Archive for the ‘Afghanistan’ Category

UNHAS Afghanistan Standard Administrative and Operating Procedures (SAOP) – Part 1 – Afghanistan – ReliefWeb

2.INTRODUCTION

2.1CONCEPT OF OPERATION

UNHAS Afghanistan fulfills the demand from the humanitarian community for transportation of their staff, partners and cargo involved in humanitarian and development activities in Afghanistan. Aircraft chartered by WFP Aviation under UNHAS management provides airtransport to all eligible humanitarian organizations and their partners to all regions of Afghanistan. UNHAS provides both regular and special flights, which includes scheduled, charter, medevac, and security relocation flights for all its registered userorganizations. The aircraft have a monthly capacity of more than 3,000 passengers and 15,000 KG of light humanitarian cargo. The aircraft used in the operation includes airplanes and helicopter. UNHAS operates flights on a "point to point" basis within Afghanistan anddoes not offer orfacilitate transfer of passengers or their baggage to other flights outside the UNHAS system.

2.2 GENERAL PRINCIPLES

Aviation plays an important role in humanitarian operations around the world, especially in countries where overland transport is difficult or impossible due to insecurity, damaged or inadequate infrastructure, and challenging climatic conditions.Aviation allows the transport of humanitarian aid workers and humanitarian cargo to communities in some of the worlds most inaccessible places.During the Fifth Session of the United Nations High Level Committee on Management (HLCM) held in New York from 12-13 June 2003, the World Food Programme (WFP) accepted the request of the Committee to take the responsibility for administering air transport services for UN agencies and NGOs involved in humanitarian activities.

2.3 AVIATION STANDARDS

The operation of aircraft is a potentially dangerous and costly undertaking, and it is essential that it is conducted in a reliable and cost-effective manner.UNHAS bases its rules and procedures, staff qualification criteria and aircraft chartering procedures on the United Nations Aviation Standards for Peacekeeping and Humanitarian Air Operations (UNAVSTADS). The UNAVSTADS have been developed by the Department of Peacekeeping Operations (DPKO)/Department of Field Support (DFS) and the World Food Programme (WFP) with the assistance of the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO).In challenging and changing contexts, like conflict or disaster, the operational requirements and priorities invariably change over time and the operational response must adapt accordingly.

Resultantly, air operations are inherently flexible and can be quickly adapted to meet these new situations and requirements. The operational structure and these procedures will be adaptable and responsive to new and/or changed needs. To this end, these procedures will remain under constant review and subject to amendment as required.UNHAS receives permanent support from the WFP Aviation Service in the areas of staff recruitment, funds management, aircraft contracting and fleet management, internal quality assurance evaluations, safety related guidance and aviation training.

2.4 ADMINISTRATION OF SAOP

This SAOP has two parts and has been produced using WFP Aviation approved guidance and templates. UNHAS CATO is responsible for the contents and update of the SAOP.Part 1 of the SAOP, which includes the principles and policies for the humanitarian air service in Afghanistan, will be presented to the User Group Committee (UGC) for review and inputs before sharing with the Steering Committee (SC) for its endorsement and subsequent implementation.Electronic copies of part 1 will be shared with members of the Steering Committee, Registered Users, relevant UNHAS staff, Contracted air operators, the WFP Country Director (CD) and with WFP Aviation.Part 2 of the SAOP includes the technical part guiding UNHAS staff on management and operation of UNHAS activities in the country and is accepted by the WFP Chief Aviation.For operational and technical guidance for the management and operation of the UNHAS air operation, UNHAS will further develop and maintain guidance and standardize the operational procedures, which are published in part 2 of the SAOP.Temporary Revision. Urgent changes or updates to UNHAS guidance for staff and stakeholders will be issued in the form of Temporary Revisions (TR) under the authority of the head of UNHAS, which will be active until expired or included in the applicable controlled document as per the TR control sheet.NOTE: The contents of the SAOP are applicable to all UNHAS staff, contracted operators and UNHAS users and it is mandatory to follow and comply with them.

See the original post:
UNHAS Afghanistan Standard Administrative and Operating Procedures (SAOP) - Part 1 - Afghanistan - ReliefWeb

Eagle Down: The Last Special Forces Fighting The Forever War – Connecting Vets

Frustrated by much of the reporting (or lack thereof) on U.S. Special Forces in Afghanistan, Wall Street Journal journalist Jessica Donati set out to tell this story herself in a new book titled "Eagle Down." With the Department of Defense preventing embeds and the Pentagon spin insisting that there were no longer Green Berets in combat, Donati found her own way on the battlefields of Afghanistan.

Recently, she took a few minutes to answer some questions for Connecting Vets about the missions that Special Forces continue to conduct in Afghanistan and how she was able to tell their story.

JM: The first thing I want to ask -- and this seems be tothe premise of your new book "Eagle Down" -- twenty years after the invasion and beginning of the Global War on Terror what exactly are U.S. Special Forces still doing in Afghanistan?

JD: This is exactly the premise of the book. In 2015, the Obama administration pulled most U.S. troops out of Afghanistan and claimed to have brought the war to a responsible conclusion." A curtain drew over U.S. military operations to support this claim, even though, as things got worse, U.S. SOF played a bigger and bigger role in keeping the country from collapse.

I found it frustrating as a journalist in Afghanistan to know the U.S. continued to have a critical role in the war, and have virtually no access to U.S. troops. In earlier years of the war, journalists could embed with soldiers pretty much anywhere. Just think of documentaries like Restrepo." You cant tell these stories without being there, and it seemed to me we were missing a big piece of the picture.

The US military continued to claim it was no longer in combat, even when soldiers were wounded and killed on the battlefield. As one senior SF officer told me later, we laughed at the idea we were not in combat.

The only way to piece together what was going on and it was far from ideal was from the Afghan side.

The Afghans were telling us that U.S. SOF were going in alongside Afghan commandos and other local forces, helping them recapture villages and cities from the Taliban. And it became clear that U.S. SOF were evolving into a sort of fire-fighting force, putting out fires all across the country, to keep towns and cities from falling to the Taliban. Meanwhile, all these operations were being kept secret to make it look like the Afghan government was holding its own.During the course of researching the book, I also found that U.S. SOF were also doing missions to kill or capture Taliban commanders, fight Islamic State, and so on.

I understand the need to keep some U.S. SOF operations secret, but when you turn ODAs into frontline troops or a strike force, then there should be some sort of public discourse about what theyre being asked to do. Especially when its clearly a short-sighted strategy. The Afghan government is becoming more corrupt, more authoritarian and more fractured over time instead of improving.

Now obviously, this has changed in the past year. As a result of the U.S.-Taliban deal, the Taliban have held off attacks on major cities and towns (with the notable exception of Lashkar Gah last year, which drew in yet another U.S. intervention to stop the city from falling). But if the U.S. cancels the withdrawal, as seems likely, we could see U.S. SOF go back to the firefighting model.

JM: In the book you mention that most embedded journalists with Special Operations tend to be Washington D.C. based as opposed to foreign correspondents like yourself because they find reporters like you are more often critical of the war. How did you go about gaining access to sensitive combat operations and personnel in Afghanistan?

JD: Yes and even then, it was literally like one or two journalists per year, in really restricted circumstances. Those journalists have built up their careers working closely with SOF leadership, which is fine, but theres another side to the story.

When I was in Afghanistan, we found the best way to figure out what the Americans were doing was to talk to the Afghans working with them. We had a good relationship with the Afghan Ministry of Defense, and would regularly get permission from the Afghan side to embed with Afghan commandos or whatever force was in the area we wanted to report on.

The only problem with Afghan embeds was getting there, because they didnt have the resources to fly out to these places and the Americans wouldnt take us, so we often ended up just driving to bases out in the middle of nowhere, or taking a commercial flight to the closest airport, and then driving the rest of the way with a local fixer.

The other problem with Afghan embeds of course was being female. Usually, Afghan soldiers wouldnt have seen a woman for a very long time, so I was quite a spectacle, even though of course I wore a headscarf and local clothes, including an all-covering abaya. Its also worth mentioning such flowing garb was not ideal for patrols in Humvees or on foot, but I figured it was better than drawing attention to myself.

JM: If the Hollywood image of U.S. Special Forces from 2001 is a handsome Australian actor riding a horse into combat, what is that image of our soldiers in Afghanistan today?

JD: I think most Americans would be like we have soldiers in Afghanistan? Which is the result of a deliberate effort by U.S. leaders to stop talking about the war so they dont have to fix it or make a decision there.

And then I think if you told them oh there are Special Forces they will probably still think of a handsome Australian actor riding a horse into combat.

JM: From the perspective of the troops on the ground, be they a 22-year old NCO or a grizzled Special Forces Team Sergeant or Team Leader, through what lens to they view the war? What do they see as their objectives in the country?

JD: I think most of them focus on seeing the war through the narrow lens of their mission to train and advise Afghan forces, work with the commandos. Especially when theyre out there on missions. They see it as their jobs to help improve the Afghan commandos and make their lives better for the six-months that theyre in the country or whatever.

Ive talked to team sergeants that have been going back and fighting in the same places over and over again, and they are philosophical about it like were here to help the commandos and the bigger picture is up to the higher ups.

I think its probably a different story outside the job, when troops have a chance to reflect on the bigger picture and see how it all fits together. And then you start to hear guys talk about feeling like SOF are being used as a political pawn to put out fires in Afghanistan to make it look like policy in Washington D.C. is working.

JM: What was your impression of the Afghan military and paramilitary units? Did you assess them as prepared to stand on their own against the Taliban after U.S. withdrawal?

JD: I think there was a big variation among the Afghan soldiers that we saw. Village militias were often scary to us, because you had a feeling they could be on either side depending on the weather. The commandos, hit and miss, we met some incredibly impressive Afghan commandos, who were brave, smart and had been fighting forever.

What I always tried to remember when hearing that Afghan commandos or other local forces were lacking the will to fight, was that they were stuck there. Its not like they could get through a couple of tours and then they go back to a nice life in America. This was their lot an incredibly dangerous job, corrupt leadership, little prospect of promotion, almost non-existent healthcare, and little compensation for their families if they get killed. So, its not surprising that morale is very low, and these guys are generally out to ensure they can survive as long as possible.

I think that without a doubt, if the U.S. were to leave, there would be a very significant and relatively competent fighting force on the Afghan side that would stand on their own. Perhaps not for the Kabul government and Ghani, but for whoever they viewed as their leader. Especially the Tajiks and Hazaras, and many Tajiks especially make up the commandos, youre not going to see them just cave to the Taliban.

So, you might go from 350,000 Afghan forces on the payroll to like 20,000, maybe 50,000 who knows, but you will still have a significant force, which is why most people predict that a US departure would lead to a horrible civil war rather than the Taliban just rolling into Kabul.

JM: Based on your reporting, what do you see as America's end game in Afghanistan and is that even on the horizon?

Americas endgame has evolved over the years, from taking out Al Qaeda to building this great Western-style democracy. At least now, the US has stopped talking about staying until the Afghan government is ready to stand alone. The new goal seems to be to stay until the Afghans have a peace agreement. At least, thats what the Biden administration seems prepared to do stay to do counterterrorism i.e. more of the same, and help support the Afghan peace process.

There is some argument that no U.S. leader wants to be the one to give up, concede defeat and then possibly be responsible for some terrible Al Qaeda attack at some point in future. Apart from Trump, who could have cared less about how things played out in Afghanistan. But then, he had the national security establishment telling him it was too dangerous to leave and it could lead to an attack on U.S. soil. And even he didnt succeed in getting all troops out by the end of his term.

With the peace talks underway in Doha, theres a better chance than ever before, I suppose, that there could be an endgame in Afghanistan. Obviously, progress is slow and the rhetoric from the Taliban side isnt particularly encouraging. Theyre talking about having defeated the Americans and negotiating the terms of their victory. But then, the US side has also gone around claiming that Western values will be upheld in Afghanistan and so on.

As long as the peace talks continue and both sides are at least talking to one another, then I guess you could say there is hope, even if it is slight.

Eagle Down: The Last Special Forces fighting the forever war by Jessica Donati is available now.

Want to get more connected to the stories and resources Connecting Vets has to offer?Click hereto sign up for our weekly newsletter. Reach Jack Murphy:jack@connectingvets.comor@JackMurphyRGR.

View original post here:
Eagle Down: The Last Special Forces Fighting The Forever War - Connecting Vets

Situation of human rights in Afghanistan, and technical assistance achievements in the field of human rights – Report of the United Nations High…

Human Rights CouncilForty-sixth session22 February19 March 2021Agenda items 2 and 10Annual report of the United Nations High Commissionerfor Human Rights and reports of the Office of theHigh Commissioner and the Secretary-GeneralTechnical assistance and capacity-building

Summary

Submitted pursuant to decision 2/113 and resolution 14/15 of the Human Rights Council, the present report contains a description of the situation of human rights in Afghanistan from 1 January to 30 November 2020, and provides an overview of the work, including technical assistance, conducted by the Human Rights Service of the United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan (UNAMA) in cooperation with the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR).

The report is focused on the five principal areas of work of the Human Rights Service: the protection of civilians in armed conflict; children and armed conflict; the elimination of violence against women and the promotion of womens rights; the prevention of torture and respect for procedural safeguards; and civic space and the integration of human rights into peace and reconciliation processes. The High Commissioner highlights the technical assistance provided by the Human Rights Service and the achievements under these areas.

The report concludes with recommendations addressed to the Government, antigovernment elements and the international community.

I. Introduction

1. Submitted pursuant to decision 2/113 and resolution 14/15 of the Human Rights Council, the present report covers the period between 1 January and 30 November 2020. It was prepared in cooperation with the United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan (UNAMA).

2. The report focuses on the five priority areas of work of the Human Rights Service of UNAMA: the protection of civilians in armed conflict; children and armed conflict; the elimination of violence against women and the promotion of womens rights; the prevention of torture and respect for procedural safeguards; and civic space and the integration of human rights into peace and reconciliation processes.

3. During the period under review, the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) continued to provide technical and financial support to the UNAMA Human Rights Service.

II. Context

4. On 29 February, the United States of America and the Taliban signed an agreement for bringing peace to Afghanistan. The initial release of prisoners foreseen in the agreement was completed in September. On the same date, Afghanistan and the United States signed a joint declaration for bringing peace to Afghanistan, and on 12 September, the Afghanistan Peace Negotiations were inaugurated.

5. Civilians continued to bear the brunt of the armed conflict. While UNAMA and OHCHR documented a decrease in conflict-related civilian casualties in comparison with the same period in 2019, the level of civilian harm remained high. There were, however, short respites from violence the week before the signing of the agreement between the United States and the Taliban and during the two 3-day ceasefires during the religious celebrations of Eid al-Fitr and Eid al-Adha. The overall decrease was mainly caused by a drop in civilian casualties from the airstrikes of international military forces and suicide attacks carried out by anti-government elements. This was partly offset by an increase of civilian casualties from Taliban pressure-plate improvised explosive devices and Afghan Air Force airstrikes. The start of the Afghanistan Peace Negotiations has not yet led to a decrease in civilian casualties.

Read the original post:
Situation of human rights in Afghanistan, and technical assistance achievements in the field of human rights - Report of the United Nations High...

Afghanistan receives COVID-19 vaccine from India as ‘sign of generosity, commitment and strong partnership’ – Times Now

Representational image  |  Photo Credit: PTI

Kabul: India on Sunday handed over half a million doses of COVID-19 vaccines to Afghan officials as its gift to the people of the war-torn nation, a goodwill gesture described by Afghanistan as "a strong sign of generosity and sincere cooperation" of New Delhi with Kabul.

"1st Batch of COVID-19 vaccines arrives in Afghanistan. A consignment of half a million dose of COVID vaccine gifted by India to the people of Afghanistan arrived in Kabul today," the Indian Embassy in Kabul tweeted.

India's Charged'Affaires Raghuram S handed over the consignment of vaccines to Wahid Majrooh, Acting Minister of Public Health, it said.

"My profound gratitude to my friend @DrSJaishankar, the government & people of India for assisting 500k dozes of 'Made in India' vaccines to address #Covid spread in Afghanistan. A clear sign of generosity, commitment & strong partnership indeed," Afghan Foreign Minister Mohammed Haneef Atmar tweeted.

In a brief statement, the Afghan Foreign Ministry expressed its sincere gratitude for the assistance and delivery of the first shipment of the COVID 19 vaccine (COVISHIELD) by "Afghanistan's generous supporter and strategic partner, India."

"The donation of five hundred thousand doses of vaccine to tackle the spread of COVID in Afghanistan in the current difficult circumstances is a strong sign of generosity and sincere cooperation of the Republic of India with the government and people of Afghanistan," it said in the statement.

As a part of expanding cooperation between the two countries, the COVID relief assistance had been announced by India earlier on January 8 during a telephone call between Jaishankar and Atmar.

President Ashraf Ghani has expressed his gratitude for the timely assistance of India, the presidential palace said in a tweet.In the first phase, the vaccines will be administered to security and defense forces, health workers and other groups at the forefront of the fight against the virus, it added.

Majrooh said senior citizens and patients with chronic diseases such as heart disease, high blood pressure, and diabetes will receive the vaccine from this batch in the second phase.

In the second phase, senior citizens and people with chronic diseases will be immunized against the Coronavirus.Afghanistan has so far registered 55,359 COVID-19 cases and 2,413 fatalities. More than 48,041 people have recovered from the contagion.

India is one of the world's biggest drugmakers, and an increasing number of countries have already approached it for procuring the coronavirus vaccines.

India has already rolled out a massive coronavirus vaccination drive under which two vaccines, Covishield and Covaxin, are being administered to frontline health workers across the country.

While Oxford-AstraZeneca's Covishield is being manufactured by the Serum Institute, and the Covaxin is being produced by Bharat Biotech.

The Ministry of External Affairs has said it will be ensured that domestic manufacturers will have adequate stocks to meet domestic requirements while supplying abroad.

Read the original:
Afghanistan receives COVID-19 vaccine from India as 'sign of generosity, commitment and strong partnership' - Times Now

Violence May Delay U.S. Troop Withdrawal From Afghanistan – The New York Times

KABUL, Afghanistan Both the Afghan government and its Taliban foes appear to be gearing up for a violent spring amid uncertainty over whether the Biden administration will meet a May 1 deadline for the withdrawal of all American troops from Afghanistan.

On Thursday, the Pentagon raised questions about whether the pullout agreed to in a February 2020 U.S.-Taliban peace deal would go ahead on schedule as the Biden administration reviews the agreement made by its predecessor. That statement followed bellicose remarks by Taliban and Afghan government officials, amplified by waves of violence across the country.

Without them meeting their commitments to renounce terrorism and to stop the violent attacks against the Afghan National Security Forces, its very hard to see a specific way forward for the negotiated settlement, John F. Kirby, the Pentagon spokesman, said at a news briefing. But were still committed to that.

Zabihullah Mujahid, a Taliban spokesman, said Friday on social media that Mr. Kirbys assertions were unfounded.

The agreement between the Taliban and the U.S. government started the withdrawal of U.S. and NATO forces from Afghanistan in exchange for counterterrorism pledges from the Taliban and a promise to push the Afghan government to release 5,000 prisoners. The move amounted to the strongest attempt yet by the United States to extricate itself from its longest war, potentially paving the way for the Talibans future inclusion in the Afghan government.

But the talks excluded the Afghan government and left it feeling sidelined and unheard, according to Afghan officials. Under former President Donald J. Trump, they said U.S. diplomats frequently ignored concerns from Kabul in an attempt to expedite the negotiations.

There are currently 2,500 U.S. troops in Afghanistan, down from 12,000 this time last year. And while the Afghan government favors the withdrawal of Western forces, it wants a slower timetable than the one agreed to with the Taliban.

Now, it faces the prospect that the uncertainty around meeting the troop withdrawal deadline could fuel even more violence.

With the peace talks between the Afghan government and the Taliban in Doha, Qatar, at a standstill, Washingtons review will examine the Talibans commitments to severing ties with terrorist groups and reducing violence as agreed.

U.S. officials have long insisted that the agreement was conditions based, and that if the Taliban does not meet those terms it would extend the presence of U.S. forces in the country.

The Taliban, gearing up for the spring fighting season, is already well positioned around several Afghan cities after making steady gains across the country in recent years.

But recent overtures from the Biden White House have sent a more reassuring message to President Ashraf Ghani of Afghanistan and other government officials, raising their hopes that they will no longer be sidelined and that the Americans will not leave any time soon.

Hamdullah Mohib, Afghanistans national security adviser, unleashed a harsh diatribe against the Taliban last week while speaking to a group of Afghan commandos at an air base outside Kabul, the capital.

They have proved that they dont have any desire for peace and that they are a terrorist group, said Mr. Mohib, who has a long history of spouting such sharp rhetoric. His latest remarks came on the heels of a phone call with his new U.S. counterpart, Jake Sullivan.

Afghan officials have said privately that Mr. Sullivans hourlong call restored a certain level of trust between the Ghani administration and the White House and made them confident that their voices will be heard as the peace talks in Doha continue.

On Thursday, the new secretary of state, Antony J. Blinken, talked with Mr. Ghani and expressed the U.S. desire for all Afghan leaders to support this historic opportunity for peace while preserving the progress made over the last 20 years.

Assurances from the White House that the Ghani administration will have ample lines of communication to Mr. Bidens cabinet seem to have also assuaged the Afghan governments concerns over the U.S. decision to retain Zalmay Khalilzad, the diplomat who spearheaded the U.S.-Taliban negotiations that excluded the Afghan government.

Mr. Khalilzad will be reporting to a very organized decision-making process, Mr. Ghani said during a virtual appearance at the Aspen Security Forum, adding that he expects a predictable relationship with the Biden administration.

Some Afghan officials distrust Mr. Khalilzad and were hostile to his dialogue with the Taliban under the Trump administration, particularly his pressure on them to release the roughly 5,000 Taliban prisoners with hopes that a reduction in violence would follow.

It didnt. But it did open the way for talks between the Afghan government and the Taliban that began in Doha in September.

Asfandyar Mir, a postdoctoral fellow at Stanford University, said that an additional complication for the Biden administration is that the Afghan government is a house divided with rivalries throughout.

Many Afghan officials say they believe that the Taliban have only a single interest: to seize power by force. And all sides in the conflict agree that missing the May troop withdrawal deadline would quickly change whatever equilibrium has been established on the countrys battlefields and could risk setting off a concerted Taliban effort to enter cities.

In the meantime, regional powers, especially Iran and Pakistan, are biding their time and waiting to see what comes next under Mr. Biden.

Iran, for instance, hosted Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar, the Talibans deputy leader, in Tehran on Wednesday, which could be perceived as demonstrating the countrys willingness to play a more active role in the talks.

Irans involvement in the Afghan war has shifted since 2001, underscoring the changing geopolitical currents over the wars duration. On one hand, Tehrans official line has denounced the return of the Taliban as a direct threat to Iran. But on the other, Iranian operatives have made quiet overtures to the insurgent group, offering weapons and other equipment, in Afghanistans southwest, Afghan officials say.

The Taliban does not trust the United States and we will fight any group that is a mercenary for the United States, Mr. Baradar was quoted as saying in the Iranian news media in an apparent reference to the Afghan government.

But just a month earlier, Irans foreign minister, Mohammad Javad Zarif, all but offered up an Iran-trained Afghan Shiite militia to serve the Kabul government in the fight against terrorism. He was speaking in an interview with an Afghan news outlet.

Officials here took that as a clear signal from its powerful neighbor that it intends to get further involved in the Afghan conflict.

Earlier this week, a Taliban delegation met with officials in Moscow, and on Friday, Abbas Stanekzai, a Taliban negotiator, told reporters that the Ghanis administration is not honest about peace.

Abdullah Abdullah, the chairman of the Afghan government council leading the peace negotiations, sounded a pessimistic note in an interview with The New York Times on Thursday.

The Taliban have taken a sort of maximalist position, Mr. Abdullah said. Before the negotiations, we were led to believe there would be a significant reduction in violence, he added.

The recent attitude of the Taliban has not been encouraging, Mr. Abdullah said, noting that the group had yet to make a promised break with Al Qaeda, the terror group responsible for the Sept. 11 attacks and the main reason U.S. forces invaded the country in 2001.

A report from the U.S. Treasury Department earlier this month indicated that Al Qaeda had only gained strength in Afghanistan and continued its ties with the Taliban throughout 2020.

Despite waves of targeted killings across the country striking fear in some of Afghanistans most populated cities, including Kabul the Afghan Independent Human Rights commission found that the number of civilian deaths had decreased by more than 20 percent compared with 2019.

The report also found that 8,500 civilians had been killed and wounded in Afghanistan in 2020.

Najim Rahim and Fahim Abed contributed reporting.

Continued here:
Violence May Delay U.S. Troop Withdrawal From Afghanistan - The New York Times