Mediaboss Marketing

News Ghana

Roof Collapses in Eastern Afghanistan Refugee Camp, Kills 6 New York Times KABUL, Afghanistan An Afghan official says the roof of a shoddily constructed house in a refugee camp in eastern Afghanistan collapsed as a family was sleeping inside, killing 6 family members, including two women and two children. Attaullah ... Airstrike kills 6 IS militants in E. AfghanistanNews Ghana all 4 news articles »

Go here to read the rest:
Roof Collapses in Eastern Afghanistan Refugee Camp, Kills 6 - New York Times

Jan 23, 2017- Afghanistan remains one of the main challenges for the Trump administration with analysts suggesting that the new US President needs to review the strategy of the War on Terror in Afghanistan.

Donald Trump, who was sworn-in the 45th President of the US on January 20, in his maiden yet short speech at the inauguration ceremony, reportedly said: "We will unite the civilised world against radical Islamic terrorism to eradicate it completely from the face of the Earth."

However, he did not mention Afghanistan, where US-coalition forces have been fighting since October 2001 to eliminate Al Qaeda terrorists and the Taliban group, Xinhua news agency reported.

"The War on Terror, initiated by former US President George W. Bush in Afghanistan, and continued by former President Barack Obama would also last during Trump's tenure," renowned analyst General Atiqullah Omarkhil (Retd), formerly of the Afghan National Army, told Xinhua.

Backing his notion, the military expert and political observer said the "US itself doesn't want to end the war in Afghanistan".

He argued that "the US-led coalition forces might have already won the War on Terror when it had more than 150,000-strong multi-national troops in Afghanistan if it fought sincerely".

"The coalition forces overthrew the Al Qaeda-backed Taliban regime within weeks in late 2001 but the 'cat and mouse' war continues," the analyst highlighted.

The former army General expressed doubt over the US resolve in fighting terrorism sincerely in Afghanistan amid Kabul's desires that the new administration in Washington like its predecessors would continue to support the Afghan government in the war against the Taliban and associated groups.

Afghan Presidential Spokesman Haroon Chakhansori recently assumed that since relations between Kabul and Washington are strategic and based on common interests, it stands to reason the new administration would continue to back Afghanistan.

Similarly, Mujib Rahman Rahimi, the spokesman for the Afghan Chief Executive, also in talks with the media last week, accused Pakistan of supporting the Taliban and hoped the new US administration would support the Afghan government in the war against terror.

He hoped that the Trump administration would put pressure on Islamabad to give up backing militants operating in Afghanistan.

Former Afghan President Hamid Karzai also called upon Trump to review Washington's strategy in the War on Terror and pay attention to the terrorists' safe havens in Pakistan.

Afghans mostly accuse Pakistan of backing the Taliban and like-minded groups in fighting in Afghanistan, a claim utterly rebuffed by Islamabad as baseless.

Nevertheless, Omarkhil, as an eminent analyst, brushed aside the demand of Afghan officials from the new US administration as wishful thinking and observed: "The US is not serious in the War on Terror, otherwise, the Taliban militants might already have been diminished."

The war, launched by the US-led coalition forces against the Taliban regime for providing shelter to Al Qaeda leader Osama Bin Laden in October 2001, has claimed thousands of lives in Afghanistan.

"The US-led war in Afghanistan has yet to deliver," observed the analyst.

"Failure in the War on Terror has paved the way for the Islamic State terrorist group to emerge and kill Afghans. The countrymen will continue to suffer at the hands of terrorists in the years ahead," Omarkhil said.

Corroborating the notion, former Afghan diplomat and prominent analyst Ahmad Sayedi said Trump in his speech clearly indicated that he wants everything for his country and cautioned the government to be vigilant and do its best to stand on its own feet.

"With a backdrop of failure in the War on Terror over the past 15 years, Afghanistan will likely continue to remain a challenge for the US in the years ahead," the political expert observed.

The Afghan media has also warned the Trump administration that leaving Afghanistan in the lurch would eventually pave the way for terrorist outfits to regroup and destabilise the region and the world at large.

Published: 23-01-2017 16:04

View post:
Fighting terror in Afghanistan challenge for Trump - The Kathmandu Post

SIGN UP FOR OUR NEWSLETTER

In the final days of the Obama Administration, 23 refugees came through Slovakias Emergency Transit Centre from countries including Somalia, Afghanistan, Ethiopia, Iraq and Eritrea, all of which have struggled with terrorism, according to the International Organization for Migration.

SIGN UP FOR OUR NEWSLETTER

Slovakia has been sending refugees into the U.S. since 2009, with now 978 refugees already resettled into the country.

But, the latest group of refugees could be some of the last to enter the country for a while. The Trump administration has promised to halt the refugee resettlement program, at least from countries where the majority of refugees currently migrate from.

Where the newest refugees have migrated to in the U.S. remains unknown, but regions like Knoxville, Tennessee, have seen their fair-share of refugees entering their neighborhoods at record pace, as Breitbart Texas reported.

Like the refugees coming to the U.S. from Slovakia, the majority of refugees entering Knoxville are from Iraq, a country that has been torn apart by Islamic terrorism. Other refugees in Knoxville are from similar third-world areas, like the Democratic Republic of Congo and Somalia.

Just three years ago, there were only 170 refugees resettled in Knoxville. In 2015, that number slightly increased to 194. If the projections are sustained, there will be at least 476 brought to the region in two years.

John Binder is a contributor for Breitbart Texas. Follow him on Twitter at@JxhnBinder.

Go here to read the rest:
Refugee Flow From Somalia, Afghanistan Continues Into US - Breitbart News

Desert T20 Challenge January 22, 2017

ESPNcricinfo picks out five talking points from the inaugural Desert T20 which was won by Afghanistan

The Desert T20 was a short, sharp well-run tournament and the teams wanted to win it Peter Della Penna

1. No Papua New Guinea, No Problem

Of the Division One Associate countries, only Papua New Guinea declined an invitation to participate as the dates conflicted with most of their first-choice players appearing in the East Asia-Pacific squad at the Australian Country Championship. Those plans had been arranged well in advance while the Desert T20 was arranged at relatively short notice.

However, given the opportunity to participate in a future edition, it's doubtful that PNG would voluntarily skip it again. Though Namibia went winless, they provided stiff competition in their first two games, taking UAE down the last ball and Ireland into the final over. More than that, every team more or less brought their first choice squad and played at a high intensity level throughout regardless of there not being an ICC qualification or tournament spot up for grabs. The tipping point was Scotland's seven-run win over Netherlands as the Scots showed a total desperation to win. Scotland have been more vocal than most Associates about wanting more playing opportunities and were taking advantage of the current one on offer.

2. A Full Member or Two Wouldn't Hurt Though

The only carrot left to dangle in front of Associates that would make them even keener to come back would be the inclusion of Zimbabwe and one lower-ranked Full Members. Afghanistan are currently ranked ninth in the ICC's T20I rankings, ahead of both Zimbabwe and Bangladesh and though Bangladesh have traditionally been bunched together when discussing Full Member sides who aren't pulling their weight competing with the other Test nations, that is shifting thanks to Bangladesh's vast improvements in recent times.

Bangladesh qualified ahead of West Indies for the 2017 Champions Trophy and currently are in line for an automatic qualification spot for the 2019 World Cup too. T20 is a different kettle of fish but it wouldn't hurt for another team, whether it is Pakistan, Sri Lanka or Bangladesh to throw their hat into the ring.

3. The transformation of the Afghanistan fan base

At the 2010 World T20 Qualifier final in Dubai, more than 10,000 fans filled up Dubai International Stadium to be a part of history, getting a chance to witness Afghanistan win the tournament and move on to the 2010 World T20 in West Indies. The crowd that night seemed more there to support Afghanistan the country than Afghanistan the cricket team, with many seemingly first time fans cheering at awkward moments not entirely sure of what was happening.

Seven years later, the fan base has swelled in size and in knowledge. Those turning up throughout the tournament still have a peerless passion, literally seen walking through open stretches of desert without a form of transportation to get them to the stadium venues but determined to see their team play. But there is no doubting that they now also have a keen appreciation for the nuances of the game. It is best seen through the way they cheered Rashid Khan's spells, for even the wicketless moments were sensed for their excellence due to the impact he was having by building pressure. Afghanistan doesn't just have rabid cricket fanatics, but aficionados too.

4. Short and sweet

Fifteen games in seven days was a lot of cricket to squeeze into a week, but the ICC could learn a thing or two from how smoothly this tournament came off when the cricket is put first. Yes, it would have been great if these matches were televised, but commercial interests are the main reason why the World Cup is so bloated, extending to seven weeks despite having only two more teams.

Even the World T20 has morphed into a mini-marathon. The first one in 2007 lasted just two weeks while the most recent one in India was stretched into nearly twice that time at 27 days to squeeze out every last dollar possible from TV rights revenue. The only changes to the Desert T20 schedule that could have made the knockout stage better would be to have an off day, after the end of the group stage, and splitting the semis and final up by 24 hours rather than cramming them all into one day, something Afghanistan coach Lalchand Rajput said he hoped for regardless of his team's ability to go undefeated. Otherwise, it was a well-run event.

5. This tournament mattered

The reactions after the final told of how much winning the tournament meant to the Afghanistan players. It wasn't just about the Nawroz Mangal's farewell. When the seventh over began in the chase and only eight runs were needed to win, the entire team lined up on the boundary edge ready to sprint onto the field. When Mohammad Shahzad hit the winning runs, they hared out to the middle as if they had just won a major tournament title.

It would have been easy for Afghanistan to casually pooh-pooh the win as just another title for them because they were expected to win it from the start based on their ranking and the form entering the tournament of their nearest traditional rival, Ireland. But they wanted it badly. The other teams did too, especially Oman, Scotland and Ireland judging on their reactions upon losing the semi-final and final respectively. Even Hong Kong, with almost nothing to play for against Netherlands, not only upended them from making the semis but did so with enough oomph to give themselves an outside chance of progressing as well. Everyone wanted it badly and the intensity level from beginning to end legitimised the event as a quality tournament.

ESPN Sports Media Ltd.

Read more from the original source:
How about a Full Member and TV next time - ESPNcricinfo.com

The Afghanistan war was forgotten during the 2016 presidential campaign although the war is the longest American war in US history. After 16 years including NATO participation, the war is inconclusive - there is no peace and seemingly no end. The war has been between U.S./NATO and the Taliban. Originally the Taliban conquered many towns and provinces without fighting as the townsmen welcomed them because they were disappointed with the mujahidin internal intrigue just the same as the American public who were disappointed with the established political order in Washington during 2016 election that led to the victory of President-Elect Donald Trump.

The Taliban had control of Afghanistan when the tragedy of Bin Laden's 9/11 took place and caused a regime change in Afghanistan on October 7, 2001. The subsequent U.S. appointed regimes failed to make peace with the Taliban and bring into the fold the 30 million Afghan citizens.

Needless to say, the American war must end by President Trump as it has no purpose to continue. The engagement of NATO members in Afghanistan was arguably unlawful. The North Atlantic Treaty initially included 12 memberships in 1949. Its mission was a collective defense pact against the threat of the Soviet Union to protect Europe. The membership has been expanded to currently 28 countries. Under article 5 of the treaty an attack on any member is considered an attack on all members. However, the Soviet Union never attacked a member of NATO and therefore its provision was never put to use until the US-led invasion of Afghanistan.

The United States pressured NATO members to participate in the invasion of Afghanistan plus several additional non-NATO members such as Korea. NATO participation in Afghanistan has been a tragic failure, as evidenced in the British contingent in Helmand and the French contingent in the southern provinces of Afghanistan. Moreover citizens of France and England demonstrated against the war in Afghanistan and pressured their governments to withdraw their troops which they did prematurely. Besides the engagement of NATO in Afghanistan was arguably illegal as Afghanistan had not invaded any of the NATO member countries and therefore NATO's article 5 provisions did not apply in the particular case of Afghanistan. Historically, Afghanistan has had good relations with European countries.

During the U.S. presidential campaign candidate Trump opted to modify or withdraw from subsidizing NATO. President Trump should use this lever to redefine US Afghanistan policy.

Currently the Taliban appears to be prepared to make peace, negotiate with the U.S. government, and offer many advantages including eliminating the presence of ISIS and other Arab insurgents groups from Afghanistan soil and end Pakistan's long-term duplicity vis-i-vis U.S. interest. President Trump should not miss this opportunity to finally end the war.

Read the original:
President Trump's Opportunity To End American War In Afghanistan - Huffington Post