to work out their future. We, therefore, urge the Afghan people to seize this opportunity for peace and a new future for their country.”

U.S. and Taliban negotiators were close to signing a peace deal in September, but the effort was scuttled by Trump after an attack by the Taliban killed a U.S. soldier.

Since then, chief U.S. negotiator Zalmay Khalilzad sought confidence-building measures to bring both sides back to the table. In November, the Taliban released two Western hostages in exchange for the release of senior militants linked to the Taliban by the Afghan government. And over the last week both sides reduced violence nationwide.

It is unclear if the reduction in violence will hold in the coming weeks as Afghan government officials and the Taliban begin talks. The Afghan government initially demanded a cease-fire before agreeing to talks with the Taliban.

As peace talks between the U.S. and the Taliban gained momentum last year, violence in Afghanistan intensified. The United Nations annual report on civilian casualties released this month said that in 2019 3,403 civilians were killed and 6,989 injured.

The United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan has documented more than 100,000 civilian casualties since the organization began its tally in 2009.

Sharif Hassan in Kabul and Sarah Dadouch and Haq Nawaz Khan in Doha, Qatar, contributed to this report.

Read more

The Afghanistan Papers: A secret history of the war

A glimpse of peace in Afghanistan: With fighting paused, soldiers invite Taliban over for chicken

Inside the U.S. military’s historic week in Afghanistan ahead of a peace deal with the Taliban

Today’s coverage from Post correspondents around the world

Like Washington Post World on Facebook and stay updated on foreign news

Let's block ads! (Why?)


https://news.google.com/__i/rss/rd/articles/CBMilgFodHRwczovL3d3dy53YXNoaW5ndG9ucG9zdC5jb20vd29ybGQvYXNpYV9wYWNpZmljL2FmZ2hhbmlzdGFuLXVzLXRhbGliYW4tcGVhY2UtZGVhbC1zaWduaW5nLzIwMjAvMDIvMjkvYjk1MmZiMDQtNWE2Ny0xMWVhLThlZmQtMGY5MDRiZGQ4MDU3X3N0b3J5Lmh0bWzSAQA?oc=5

2020-02-29 12:43:00Z
52780629907270

Syria war: Turkey says thousands of migrants have crossed to EU - BBC News

Media playback is unsupported on your device

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan says 18,000 migrants have crossed Turkish borders into Europe after the country "opened the doors" for them to travel.

The number is expected to hit 25,000 to 30,000 in the coming days, he said.

Turkey could no longer deal with the amount of people fleeing Syria's civil war, he added.

Greece says it has blocked thousands of migrants from entering "illegally" from Turkey.

Greek authorities fired tear gas to attempt to disperse the crowds.

Turkey's decision followed a deadly attack on Turkish troops by Syrian government forces in northern Syria this week.

At least 33 Turkish soldiers were killed in a bombardment in Idlib, the last Syrian province where Syrian rebel groups hold significant territory.

Syrian government forces, supported by Russia, have been trying to retake Idlib from jihadist groups and Turkish-backed rebel factions.

Turkey is hosting 3.7 million Syrian refugees, as well as migrants from other countries such as Afghanistan - but had previously stopped them from leaving for Europe under an aid-linked deal with the EU.

But Mr Erdogan accused the EU of breaking promises.

"We said months ago that if it goes on like this, we will have to open the doors. They did not believe us, but we opened the doors yesterday," President Erdogan said in Istanbul on Saturday.

He said that some 18,000 refugees had "pressed on the gates and crossed" into Europe by Saturday morning. He did not provide evidence of these numbers.

"We will not close these doors in the coming period and this will continue. Why? The European Union needs to keep its promises. We don't have to take care of this many refugees, to feed them," he said.

Brussels had not given full financial aid agreed in the 2018 Turkey-EU refugee deal, he said.

Greece said it had averted more than 4,000 attempts to cross into the country. There were further clashes between migrants and Greek police on Saturday.

"The government will do whatever it takes to protect its borders," government spokesman Stelios Petsas told reporters.

The Turkish president also said that he had asked Russian President Vladimir Putin - a close ally of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad - to stand aside and let Turkey "do what is necessary" with the Syrian government by itself.

Russia and Turkey are backing opposing sides in the civil war. Turkey is opposed to the government of Bashar al-Assad and supports some rebel groups.

Media playback is unsupported on your device

Let's block ads! (Why?)


https://news.google.com/__i/rss/rd/articles/CBMiLmh0dHBzOi8vd3d3LmJiYy5jb20vbmV3cy93b3JsZC1ldXJvcGUtNTE2ODcxNjDSATJodHRwczovL3d3dy5iYmMuY29tL25ld3MvYW1wL3dvcmxkLWV1cm9wZS01MTY4NzE2MA?oc=5

2020-02-29 12:07:05Z
52780628766708

Coronavirus Live Updates: South Korea Reports 800 New Cases - The New York Times

Credit...Kim Hyun-Tai/Yonhap, via Associated Press

South Korea, which has the largest coronavirus outbreak outside China, reported 813 new cases on Saturday, bringing its total to 3,150. In North Korea, Kim Jong-un ordered all-out efforts to fight the virus at a high-level meeting, state media reported.

South Korean officials have warned that confirmed cases would rise sharply as they aggressively tested thousands of people, particularly in the southeastern city of Daegu. More than 86 percent of patients have been in Daegu and nearby towns; many have been associated with a church called Shincheonji, which has a strong presence in Daegu.

The United States military, which has more than 28,000 personnel in South Korea, said on Saturday that the spouse of an American soldier infected with the virus had also tested positive for it. She had been in self-quarantine since Wednesday, following her husband’s diagnosis, and was being transported to a military hospital, the military said.

Also on Saturday, Mr. Kim, North Korea’s leader, convened the Politburo of his ruling party to order an all-out campaign to prevent an outbreak, state media reported. The North has not reported any coronavirus cases, but there has been concern that the secretive, totalitarian country could be hiding an outbreak.

“In case the infectious disease spreading beyond control finds its way into our country, it will entail serious consequences,” the North’s official Korean Central News Agency quoted Mr. Kim as saying. It said that officials had discussed “measures to deter the influx and spread of the infectious disease in a scientific, pre-emptive and lockdown way.”

North Korea has already closed its 930-mile border with China, where the coronavirus emerged, and its border with Russia. But the Chinese border has long been porous for smugglers, who ferry goods across the shallow river that separates the countries. The North has also suspended all flights and trains to and from China and asked all foreign diplomats not to leave their compounds.

The state media report Saturday also said that Mr. Kim had fired one of his top aides, Ri Man-gon, and another official for corruption, but it was unclear whether the dismissals were connected to the antivirus campaign.

Troubling new signs of how the coronavirus is spreading in the United States emerged on Friday, as cases not explained by overseas travel or contact with a person known to be infected were reported in California, Oregon and Washington State.

Officials from the three states announced that their testing had found new cases: a high school student from Washington State; an employee of a school in Oregon, near Portland; and a woman in Santa Clara County, Calif., in the heart of Silicon Valley.

Sixty-five cases of the virus have been reported in the United States, but until this week, all of them could be explained by overseas travel or contact with someone who had been ill. The three new cases on Friday, and a case earlier in the week, in California, were the first in the United States in which the cause was mysterious and unknown — a sign, experts warned, that the virus might now be spreading in this country.

“If we were worried yesterday, we are even more worried today,” said Dr. William Schaffner, an infectious disease specialist at Vanderbilt University Medical Center. “Now we have to ask: How widely, really widely, is this virus out there?”

As word emerged of the unexplained cases, local officials scrambled to trace everyone who had come in contact with those who were ill. California health officials said they were increasing testing. And in Washington State, officials suggested that people needed to prepare for the possibility of schools closing and businesses keeping workers home.

“We’re going to be increasingly recommending that people try and avoid crowds and close contact with other people,” Dr. Jeff Duchin, health officer for Public Health Seattle & King County, said. “We may get to a point where we want to recommend canceling large public gatherings — social events, sporting events, entertainment — until we get over a hump of what might be a large outbreak.”

The number of confirmed cases of the coronavirus around the globe passed 85,000 on Saturday, according to a tracker maintained by Johns Hopkins University that draws on data from four sources, including the World Health Organization.

Of the more than 85,400 cases recorded, more than 79,000 were in mainland China.

Qatar confirmed its first case of the virus on Saturday, its health ministry said, bringing the number of countries where the virus has been detected to at least 57.

The Coronavirus Outbreak

  • Answers to your most common questions:

    Updated Feb. 26, 2020

    • What is a coronavirus?
      It is a novel virus named for the crownlike spikes that protrude from its surface. The coronavirus can infect both animals and people and can cause a range of respiratory illnesses from the common cold to more dangerous conditions like Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome, or SARS.
    • How do I keep myself and others safe?
      Washing your hands frequently is the most important thing you can do, along with staying at home when you’re sick.
    • What if I’m traveling?
      The C.D.C. haswarned older and at-risk travelers to avoid Japan, Italy and Iran. The agency also has advised against all nonessential travel to South Korea and China.
    • Where has the virus spread?
      The virus, which originated in Wuhan, China, has sickened more than 80,000 people in at least 33 countries, including Italy, Iran and South Korea.
    • How contagious is the virus?
      According to preliminary research, it seems moderately infectious, similar to SARS, and is probably transmitted through sneezes, coughs and contaminated surfaces. Scientists have estimated that each infected person could spread it to somewhere between 1.5 and 3.5 people without effective containment measures.
    • Who is working to contain the virus?
      World Health Organization officials have been working with officials in China, where growth has slowed. But this week, as confirmed cases spiked on two continents, experts warned that the world was not ready for a major outbreak.

The health authorities in Britain were investigating the country’s first known case of the local transmission of the coronavirus.

The patient was believed to be a man from Surrey, in southeastern England, who had not traveled abroad recently, according to the BBC.

“The virus was passed on in the U.K.,” the chief medical officer for England, Chris Whitty, said in a statement on Friday. “It is not yet clear whether they contracted it directly or indirectly from an individual who had recently returned from abroad. This is being investigated and contact tracing has begun.”

The patient was being treated at a specialist center in Central London, Mr. Whitty said.

The latest diagnosis raised the number of coronavirus cases in Britain to 20, with 18 in England and one each in Northern Ireland and Wales.

The announcement came after a man who was infected on the Diamond Princess cruise ship in Japan became the first Briton to die from coronavirus.

“We’re still in the containment phase of this disease,” Edward Argar, a health minister, told BBC radio on Saturday. “That’s what our focus is on.”

In France, a third staff member at Tenon Hospital in Paris, the head of the infectious diseases department, was confirmed on Saturday as having tested positive for the coronavirus. None are in serious condition, officials said.

There are now 57 confirmed cases in the country, according to the World Health Organization, at least seven of them locally transmitted.

During a freewheeling rally in South Carolina on Friday night, President Trump accused his rivals of politicizing the coronavirus outbreak and perpetuating a “new hoax” against him, though there was no evidence for his claims.

“They tried the impeachment hoax,” Mr. Trump said of Democrats, who have criticized his administration’s response to the outbreak as inadequate. “They lost. It is all turning. Think of it. Think of it. And this is their new hoax.”

The president suggested that the news media had also fanned panic over the outbreak, accusing it of being in “hysteria mode.”

As proof that he had the outbreak under control, the president cited his decision to bar foreign nationals who had recently been in China from entering the United States. Experts have disagreed on the effectiveness of border closures and quarantines, but Mr. Trump appeared to tie his decision to his calls for tighter immigration policies.

“We must understand that border security is also health security,” he said.

Other members of Mr. Trump’s administration have also urged calm about the outbreak, though in less explicitly political terms. On Wednesday, Mr. Trump tapped Vice President Mike Pence to lead the country’s coronavirus response.

A Japanese man who was allowed to disembark from the Diamond Princess cruise ship after testing negative for the virus has now tested positive — after he took public transportation home, according to Japanese officials.

He is the fifth passenger to test positive after disembarking and being allowed to travel freely.

The man, who is in his 70s, was among nearly 1,000 people allowed to leave the virus-stricken cruise ship last week, after two weeks of quarantine in the port of Yokohama. The cruise ship, which originally carried 3,700 passengers and crew, became a hotbed of infection: More than 700 people who were aboard have tested positive, and at least six people have died.

The man had tested negative for the virus when he disembarked on Feb. 20, and he used public transportation to travel home to the city of Sendai, about 250 miles north. But on Friday, he developed a sore throat and a slight fever, according to an announcement by Sendai’s mayor. He was confirmed to be infected on Saturday. His family tested negative.

The high number of infections aboard the Diamond Princess has brought intense scrutiny upon Japanese officials, who ordered the quarantine. The disembarkation process has also been marred by mismanagement: Japan’s health minister was forced to apologize after 23 people left the ship without being tested.

Reports of coronavirus patients testing positive for the virus again after recovering have raised alarm, but health experts say it’s likely that faulty tests are to blame.

The Japanese government reported this week that a woman in Osaka had tested positive for the coronavirus for a second time, weeks after recovering from the infection and being discharged from a hospital. Chinese officials have announced similar cases.

But experts said that recovered patients should have at least short-term immunity.

The apparent reinfections could be the result of false negatives when the patients were discharged, said Marc Lipsitch, an epidemiologist at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health. The throat swabs used to examine for the virus can be technically tricky, and they can miss an infection elsewhere in the body.

“A negative test is not a definitive that there is no more virus in that person,” Dr. Lipsitch said.

Even if patients test positive long after they stop displaying symptoms, they may no longer pose a transmission risk to others, according to a report published on Thursday in JAMA. And even if there are occasional cases of true reinfection, so far, they do not seem to be occurring in large enough numbers to be a priority.

As the coronavirus outbreak spreads, the world’s biggest companies have begun painting a bleak picture of broken supply chains, disrupted manufacturing, empty stores and flagging demand for their wares.

The announcements by businesses like Mastercard, Microsoft, Apple and United Airlines offer a look at how the virus is affecting consumer behavior and business sentiment. These corporate bulletins — and what executives do in response — could determine how much economic damage the outbreak inflicts.

Some companies have expressed optimism that governments will curb new infections and that consumer spending in Europe and North America will be largely unscathed. But if executives see a threat beyond the first three months of the year, they may pare planned investments and even lay off workers.

The stock-market plunge this week, the steepest since the financial crisis, suggests that investors are bracing for a bad news.

“Everything is slowing down even more — and that has not been fully appreciated,” said Michael O’Rourke, chief market strategist at JonesTrading.

Many times in many countries, political leaders have tried to censor health officials and play down the risks of infection just as epidemics approached. This strategy has almost never worked, historians and former health officials said.

And if there are more deaths than leaders predict, stonewalling destroys the reputations of the leaders themselves.

This week’s efforts to reorganize the Trump administration’s chaotic response to the coronavirus outbreak risk falling into that pattern. The White House will coordinate all messaging, the public was told, and scientists in the government will not be popping up on television talk shows, saying what they think.

That may not be a winning strategy, experts warned. The stock market reacts to rumors, and the Federal Reserve Bank may succumb to political pressure. But pathogens, like hurricanes and tsunamis, are immune to spin.

“It’s crucially important that experts tell the public what they know and when they know it,” said Dr. Thomas R. Frieden, a former director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. “That’s the only way to earn and maintain the public trust that is essential to work together as a society and fight an epidemic.”

When the coronavirus emerged in Wuhan, China, residents in a nearby suburb thought they were safe. Zuoling New Town, a bustling community of retired farmers, factory workers and white-collar professionals, was 22 miles from the market where the outbreak appeared to have started.

But as the virus spread, Zuoling emerged as a stubborn hot spot of infections, and a somber lesson in how the state’s effort to contain the virus left some communities vulnerable. The leadership’s top-down campaign relied on grass-roots mobilization, and the very newness and isolation of Zuoling proved to be a weakness, depriving residents of food supplies, medical care and labor.

Residents crammed into the only large supermarket to stock up. Those worried about fevers crowded the local clinic, and many were sent back to their high-rise homes, sometimes spreading the virus. The nearest public hospital assigned to take patients was 10 miles away, making it difficult to get treatment without a car.

“I never imagined that this would hit our home,” said Zhang Jin, a 47-year-old resident. His mother, Yan Yinzhen, who was living with him, contracted what doctors believed was the coronavirus, possibly from a neighbor. Mr. Zhang, his wife and father all fell ill.

“We’ve lost confidence,” said Mr. Zhang, a school bus driver. “Nobody in the neighborhood took charge.”

Reporting and research were contributed by Peter Eavis, Donald G. McNeil Jr., Choe Sang-Hun, Thomas Fuller, Sheri Fink, Nicholas Bogel-Burroughs, Amy Qin, Sui-Lee Wee, Vivian Wang, Katie Rogers, Apoorva Mandavilli, Peter Robins, Norimitsu Onishi, Motoko Rich and Makiko Inoue.

Let's block ads! (Why?)


https://news.google.com/__i/rss/rd/articles/CBMiPmh0dHBzOi8vd3d3Lm55dGltZXMuY29tLzIwMjAvMDIvMjkvd29ybGQvY29yb25hdmlydXMtbmV3cy5odG1s0gFCaHR0cHM6Ly93d3cubnl0aW1lcy5jb20vMjAyMC8wMi8yOS93b3JsZC9jb3JvbmF2aXJ1cy1uZXdzLmFtcC5odG1s?oc=5

2020-02-29 10:50:00Z
52780638514307