The Daily Mail (UK): The 25-year-old man has been charged with endangering his young son’s life; The two were among a group of 25 people whose boat reportedly capsized ; The unnamed father faces up to 10 years in prison if found guilty in Greece; Lawyers and NGOs have criticised the unusual legal action as another obstacle for those seeking asylum in Europe. Click here to read more (external link).
COVID-19: 228 New Cases, 15 Deaths Reported in Afghanistan
Tolo News: The Ministry of Public Health on Monday reported 228 new positive cases of COVID-19 out of 1,251 samples tested in the last 24 hours. The data by the ministry shows that the cumulative number of total cases is now 43,468, the number of total reported deaths is 1,632, and the total number of recoveries is 35,136. Click here to read more (external link).
India, Afghanistan Reject Terror-Related Charges by Pakistan
Ayaz Gul
VOA News
November 15, 2020
ISLAMABAD, PAKISTAN – Afghanistan and India Sunday refuted allegations they are the source of terrorist attacks in Pakistan and instead questioned counterterrorism credentials of their South Asian neighbor.
The strong rebuttal comes a day after Islamabad accused New Delhi of running some 66 militant training camps on Afghan soil to plot “terrorism” to destabilize Pakistan and hurt its economic partnership with China.
The Pakistani government, in a nationally televised news conference, presented what it said was “irrefutable evidence” to substantiate the charges.
“The so-called claims of ‘proof’ against India enjoy no credibility, are fabricated and represent figments of imagination,” Indian Foreign Ministry spokesman Anurag Srivastava said in a statement issued Sunday.
“We call upon Pakistan to end its support to cross-border terrorism…. Concocting documents and peddling false narratives will not absolve Pakistan of such actions,” Srivastava said.
He reiterated long-running Indian allegations that Pakistan trains Islamist militants and helps them infiltrate into Indian-administered Kashmir to foment separatist violence in the Muslim-majority region.
“The incessant infiltration of terrorists and induction of weapons to fuel terror activities continues unabated,” alleged Srivastava.
Pakistan, which administers one-third of Kashmir, denies the accusations, saying they are an attempt by the neighboring country to cover up alleged human rights abuses being inflicted on Kashmiris.
The two nuclear-armed rival nations have fought several wars and low-intensity conflicts over Kashmir since gaining independence from Britain in 1947. India and Pakistan claim the region in its entirety and it remains the primary source of bilateral military tension and acrimony.
Afghan denial
Officials in Afghanistan also rejected allegations that its territory or citizens were being used for carrying out subversive activities against Pakistan.
In a statement Sunday, the foreign ministry said that Afghanistan itself is a major victim of terrorism. Kabul, it said, is “committed to a policy of combating all forms of terrorism…and will never allow Afghan territory to be used for destructive activities against other countries.”
The statement noted that as the Afghan government is preparing for this week’s maiden visit to Kabul by Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Khan, it is expected Islamabad will raise “issues of bilateral interest and debate” through existing cooperation mechanisms between the two countries.
Pakistan and Afghanistan share a nearly 2,600-kilometer border but mutual ties are marred by mistrust and suspicion. Kabul accuses Islamabad of supporting the Afghan Taliban’s violent campaign aimed at dislodging the Afghan government.
For its part, Pakistan maintains that militant groups fleeing years of counterterrorism security operations have taken shelter in Afghan border areas and orchestrating cross-border attacks.
Pakistani army spokesman Major-General Iftikhar Babar on Saturday displayed what he said were documents, banking transactions worth millions of dollars, audio clips and details of contacts between Indian intelligence operatives and diplomats with fugitive Pakistani militants operating out of Afghanistan.
“Uncontrivable evidence reveals that Indian embassies and consulates operating along Pakistan’s borders have become hub of terror sponsorship against Pakistan…We have verifiable evidence of terrorists funding by India. Indian ambassadors in Afghanistan have been regularly supervising various terrorist activities,” Babar said.
Acting U.S. Defense Chief Signals Accelerated Withdrawal Of U.S. Troops

A file photo of American soldiers at an unknown location in Afghanistan.
Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty
November 15, 2020
Acting U.S. Defense Secretary Christopher Miller has signaled that he could accelerate the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Afghanistan and the Middle East.
In his first message to the U.S. armed services since his appointment by President Donald Trump, Miller wrote on November 13 that “all wars must end” and “it’s time to come home.”
He did not specifically mention Afghanistan or the Middle East, but did stress that the United States was still be committed to “finishing the war that Al-Qaeda brought to our shores in 2001,” a reference to the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks that led to the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan in a war that has lasted 19 years.
The United States currently has fewer than 9,000 troops in Afghanistan. The United States is also involved in military efforts to counter Al-Qaeda and its affiliates in the Middle East.
“This is the critical phase in which we transition our efforts from a leadership to supporting role,” Miller wrote. “Ending wars requires compromise and partnership. We met the challenge; we gave it our all.”
The Taliban militant group and the Afghan government are currently engaged in intra-Afghan talks, in keeping with a deal signed by the United States and the Taliban in Doha under which foreign forces are to leave Afghanistan by May 2021 in exchange for the Taliban committing to cut ties with Al-Qaeda and other international militant groups.
However, no breakthrough has been reported since Afghan government representatives and the Taliban inaugurated the negotiations in September, while violence has been ramping up throughout Afghanistan with the militant fighters attacking provincial capitals, in some case prompting U.S. air strikes.
Questions have also been raised over Al-Qaeda’s links with the Taliban, with United Nations monitors saying in a report released in June that the two continue to maintain ties.
Based on AFP, Reuters, and TOLOnews
Copyright (c) 2020. RFE/RL, Inc. Reprinted with the permission of Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, 1201 Connecticut Ave NW, Ste 400, Washington DC 20036.
Related
1TV Afghanistan Dari News – November 15, 2020
Militants destroyed 2 billion afghanis roads, bridges, culverts in Afghanistan

Taliban fighters (file photo)
1TV: Most of the roads, bridges and culverts have been built with funding from the Afghan government, Asian Development Bank and provincial communities. Most of the destroyed bridges and culverts have not been rebuilt yet. Click here to read more (external link).
205 New Cases of COVID-19, 12 Deaths Reported in Afghanistan
Tolo News: The Ministry of Public Health on Sunday reported 205 new positive cases of COVID-19 out of 691 samples tested in the last 24 hours. The data by the ministry shows that the cumulative number of total cases is now 43,240, the number of total reported deaths is 1,617, and the total number of recoveries is 35,092. Click here to read more (external link).
Trump’s New Anti-War Pentagon Adviser Looks to Thwart ‘Swamp’s’ Bid to Stay in Afghanistan

Macgregor
Michael Hughes: U.S. establishment politicians in both political parties, senior military leaders and the mainstream media are pulling out all the stops to ensure the United States remains on a near permanent war footing in places like Afghanistan and Syria. However, these designs took a serious blow recently when President Donald Trump replaced top Pentagon officials with many of his personal favorites. Top amongst these being a cowboy-guru former military commander by the name of Douglas Macgregor, who is pushing a peace-loving agenda that encompasses a quick exit from Afghanistan and defusing tensions with Tehran. Click here to read more.
Afghanistan Pinned Hopes For Change On Biden, But U.S. Likely To Stay Course Set By Trump

Joe Biden
Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty
November 14, 2020
Frud Bezhan
Afghan officials have been angered and alienated by what they view as U.S. President Donald Trump’s push for a hasty military pullout from Afghanistan without a comprehensive peace settlement.
Many in Kabul put their hopes on his Democratic rival, Joe Biden, winning the November 3 presidential election and providing more flexibility for the Afghan government in its contentious negotiations with the Taliban in Doha.
Kabul wants a slower withdrawal of American troops from Afghanistan and the possibility of renegotiating the terms of the U.S.-Taliban peace deal that excluded the Afghan government and which is seen as skewed in favor of the militants.
But analysts say President-elect Biden will likely stay the course set by Trump to end America’s 19-year war in Afghanistan, although they say he is likely to take a harder line against the Taliban.
“Biden largely agrees with the current U.S. policy — he supports the peace process and a U.S. withdrawal,” says Michael Kugelman, South Asia senior associate at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars in Washington.
“It’s largely the pacing of the withdrawal that Biden takes issue with,” adds Kugelman. “He favors a withdrawal, but a gradual and ‘responsible’ one.”
One-Sided Deal
For years, U.S. policy was to facilitate an Afghan-led, Afghan-owned peace process between the Kabul government and the Taliban. But with the Taliban refusing to negotiate with government officials — who they view as illegitimate — the peace process was deadlocked.
Controversially, U.S. policy changed in 2018 when the Trump administration opened direct negotiations with the Taliban in Qatar without the presence of the Afghan government. Eighteen months later, the sides signed a bilateral deal aimed at ending the war.
The deal gave the Taliban what it has craved for years: international legitimacy and recognition. Conversely, the agreement undermined the internationally recognized government in Kabul, which was not a party to the accord.
Under the agreement, all foreign forces are to leave Afghanistan by May in return for counterterrorism guarantees from the Taliban, which has pledged to negotiate a permanent cease-fire and a power-sharing agreement with the Afghan government.
Critics say Washington made too many concessions to the Taliban without getting much in return.
The agreement fell short of a core U.S. demand for the Taliban to publicly cut its ties with the Al-Qaeda terrorist network. It also did not tie the military pullout to the success of intra-Afghan peace talks or lay out how the United States would monitor and verify if the Taliban is sticking to its commitments.
The text of the deal also made no mention of a Taliban commitment to reduce violence, although it is believed the militant group agreed to stop attacks on major highways and urban centers.
The agreement also committed the Afghan government to free some 5,000 Taliban fighters. Kabul initially balked at the mass release but grudgingly accepted, staggering the freeing of the inmates in a way that delayed the peace talks by months.
Observers at the time said Kabul was deliberately stalling the process in hopes that Washington’s policy on Afghanistan would shift if Biden won the election.
Violating The Deal
Trump sent alarm bells ringing in October when he tweeted that he wanted to pull all American troops out of Afghanistan by Christmas, although his national-security adviser, Robert O’Brien, later said the number of U.S. troops would shrink from around 4,500 to 2,500 early next year.
In response, NATO chief Jens Stoltenberg said the military alliance would not leave Afghanistan until security conditions allow, highlighting divisions in the alliance over Trump’s rushed exit from the war-torn country.
The prospect of a premature U.S. withdrawal came despite the Taliban failing to fulfill its pledges under its deal with Washington.
The Taliban appears to have been upholding its commitment not to attack departing U.S. forces. But the militants have failed to fulfill a pledge to renounce the Al-Qaeda terrorist network, a longtime ally.
Meanwhile, the Taliban has intensified attacks on Afghan government forces and sought to seize more territory, despite U.S. officials saying the Taliban had agreed to reduce violence.
‘Bear No Responsibility’
Since Biden’s election victory, Afghan officials have demanded a review of the peace process.
“We hope that the process so far will be reviewed and reevaluated under the new government in the United States,” Afghan Second Vice President Sarwar Danish said on November 9.
He added: “As the government of Afghanistan, we didn’t sign this agreement. We were not a party to it. From a legal standpoint, we do not bear any responsibility about the details of this agreement.”
Afghan President Ashraf Ghani said on November 8 that he expected ties between Kabul and Washington to deepen in areas of counterterrorism and building peace.
“There has been no articulation on the part of the government as to how it wants the process to be reviewed,” says Ali Adili, a researcher at the Afghanistan Analysts Network, an independent think tank in Kabul.
“But it might want the new U.S. administration to support its call for a cease-fire, the talks to proceed on the government’s terms, and to come down hard on the Taliban in the face of its intensification of violence,” he adds.
The Taliban has said it expects Biden to abide by the agreement.
“We signed the agreement with the American government, not a person,” Mohammad Naeem, a spokesman for the Taliban, told AFP on November 8. “We hope that the process that has started will not be weakened but rather strengthened.”
‘Pay Closer Attention’
Analysts say Biden is likely to stick to the U.S.-Taliban deal, given his support for withdrawing American troops from Afghanistan.
“The current Trump strategy has two military components — advising and supporting Afghan forces and counterterrorism — and a diplomatic one which is peace talks,” says Jonathan Schroden, a security expert with the U.S.-based nonprofit research and analysis organization CAN.
“I don’t think that overall formula will change under Biden, but the trend of decreasing resources for the two military components is likely to continue,” he says.
Even if Biden wanted to renegotiate the deal, experts say the Taliban would refuse because the current deal is generous to the militants.
Biden is expected, however, to delay the military withdrawal considering his administration will conduct a policy review and peace talks that were planned in March only started in September due to delays and disputes between the Taliban and Afghan government.
Observers say Biden will also be stricter in enforcing the deal than Trump.
“Specifically, Biden will be paying more attention to the Taliban’s commitment to end cooperation with Al-Qaeda,” says Kugelman.
“I could envision the Biden administration threatening to hold up the withdrawal of the remaining U.S. troops next spring if there’s no indication, or insufficient evidence, that the Taliban has ended cooperation with Al-Qaeda.”
The United States invaded Afghanistan in 2001 and ousted the Taliban after they refused to hand over Al-Qaeda leaders who were behind the September 11 terrorist attacks in the United States that killed nearly 3,000 people.
The U.S.-Taliban agreement states that the Taliban “will not allow any of its members, other individuals or groups, including [Al-Qaeda], to use the soil of Afghanistan to threaten the security of the United States and its allies.”
But the deal does not include an explicit Taliban commitment to break off ties with Al-Qaeda.
If Biden’s concerns are not addressed, analysts say he is likely to push for a small, residual U.S. counterterrorism force in Afghanistan beyond the scheduled military withdrawal.
“This is what he’s long envisioned as the ideal U.S. troop posture in Afghanistan, and it would address his counterterrorism focus,” he adds. “But it could risk triggering a major disagreement with the Taliban, which wants all U.S. troops out.”
‘Counterterrorism Lens’
Analysts say Biden has long seen the war in Afghanistan through a counterterrorism lens.
When he was vice president, Biden vehemently opposed President Barack Obama’s troop surge in 2009.
The surge was part of Obama’s ambitious counterinsurgency strategy in which tens of thousands of additional troops were deployed to defeat the Taliban and billions of dollars were spent on winning the heart and minds of Afghans by building up infrastructure and establishing a well-functioning government.
But the expensive strategy failed and forced the Obama administration to consider peace talks as an alternative to end the war.
“I was totally against the whole notion of nation building in Afghanistan,” Biden said during the election campaign in February. “The only thing we should be doing is dealing with terrorism in that region.”
In comments that provoked widespread anger among Afghans, Biden added that there was “no possibility of uniting that country, no possibility at all of making it a whole country.”
“Biden consistently took a very narrow view of U.S. interests in Afghanistan — focused on defeating Al-Qaeda,” says Schroden. “I’d expect that narrow focus, [which is] now on Al-Qaeda and Islamic State, to continue.”
Copyright (c) 2020. RFE/RL, Inc. Reprinted with the permission of Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, 1201 Connecticut Ave NW, Ste 400, Washington DC 20036.
Related
