| AFGHANISTAN Islamic Republic of Afghanistan Jomhuri-ye Eslami-ye Afghanestan Joined United Nations: 19 November 1946 Human Rights as assured by their constitution Click here Updated 12/22/10 |
| CAPITAL |
| POPULATION |
| CHIEF OF STATE |
| SELECTION PROCESS |
Kabul
29,121,286 (July 2010 est.)
The president and two vice presidents are elected by direct vote for
a five-year term (eligible for a second term); if no candidate receives
50% or more of the vote in the first round of voting, the two
candidates with the most votes will participate in a second round; a
president can only be elected for two terms; election last held 20
August 2009
NOTE- remained unresolved during a lengthy period of vote
counting and fraud investigation. A run-off vote between incumbent
President Hamid Karzai and his main rival Abdullah Abdullah was
announced for November 7, 2009. On November 1, however,
Abdullah announced that he would no longer be participating in the
run-off because his demands for changes in the electoral commission
had not been met, and a "transparent election is not possible." A day
later, on November 2, 2009, officials of the election commission
cancelled the run-off and declared Hamid Karzai as President of
Afghanistan for another 5 year term.
Next scheduled election: 2014
a five-year term (eligible for a second term); if no candidate receives
50% or more of the vote in the first round of voting, the two
candidates with the most votes will participate in a second round; a
president can only be elected for two terms; election last held 20
August 2009
NOTE- remained unresolved during a lengthy period of vote
counting and fraud investigation. A run-off vote between incumbent
President Hamid Karzai and his main rival Abdullah Abdullah was
announced for November 7, 2009. On November 1, however,
Abdullah announced that he would no longer be participating in the
run-off because his demands for changes in the electoral commission
had not been met, and a "transparent election is not possible." A day
later, on November 2, 2009, officials of the election commission
cancelled the run-off and declared Hamid Karzai as President of
Afghanistan for another 5 year term.
Next scheduled election: 2014
HEAD OF GOVERNMENT
According to the Afghani Constitution, the President is both the
Chief of State and Head of Government
Chief of State and Head of Government
| DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS |
| ETHNIC GROUPS |
Pashtun 42%, Tajik 27%, Hazara 9%, Uzbek 9%, Aimak 4%, Turkmen 3%, Baloch 2%, other 4%
| RELIGIONS |
Sunni Muslim 80%, Shi'a Muslim 19%, other 1%
| GOVERNMENT STRUCTURE |
Islamic republic with 34 provinces (velayat, singular - velayat); Legal system is based on mixed civil and Shari'a law; has not accepted
compulsory ICJ jurisdiction
Executive: The president and two vice presidents are elected by direct vote for a five-year term (eligible for a second term); if no candidate
receives 50% or more of the vote in the first round of voting, the two candidates with the most votes will participate in a second round; a
president can only be elected for two terms; election last held 20 August 2009 (next to be held in August 2014)
Legislative: Bicameral National Assembly consists of the Wolesi Jirga or House of People (no more than 249 seats), directly
elected for five-year terms, and the Meshrano Jirga or House of Elders (102 seats, one-third elected from provincial councils for
four-year terms, one-third elected from local district councils for three-year terms, and one-third nominated by the president for
five-year terms)
note: on rare occasions the government may convene a Loya Jirga (Grand Council) on issues of independence, national sovereignty,
and territorial integrity; it can amend the provisions of the constitution and prosecute the president; it is made up of members of the
National Assembly and chairpersons of the provincial and district councils
elections: last held 18 September 2009 (next to be held for the Wolesi Jirga by September 2013; next to be held for the provincial
councils to the Meshrano Jirga by September 2013)
Judicial: Constitution establishes a nine-member Stera Mahkama or Supreme Court (its nine justices are appointed for 10-year
terms by the president with approval of the Wolesi Jirga) and subordinate High Courts and Appeals Courts; there is also a minister
of justice; a separate Afghan Independent Human Rights Commission established by the Bonn Agreement is charged with
investigating human rights abuses and war crimes
compulsory ICJ jurisdiction
Executive: The president and two vice presidents are elected by direct vote for a five-year term (eligible for a second term); if no candidate
receives 50% or more of the vote in the first round of voting, the two candidates with the most votes will participate in a second round; a
president can only be elected for two terms; election last held 20 August 2009 (next to be held in August 2014)
Legislative: Bicameral National Assembly consists of the Wolesi Jirga or House of People (no more than 249 seats), directly
elected for five-year terms, and the Meshrano Jirga or House of Elders (102 seats, one-third elected from provincial councils for
four-year terms, one-third elected from local district councils for three-year terms, and one-third nominated by the president for
five-year terms)
note: on rare occasions the government may convene a Loya Jirga (Grand Council) on issues of independence, national sovereignty,
and territorial integrity; it can amend the provisions of the constitution and prosecute the president; it is made up of members of the
National Assembly and chairpersons of the provincial and district councils
elections: last held 18 September 2009 (next to be held for the Wolesi Jirga by September 2013; next to be held for the provincial
councils to the Meshrano Jirga by September 2013)
Judicial: Constitution establishes a nine-member Stera Mahkama or Supreme Court (its nine justices are appointed for 10-year
terms by the president with approval of the Wolesi Jirga) and subordinate High Courts and Appeals Courts; there is also a minister
of justice; a separate Afghan Independent Human Rights Commission established by the Bonn Agreement is charged with
investigating human rights abuses and war crimes
| LANGUAGES |
Afghan Persian or Dari (official) 50%, Pashto (official) 35%, Turkic languages (primarily Uzbek and Turkmen) 11%, 30 minor
languages (primarily Balochi and Pashai) 4%, much bilingualism
languages (primarily Balochi and Pashai) 4%, much bilingualism
| BRIEF HISTORY |
Excavation of prehistoric sites by Louis Dupree, the University of Pennsylvania, the Smithsonian Institute and others suggests that
early humans were living in what is now Afghanistan at least 50,000 years ago, and that farming communities in Afghanistan were
among the earliest in the world. Afghanistan's known pre-Islamic past began with Aryan invasions around 2000 BCE and continued
with Persian, Median, Greek, Mauryan, Bactrian, and other phases in its history. Following the defeat of the Persian Achaemenids
in 329 BCE, Alexander the Great entered the territory of modern Afghanistan to capture Bactria, the area around the present-day
Balkh. After the defeat of Seleucus' invasion by Chandragupta, the Maurya Empire of India obtained the provinces of Southern
Afghanistan, including the Kabul Valley and modern Kandahar. Mauryan rule lasted roughly 100-120 years. It was most notable for
the introduction of Buddhism under Emperor Ashoka. Provincial governor under the Mauryas. Invasions by the Indo Greeks,
Scythians, Kushans, Parthians, White Huns, and Göktürks followed in succeeding centuries. Buddhas of Bamyan were the largest
Buddha statues in the world, dating back to the first century CE. Buddhas of Bamyan were the largest Buddha statues in the world,
dating back to the first century CE. During the Kushan rule, Afghanistan became the center of culture and learning. The Sassanians
and other Persian powers ruled most of Afghanistan before the coming of Muslim armies. The Shahis ruled eastern Afghanistan from
the mid-7th century until Turkic invasions in the 10th century CE. In 642 CE, Arabs invaded the entire region and introduced Islam.
Afghanistan--like all others conquered by the Arabs--had local rulers including the empire of Tang China, which had extended its
influence all the way to Kabul. The Khorasani Persian-Arabs controlled the western and northern areas until they were conquered
by the Ghaznavid Empire in 998. The Arab forces did not conquer all of Afghanistan. The southern and eastern parts of Afghanistan
became part of the Kingdom of Gandhara, ruled first by the Buddhist Shahi, from the 6th century to about 970, and then by the
Hindu Shahi which lasted through the 10th century in the area now known as Afghanistan, when it too was conquered by the
Muslim Ghaznavid Empire. Mahmud of Ghazni (998-1030) consolidated the conquests of his predecessors and turned Ghazna
(Ghazni) into a great cultural center as well as a base for frequent forays into India. The Ghaznavid dynasty was defeated in 1146 by
the Ghurids (Ghor), the Ghaznavid Khans continued to live in Ghazni as the 'Nasher' until the early 20th century, but they did not
regain their once vast power until about 500 years later when the Ghilzai Pashtuns's defeated the Safavid Persians in Kandahar.
Various princes and Seljuk rulers attempted to rule parts of the country until the Shah Muhammad II of the Khwarezmid Empire
conquered all of Persia in 1205. By 1219, the empire had fallen to the Mongols. Led by Genghis Khan, the invasion resulted in
massive slaughter of the population, destruction of many cities, including Herat, Ghazni, and Balkh, and the despoliation of fertile
agricultural areas. Following Genghis Khan's death in 1227, a succession of petty chiefs and princes struggled for supremacy until
late in the 14th century, when one of his descendants, Timur Lang, incorporated what is today Afghanistan into his own vast Asian
empire. Babur, a descendant of Timur and the founder of Moghul Empire at the beginning of the 16th century, made Kabul the
capital. Afghanistan was divided in many parts in the 16th, 17th and early 18th century. North were the Uzbeks, west was Safavid's
rule and east was the Mughal's and local Pashtun rule. In 1709, the Afghans (Pashstuns) decided to rise against the Persian
Safavids. The Persians were defeated very badly and the Afghans held Isfahan (Iran) from 1719-1729. Nadir Shah of Persia
pushed back the Afghans in the 1729 Battle of Damghan. In 1738, Nadir Shah conquered Kandahar, in the same year he occupied
Ghazni, Kabul and Lahore. After his death in 1747, the Durrani Pashtuns became the principal Afghan rulers. Ahmed Shah Durrani,
the founder of the Durrani Empire, established his rule in 1747 at Kandahar. Ahmad Shah, a Pashtun from the Abdali clan, was
elected King in a loya jirga after the assassination of Nadir Shah in the same year. Throughout his reign, Ahmad Shah consolidated
chieftains, petty principalities, and fragmented provinces into one country. His rule extended from Mashad in the west to Kashmir
and Delhi in the east, and from the Amu Darya (Oxus) River in the north to the Arabian Sea in the south. With the exception of a
9-month period in 1929, all of Afghanistan's rulers until the 1978 Marxist coup were from Durrani's Pashtun tribal confederation,
and all were members of that tribe's Mohammedzai clan after 1818. Dost Mohammed Khan gained control in Kabul. Collision
between the expanding British and Russian Empires significantly influenced Afghanistan during the 19th century in what was termed
"The Great Game." British concern over Russian advances in Central Asia and growing influence in Persia culminated in two
Anglo-Afghan wars and "The Siege of Herat" 1837-1838, in which Persians trying to retake Afghanistan and throw out the British
and Russians sent armies into the country waging wars with the British mostly around and in the city of Herat. The first (1839-1842)
resulted in the destruction of a British army; it is remembered as an example of the ferocity of Afghan resistance to foreign rule. The
second Anglo-Afghan war (1878-1880) was sparked by Amir Shir Ali's refusal to accept a British mission in Kabul. This conflict
brought Amir Abdur Rahman to the Afghan throne. During his reign (1880-1901), the British and Russians officially established the
boundaries of what would become modern Afghanistan. The British retained effective control over Kabul's foreign affairs.
Afghanistan remained neutral during World War I, despite German encouragement of anti-British feelings and Afghan rebellion
along the borders of British India. The Afghan king's policy of neutrality was not universally popular within the country, however.
Habibullah, Abdur Rahman's son and successor, was assassinated in 1919, possibly by family members opposed to British
influence. His third son, Amanullah, regained control of Afghanistan's foreign policy after launching the Third Anglo-Afghan war with
an attack on India in the same year. During the ensuing conflict, the war-weary British relinquished their control over Afghan foreign
affairs by signing the Treaty of Rawalpindi in August 1919. In commemoration of this event, Afghans celebrate August 19 as their
Independence Day.King Amanullah (1919-1929) moved to end his country's traditional isolation in the years following the Third
Anglo-Afghan war. He established diplomatic relations with most major countries and, following a 1927 tour of Europe and Turkey.
Mohammad Zahir Shah, Nadir Khan's 19-year-old son, succeeded to the throne and reigned from 1933 to 1973. Amid charges of
corruption and malfeasance against the royal family and poor economic conditions created by the severe 1971-72 drought, former
Prime Minister Mohammad Sardar Daoud Khan seized power in a military coup on July 17, 1973 while Zahir Shah was receiving
treatment for eye problems and therapy for lumbago in Italy. As disillusionment set in, on April 27, 1978, the PDPA initiated a
bloody coup, which resulted in the overthrow and murder of Daoud and most of his family. On December 25, 1979, the Soviet
army entered Kabul. This was the starting point of the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan and the Soviet war in Afghanistan, which
ended only in 1989 with a full withdrawal of Soviet troops under the Geneva Accords reached in 1988 between Afghanistan and
Pakistan. For over nine years, the Soviet Army conducted military operations against the Afghan mujahedin rebels. The American
CIA, Pakistan, and Saudi Arabia assisted in the financing of the resistance because of their anti-communist stance, and, in the case
of Saudi Arabia, because of their Islamist inclinations. Among the foreign participants in the war was Osama bin Laden, whose
Maktab al-Khidamat (MAK) (Office of Order) organization trained a small number of mujahideen and provided some arms and
funds to fight the Soviets. Bin Laden played only a limited part in this conflict and, in 1988, he broke away from the MAK with
some of its more militant members to form Al-Qaida, in order to expand the anti-Soviet resistance effort into a worldwide Islamic
fundamentalist movement. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, the Najibullah government was overthrown on April 18, 1992
when Abdul Rashid Dostum mutinied, and allied himself with Ahmed Shah Massoud, to take control of Kabul and declare the
Islamic State of Afghanistan. When the victorious mujahideen entered Kabul to assume control over the city and the central
government, internecine fighting began between the various militias, which had coexisted only uneasily during the Soviet occupation.
With the demise of their common enemy, the militias' ethnic, clan, religious, and personality differences surfaced, and civil war
continued. An interim Islamic Jihad Council was put in place, first led by Sibghatullah Mojadeddi for two months, then by
Burhanuddin Rabbani. Fighting among rival factions intensified. In reaction to the anarchy and warlordism prevalent in the country,
and the lack of Pashtun representation in the Kabul government, the Taliban, a movement of religious scholars and former
mujahideen, emerged from the southern province of Kandahar. In response to the Taliban support of Al Qaeda, the terrorist group
that perpetrated the September 11, 2001 attacks, the Taliban's refusal to assist the U.S. in prosecuting Al Qaeda, and the Taliban's
ruthless attack on women's rights (e.g., women were not allowed to see male doctors, but women were not allowed to attend
school, leaving women without medical care), the United States and its coalition allies launched an invasion of Afghanistan to oust
the Taliban government. Sponsored by the UN, Afghan factions met in Bonn, Germany and chose a 30 member interim authority
led by Hamid Karzai, a Pashtun from Kandahar. After governing for 6 months, former King Zahir Shah convened a Loya Jirga,
which elected Karzai as president and gave him authority to govern for two more years. Then, on October 9, 2004, Karzai was
elected as president of Afghanistan in the country's first ever presidential election.
Source: Wikipedia: History of Afghanistan
early humans were living in what is now Afghanistan at least 50,000 years ago, and that farming communities in Afghanistan were
among the earliest in the world. Afghanistan's known pre-Islamic past began with Aryan invasions around 2000 BCE and continued
with Persian, Median, Greek, Mauryan, Bactrian, and other phases in its history. Following the defeat of the Persian Achaemenids
in 329 BCE, Alexander the Great entered the territory of modern Afghanistan to capture Bactria, the area around the present-day
Balkh. After the defeat of Seleucus' invasion by Chandragupta, the Maurya Empire of India obtained the provinces of Southern
Afghanistan, including the Kabul Valley and modern Kandahar. Mauryan rule lasted roughly 100-120 years. It was most notable for
the introduction of Buddhism under Emperor Ashoka. Provincial governor under the Mauryas. Invasions by the Indo Greeks,
Scythians, Kushans, Parthians, White Huns, and Göktürks followed in succeeding centuries. Buddhas of Bamyan were the largest
Buddha statues in the world, dating back to the first century CE. Buddhas of Bamyan were the largest Buddha statues in the world,
dating back to the first century CE. During the Kushan rule, Afghanistan became the center of culture and learning. The Sassanians
and other Persian powers ruled most of Afghanistan before the coming of Muslim armies. The Shahis ruled eastern Afghanistan from
the mid-7th century until Turkic invasions in the 10th century CE. In 642 CE, Arabs invaded the entire region and introduced Islam.
Afghanistan--like all others conquered by the Arabs--had local rulers including the empire of Tang China, which had extended its
influence all the way to Kabul. The Khorasani Persian-Arabs controlled the western and northern areas until they were conquered
by the Ghaznavid Empire in 998. The Arab forces did not conquer all of Afghanistan. The southern and eastern parts of Afghanistan
became part of the Kingdom of Gandhara, ruled first by the Buddhist Shahi, from the 6th century to about 970, and then by the
Hindu Shahi which lasted through the 10th century in the area now known as Afghanistan, when it too was conquered by the
Muslim Ghaznavid Empire. Mahmud of Ghazni (998-1030) consolidated the conquests of his predecessors and turned Ghazna
(Ghazni) into a great cultural center as well as a base for frequent forays into India. The Ghaznavid dynasty was defeated in 1146 by
the Ghurids (Ghor), the Ghaznavid Khans continued to live in Ghazni as the 'Nasher' until the early 20th century, but they did not
regain their once vast power until about 500 years later when the Ghilzai Pashtuns's defeated the Safavid Persians in Kandahar.
Various princes and Seljuk rulers attempted to rule parts of the country until the Shah Muhammad II of the Khwarezmid Empire
conquered all of Persia in 1205. By 1219, the empire had fallen to the Mongols. Led by Genghis Khan, the invasion resulted in
massive slaughter of the population, destruction of many cities, including Herat, Ghazni, and Balkh, and the despoliation of fertile
agricultural areas. Following Genghis Khan's death in 1227, a succession of petty chiefs and princes struggled for supremacy until
late in the 14th century, when one of his descendants, Timur Lang, incorporated what is today Afghanistan into his own vast Asian
empire. Babur, a descendant of Timur and the founder of Moghul Empire at the beginning of the 16th century, made Kabul the
capital. Afghanistan was divided in many parts in the 16th, 17th and early 18th century. North were the Uzbeks, west was Safavid's
rule and east was the Mughal's and local Pashtun rule. In 1709, the Afghans (Pashstuns) decided to rise against the Persian
Safavids. The Persians were defeated very badly and the Afghans held Isfahan (Iran) from 1719-1729. Nadir Shah of Persia
pushed back the Afghans in the 1729 Battle of Damghan. In 1738, Nadir Shah conquered Kandahar, in the same year he occupied
Ghazni, Kabul and Lahore. After his death in 1747, the Durrani Pashtuns became the principal Afghan rulers. Ahmed Shah Durrani,
the founder of the Durrani Empire, established his rule in 1747 at Kandahar. Ahmad Shah, a Pashtun from the Abdali clan, was
elected King in a loya jirga after the assassination of Nadir Shah in the same year. Throughout his reign, Ahmad Shah consolidated
chieftains, petty principalities, and fragmented provinces into one country. His rule extended from Mashad in the west to Kashmir
and Delhi in the east, and from the Amu Darya (Oxus) River in the north to the Arabian Sea in the south. With the exception of a
9-month period in 1929, all of Afghanistan's rulers until the 1978 Marxist coup were from Durrani's Pashtun tribal confederation,
and all were members of that tribe's Mohammedzai clan after 1818. Dost Mohammed Khan gained control in Kabul. Collision
between the expanding British and Russian Empires significantly influenced Afghanistan during the 19th century in what was termed
"The Great Game." British concern over Russian advances in Central Asia and growing influence in Persia culminated in two
Anglo-Afghan wars and "The Siege of Herat" 1837-1838, in which Persians trying to retake Afghanistan and throw out the British
and Russians sent armies into the country waging wars with the British mostly around and in the city of Herat. The first (1839-1842)
resulted in the destruction of a British army; it is remembered as an example of the ferocity of Afghan resistance to foreign rule. The
second Anglo-Afghan war (1878-1880) was sparked by Amir Shir Ali's refusal to accept a British mission in Kabul. This conflict
brought Amir Abdur Rahman to the Afghan throne. During his reign (1880-1901), the British and Russians officially established the
boundaries of what would become modern Afghanistan. The British retained effective control over Kabul's foreign affairs.
Afghanistan remained neutral during World War I, despite German encouragement of anti-British feelings and Afghan rebellion
along the borders of British India. The Afghan king's policy of neutrality was not universally popular within the country, however.
Habibullah, Abdur Rahman's son and successor, was assassinated in 1919, possibly by family members opposed to British
influence. His third son, Amanullah, regained control of Afghanistan's foreign policy after launching the Third Anglo-Afghan war with
an attack on India in the same year. During the ensuing conflict, the war-weary British relinquished their control over Afghan foreign
affairs by signing the Treaty of Rawalpindi in August 1919. In commemoration of this event, Afghans celebrate August 19 as their
Independence Day.King Amanullah (1919-1929) moved to end his country's traditional isolation in the years following the Third
Anglo-Afghan war. He established diplomatic relations with most major countries and, following a 1927 tour of Europe and Turkey.
Mohammad Zahir Shah, Nadir Khan's 19-year-old son, succeeded to the throne and reigned from 1933 to 1973. Amid charges of
corruption and malfeasance against the royal family and poor economic conditions created by the severe 1971-72 drought, former
Prime Minister Mohammad Sardar Daoud Khan seized power in a military coup on July 17, 1973 while Zahir Shah was receiving
treatment for eye problems and therapy for lumbago in Italy. As disillusionment set in, on April 27, 1978, the PDPA initiated a
bloody coup, which resulted in the overthrow and murder of Daoud and most of his family. On December 25, 1979, the Soviet
army entered Kabul. This was the starting point of the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan and the Soviet war in Afghanistan, which
ended only in 1989 with a full withdrawal of Soviet troops under the Geneva Accords reached in 1988 between Afghanistan and
Pakistan. For over nine years, the Soviet Army conducted military operations against the Afghan mujahedin rebels. The American
CIA, Pakistan, and Saudi Arabia assisted in the financing of the resistance because of their anti-communist stance, and, in the case
of Saudi Arabia, because of their Islamist inclinations. Among the foreign participants in the war was Osama bin Laden, whose
Maktab al-Khidamat (MAK) (Office of Order) organization trained a small number of mujahideen and provided some arms and
funds to fight the Soviets. Bin Laden played only a limited part in this conflict and, in 1988, he broke away from the MAK with
some of its more militant members to form Al-Qaida, in order to expand the anti-Soviet resistance effort into a worldwide Islamic
fundamentalist movement. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, the Najibullah government was overthrown on April 18, 1992
when Abdul Rashid Dostum mutinied, and allied himself with Ahmed Shah Massoud, to take control of Kabul and declare the
Islamic State of Afghanistan. When the victorious mujahideen entered Kabul to assume control over the city and the central
government, internecine fighting began between the various militias, which had coexisted only uneasily during the Soviet occupation.
With the demise of their common enemy, the militias' ethnic, clan, religious, and personality differences surfaced, and civil war
continued. An interim Islamic Jihad Council was put in place, first led by Sibghatullah Mojadeddi for two months, then by
Burhanuddin Rabbani. Fighting among rival factions intensified. In reaction to the anarchy and warlordism prevalent in the country,
and the lack of Pashtun representation in the Kabul government, the Taliban, a movement of religious scholars and former
mujahideen, emerged from the southern province of Kandahar. In response to the Taliban support of Al Qaeda, the terrorist group
that perpetrated the September 11, 2001 attacks, the Taliban's refusal to assist the U.S. in prosecuting Al Qaeda, and the Taliban's
ruthless attack on women's rights (e.g., women were not allowed to see male doctors, but women were not allowed to attend
school, leaving women without medical care), the United States and its coalition allies launched an invasion of Afghanistan to oust
the Taliban government. Sponsored by the UN, Afghan factions met in Bonn, Germany and chose a 30 member interim authority
led by Hamid Karzai, a Pashtun from Kandahar. After governing for 6 months, former King Zahir Shah convened a Loya Jirga,
which elected Karzai as president and gave him authority to govern for two more years. Then, on October 9, 2004, Karzai was
elected as president of Afghanistan in the country's first ever presidential election.
Source: Wikipedia: History of Afghanistan
| ECONOMIC OVERVIEW |
Afghanistan's economy is recovering from decades of conflict. The economy has improved significantly since the fall of the Taliban
regime in 2001 largely because of the infusion of international assistance, the recovery of the agricultural sector, and service sector
growth. Despite the progress of the past few years, Afghanistan is extremely poor, landlocked, and highly dependent on foreign aid,
agriculture, and trade with neighboring countries. Much of the population continues to suffer from shortages of housing, clean water,
electricity, medical care, and jobs. Criminality, insecurity, weak governance, and the Afghan Government's inability to extend rule of
law to all parts of the country pose challenges to future economic growth. Afghanistan's living standards are among the lowest in the
world. While the international community remains committed to Afghanistan's development, pledging over $57 billion at three
donors' conferences since 2002, the Government of Afghanistan will need to overcome a number of challenges, including low
revenue collection, anemic job creation, high levels of corruption, weak government capacity, and poor public infrastructure.
Source: CIA World Factbook (select Afghanistan)
regime in 2001 largely because of the infusion of international assistance, the recovery of the agricultural sector, and service sector
growth. Despite the progress of the past few years, Afghanistan is extremely poor, landlocked, and highly dependent on foreign aid,
agriculture, and trade with neighboring countries. Much of the population continues to suffer from shortages of housing, clean water,
electricity, medical care, and jobs. Criminality, insecurity, weak governance, and the Afghan Government's inability to extend rule of
law to all parts of the country pose challenges to future economic growth. Afghanistan's living standards are among the lowest in the
world. While the international community remains committed to Afghanistan's development, pledging over $57 billion at three
donors' conferences since 2002, the Government of Afghanistan will need to overcome a number of challenges, including low
revenue collection, anemic job creation, high levels of corruption, weak government capacity, and poor public infrastructure.
Source: CIA World Factbook (select Afghanistan)
| POLITICAL CLIMATE |
The 2009 presidential election was characterized by lack of security, low voter turnout and widespread ballot stuffing, intimidation,
and other electoral fraud. The vote, along with elections for 420 provincial council seats, took place on August 20, 2009, but
remained unresolved during a lengthy period of vote counting and fraud investigation.Two months later, under heavy U.S. and ally
pressure, a second round run-off vote between incumbent President Hamid Karzai and his main rival Abdullah Abdullah was
announced for November 7, 2009. On November 1, however, Abdullah announced that he would no longer be participating in the
run-off because his demands for changes in the electoral commission had not been met, and a "transparent election is not possible."
A day later, on November 2, 2009, officials of the election commission cancelled the run-off and declared Hamid Karzai as
President of Afghanistan for another 5 year term.
The current parliament was elected in 2005. Among the elected officials were former mujahideen, Taliban members, communists,
reformists, and Islamic fundamentalists. Surprisingly, 28% of the delegates elected were women, 3% more than the 25% minimum
guaranteed under the constitution. Ironically, this made Afghanistan, long known under the Taliban for its oppression of women, one
of the leading countries in terms of female representation.
The Supreme Court of Afghanistan is currently led by Chief Justice Faisal Ahmad Shinwari. Dominated by fundamentalist religious
figures, it has tried to ban a candidate in the 2004 presidential election for questioning polygamy laws, and limited the rights of
women, as well as overstepped its constitutional authority by issuing rulings on subjects not yet brought before the court. Though
many believed that Karzai would make reforming the Supreme Court a priority of his administration.
Source: Wikipedia: Politics of Afghanistan
and other electoral fraud. The vote, along with elections for 420 provincial council seats, took place on August 20, 2009, but
remained unresolved during a lengthy period of vote counting and fraud investigation.Two months later, under heavy U.S. and ally
pressure, a second round run-off vote between incumbent President Hamid Karzai and his main rival Abdullah Abdullah was
announced for November 7, 2009. On November 1, however, Abdullah announced that he would no longer be participating in the
run-off because his demands for changes in the electoral commission had not been met, and a "transparent election is not possible."
A day later, on November 2, 2009, officials of the election commission cancelled the run-off and declared Hamid Karzai as
President of Afghanistan for another 5 year term.
The current parliament was elected in 2005. Among the elected officials were former mujahideen, Taliban members, communists,
reformists, and Islamic fundamentalists. Surprisingly, 28% of the delegates elected were women, 3% more than the 25% minimum
guaranteed under the constitution. Ironically, this made Afghanistan, long known under the Taliban for its oppression of women, one
of the leading countries in terms of female representation.
The Supreme Court of Afghanistan is currently led by Chief Justice Faisal Ahmad Shinwari. Dominated by fundamentalist religious
figures, it has tried to ban a candidate in the 2004 presidential election for questioning polygamy laws, and limited the rights of
women, as well as overstepped its constitutional authority by issuing rulings on subjects not yet brought before the court. Though
many believed that Karzai would make reforming the Supreme Court a priority of his administration.
Source: Wikipedia: Politics of Afghanistan
| INTERNATIONAL DISPUTES |
Pakistan has built fences in some portions of its border with Afghanistan which remains open in some areas to foreign terrorists and
other illegal activities
other illegal activities
| REFUGEES AND INTERNALLY DISPLACED PERSONS (IDPS) |
IDPs: 132,246 (mostly Pashtuns and Kuchis displaced in south and west due to drought and instability) (2007)
| ILLICIT DRUGS |
World's largest producer of opium; poppy cultivation decreased 22% to 157,000 hectares in 2008 but remains at a historically
high level; less favorable growing conditions in 2008 reduced potential opium production to 5,500 metric tons, down 31 percent
from 2007; if the entire opium crop were processed, 648 metric tons of pure heroin potentially could be produced; the Taliban
and other antigovernment groups participate in and profit from the opiate trade, which is a key source of revenue for the Taliban
inside Afghanistan; widespread corruption and instability impede counterdrug efforts; most of the heroin consumed in Europe and
Eurasia is derived from Afghan opium; vulnerable to drug money laundering through informal financial networks; regional source
of hashish (2008)
high level; less favorable growing conditions in 2008 reduced potential opium production to 5,500 metric tons, down 31 percent
from 2007; if the entire opium crop were processed, 648 metric tons of pure heroin potentially could be produced; the Taliban
and other antigovernment groups participate in and profit from the opiate trade, which is a key source of revenue for the Taliban
inside Afghanistan; widespread corruption and instability impede counterdrug efforts; most of the heroin consumed in Europe and
Eurasia is derived from Afghan opium; vulnerable to drug money laundering through informal financial networks; regional source
of hashish (2008)
| HUMAN RIGHTS STATEMENTS, ANALYSIS AND CRITIQUES |
2009 Human Rights Report: Afghanistan
Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor
2009 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices
March 11, 2010
Afghanistan is an Islamic republic; population estimates range from 24 to 33 million. In August citizens voted in their second presidential
and first-ever contested election; after his challenger withdrew from a run-off election, the Independent Electoral Commission (IEC)
declared Hamid Karzai president for a second term. Citizens who participated in the election faced threats of insurgent violence; at least
31 persons were killed on August 20, election day, including 11 IEC members. The elections were marked by serious allegations of
widespread fraud; a Taliban offensive to disrupt the elections through public threats, fear-mongering, and violence; low turnout; and
insufficient conditions for participation by women.
The country's human rights record remained poor. Human rights problems included:
The security situation in the country deteriorated significantly during the year because of increased insurgent attacks, with civilians
continuing to bear the brunt of the violence. Armed conflict spread to almost one-third of the country, including previously unaffected
areas in the north and northeast. The marked deterioration in security posed a major challenge for the central government, hindering its
ability to govern effectively, extend its influence, and deliver services, especially in rural areas. The security environment also had an
extremely negative effect on the ability of humanitarian organizations to operate freely in many parts of the country, particularly in
providing life-saving care. Insurgents deliberately targeted government employees and aid workers. Efforts to contain the insurgency by
military and nonmilitary means continued. Reports of human rights violations were actively exploited and sometimes manufactured by
the Taliban and other insurgent groups for propaganda purposes.
According to the Ministry of Interior (MOI), 1,448 Afghan military personnel and 1,954 government employees, primarily police, died as
a result of the insurgency, including deaths by suicide attacks, roadside bombs, small-arms attacks, and targeted assassinations.
Civilian casualties increased sharply due to insurgent actions. According to the UN Assistance Mission to Afghanistan's (UNAMA)
Annual Report on the Protection of Civilians in Armed Conflict, the year was the deadliest for civilians since 2001, with 2,412 civilian
casualties, compared with 2,118 in 2008, an increase of 14 percent. Taliban and antigovernment elements were responsible for 67
percent of civilian casualties, killing 1,630 civilians, compared with 1,160 in 2008, an increase of 41 percent since 2008. The MOI
reported 2,590 civilians killed and 3,646 injured during the year. Taliban and antigovernment elements continued to threaten, rob, attack,
and kill villagers, foreigners, and nongovernmental organization (NGO) workers. As in 2008, suicide and improvised explosive device
(IED) attacks killed more Afghan civilians than any other tactic.
Progovernment forces also bore responsibility for civilian casualties. Airstrikes, whether seeking high-value targets or providing close air
support on battles located in areas with high concentrations of civilians, remained responsible for the largest percentage of civilian deaths
by progovernment forces; during the year UNAMA recorded 65 incidents of International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) airstrikes in
which reportedly more than 359 civilians were killed, down 28 percent from 552 killed in 2008.
Click here to read more »
Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor
2009 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices
March 11, 2010
Afghanistan is an Islamic republic; population estimates range from 24 to 33 million. In August citizens voted in their second presidential
and first-ever contested election; after his challenger withdrew from a run-off election, the Independent Electoral Commission (IEC)
declared Hamid Karzai president for a second term. Citizens who participated in the election faced threats of insurgent violence; at least
31 persons were killed on August 20, election day, including 11 IEC members. The elections were marked by serious allegations of
widespread fraud; a Taliban offensive to disrupt the elections through public threats, fear-mongering, and violence; low turnout; and
insufficient conditions for participation by women.
The country's human rights record remained poor. Human rights problems included:
- extrajudicial killings,
- torture, poor
- prison conditions,
- official impunity,
- prolonged pretrial detention,
- restrictions on freedom of the press,
- restrictions on freedom of religion,
- violence and societal discrimination against women,
- restrictions on religious conversions,
- abuses against minorities,
- sexual abuse of children,
- trafficking in persons,
- abuse of worker rights,
- the use of child soldiers in armed conflict
- child labor.
The security situation in the country deteriorated significantly during the year because of increased insurgent attacks, with civilians
continuing to bear the brunt of the violence. Armed conflict spread to almost one-third of the country, including previously unaffected
areas in the north and northeast. The marked deterioration in security posed a major challenge for the central government, hindering its
ability to govern effectively, extend its influence, and deliver services, especially in rural areas. The security environment also had an
extremely negative effect on the ability of humanitarian organizations to operate freely in many parts of the country, particularly in
providing life-saving care. Insurgents deliberately targeted government employees and aid workers. Efforts to contain the insurgency by
military and nonmilitary means continued. Reports of human rights violations were actively exploited and sometimes manufactured by
the Taliban and other insurgent groups for propaganda purposes.
According to the Ministry of Interior (MOI), 1,448 Afghan military personnel and 1,954 government employees, primarily police, died as
a result of the insurgency, including deaths by suicide attacks, roadside bombs, small-arms attacks, and targeted assassinations.
Civilian casualties increased sharply due to insurgent actions. According to the UN Assistance Mission to Afghanistan's (UNAMA)
Annual Report on the Protection of Civilians in Armed Conflict, the year was the deadliest for civilians since 2001, with 2,412 civilian
casualties, compared with 2,118 in 2008, an increase of 14 percent. Taliban and antigovernment elements were responsible for 67
percent of civilian casualties, killing 1,630 civilians, compared with 1,160 in 2008, an increase of 41 percent since 2008. The MOI
reported 2,590 civilians killed and 3,646 injured during the year. Taliban and antigovernment elements continued to threaten, rob, attack,
and kill villagers, foreigners, and nongovernmental organization (NGO) workers. As in 2008, suicide and improvised explosive device
(IED) attacks killed more Afghan civilians than any other tactic.
Progovernment forces also bore responsibility for civilian casualties. Airstrikes, whether seeking high-value targets or providing close air
support on battles located in areas with high concentrations of civilians, remained responsible for the largest percentage of civilian deaths
by progovernment forces; during the year UNAMA recorded 65 incidents of International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) airstrikes in
which reportedly more than 359 civilians were killed, down 28 percent from 552 killed in 2008.
Click here to read more »
21 May 2010
Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights
Forty-fourth session
Geneva, 3-21 May 2010
Consideration of reports submitted by States parties under Articles 16 and 17 of the Covenant
Concluding Observations of the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights
Afghanistan
A. Introduction
2. The Committee welcomes the submission of the combined second to fourth periodic reports of Afghanistan and the written
replies to its list of issues (E/C.12/AFG/Q/2-4).The Committee appreciates the frank and constructive dialogue with the delegation of the
State party, which included representatives from various ministries with expertise on the subjects covered by the Covenant.
3. The Committee notes with appreciation the contribution of the Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission to the
reporting process.
B. Positive aspects
4. The Committee welcomes the major legislative and institutional changes that have been introduced in the State party with a view
to promote and protect human rights, including economic, social and cultural rights, as well as its efforts to establish new programmes
and policies in line with its obligations under the Covenant and the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs).
5. The Committee welcomes the adoption of the New Constitution in 2004, which extensively address the areas covered by the
international human rights standards, including economic, social and cultural rights and the principle of non-discrimination.
C. Factors and difficulties impeding the implementation of the Covenant
12. The Committee acknowledges that Afghanistan is a country in transition that faces a wide range of challenges, and that has
been ravaged by armed conflicts for over three decades, in which it has experienced destruction of institutions and infrastructure that are
seriously impeding the implementation of the rights enshrined in the Covenant.
D. Principal subjects of concern and recommendations
13. The Committee, while noting that according to Article 7 of the new Constitution the State party shall observe the international
human rights treaties, remains concerned at the fact that the Covenant has not yet been fully incorporated into domestic law and that the
Covenant rights have not been invoked before, or directly enforced by, domestic courts, tribunals or administrative authorities.
The Committee recommends to the State party to accord the Covenant a legal status that would enable it to be invoked directly within
the domestic legal system. In this regard, the Committee refers to its general comment No. 9 (1998) on the domestic application of the
Covenant. The Committee requests the State party to include detailed information on decisions of national courts, tribunals or
administrative authorities giving effect to Covenant rights in its next periodic report.
Click here to read more »
Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights
Forty-fourth session
Geneva, 3-21 May 2010
Consideration of reports submitted by States parties under Articles 16 and 17 of the Covenant
Concluding Observations of the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights
Afghanistan
A. Introduction
2. The Committee welcomes the submission of the combined second to fourth periodic reports of Afghanistan and the written
replies to its list of issues (E/C.12/AFG/Q/2-4).The Committee appreciates the frank and constructive dialogue with the delegation of the
State party, which included representatives from various ministries with expertise on the subjects covered by the Covenant.
3. The Committee notes with appreciation the contribution of the Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission to the
reporting process.
B. Positive aspects
4. The Committee welcomes the major legislative and institutional changes that have been introduced in the State party with a view
to promote and protect human rights, including economic, social and cultural rights, as well as its efforts to establish new programmes
and policies in line with its obligations under the Covenant and the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs).
5. The Committee welcomes the adoption of the New Constitution in 2004, which extensively address the areas covered by the
international human rights standards, including economic, social and cultural rights and the principle of non-discrimination.
C. Factors and difficulties impeding the implementation of the Covenant
12. The Committee acknowledges that Afghanistan is a country in transition that faces a wide range of challenges, and that has
been ravaged by armed conflicts for over three decades, in which it has experienced destruction of institutions and infrastructure that are
seriously impeding the implementation of the rights enshrined in the Covenant.
D. Principal subjects of concern and recommendations
13. The Committee, while noting that according to Article 7 of the new Constitution the State party shall observe the international
human rights treaties, remains concerned at the fact that the Covenant has not yet been fully incorporated into domestic law and that the
Covenant rights have not been invoked before, or directly enforced by, domestic courts, tribunals or administrative authorities.
The Committee recommends to the State party to accord the Covenant a legal status that would enable it to be invoked directly within
the domestic legal system. In this regard, the Committee refers to its general comment No. 9 (1998) on the domestic application of the
Covenant. The Committee requests the State party to include detailed information on decisions of national courts, tribunals or
administrative authorities giving effect to Covenant rights in its next periodic report.
Click here to read more »
Freedom In The World 2010 Report
Political Rights Score: 6
Civil Liberties Score: 6
Status: Not Free
Ratings Change
Afghanistan’s political rights rating declined from 5 to 6 due to a deeply flawed presidential election that included massive
fraud, a compromised electoral management body, and low voter turnout due to intimidation.
Overview
President Hamid Karzai secured a new term in 2009 after his main challenger, Abdullah Abdullah, withdrew in protest from a runoff
election scheduled for November. The runoff had been called after the discovery of massive fraud reduced Karzai’s lead in the first
round, which was held in August following a controversial four-month delay. The deeply flawed voting took place as insurgent and other
violence continued to mount, spreading to the capital and previously calmer areas in the north, and further hampering local and
international efforts to rebuild Afghanistan’s shattered infrastructure and institutions.
Recognizing the failures of the military campaign and the growing frustration of their own citizens, the United States and its NATO allies
struggled in 2009 to implement better counterinsurgency practices and accelerate the training of Afghan soldiers and police. They also
boosted their troop commitments, in part to maintain security during the year’s presidential election, while the Afghan government
continued with attempts to contain the Taliban insurgency by nonmilitary means, partly through “reconciliation” efforts aimed at bringing
former antigovernment actors into the official fold. Nevertheless, thousands of civilians, security personnel, government officials, and
foreign aid workers were killed or injured during 2009in an increasing number of insurgent attacks, air strikes by coalition forces, and
clashes among factional militias and criminal gangs. Kidnapping also remained as a major concern.
The presidential election, held in August after a four-month delay, was characterized by low turnout, massive fraud, and international
paralysis. After Karzai initially emerged as the outright winner with more than 50 percent of the vote, the confirmation of large-scale
fraud significantly reduced his total, necessitating a November runoff against his main opponent, former foreign minister Abdullah
Abdullah. However, Abdullah withdrew before the vote could be held, arguing that the flaws in the electoral system had not been
adequately addressed, and Karzai was declared the winner.
Lingering doubts about the Karzai administration’s legitimacy and integrity, combined with the continued deterioration in security, posed
a major challenge to the central and provincial governments as they struggled to control areas under their jurisdiction, deliver basic
services, and engage in vital reconstruction efforts. These problems also had a negative effect on the ability of civil society and
humanitarian organizations to operate freely.
Click here to read more »
Political Rights Score: 6
Civil Liberties Score: 6
Status: Not Free
Ratings Change
Afghanistan’s political rights rating declined from 5 to 6 due to a deeply flawed presidential election that included massive
fraud, a compromised electoral management body, and low voter turnout due to intimidation.
Overview
President Hamid Karzai secured a new term in 2009 after his main challenger, Abdullah Abdullah, withdrew in protest from a runoff
election scheduled for November. The runoff had been called after the discovery of massive fraud reduced Karzai’s lead in the first
round, which was held in August following a controversial four-month delay. The deeply flawed voting took place as insurgent and other
violence continued to mount, spreading to the capital and previously calmer areas in the north, and further hampering local and
international efforts to rebuild Afghanistan’s shattered infrastructure and institutions.
Recognizing the failures of the military campaign and the growing frustration of their own citizens, the United States and its NATO allies
struggled in 2009 to implement better counterinsurgency practices and accelerate the training of Afghan soldiers and police. They also
boosted their troop commitments, in part to maintain security during the year’s presidential election, while the Afghan government
continued with attempts to contain the Taliban insurgency by nonmilitary means, partly through “reconciliation” efforts aimed at bringing
former antigovernment actors into the official fold. Nevertheless, thousands of civilians, security personnel, government officials, and
foreign aid workers were killed or injured during 2009in an increasing number of insurgent attacks, air strikes by coalition forces, and
clashes among factional militias and criminal gangs. Kidnapping also remained as a major concern.
The presidential election, held in August after a four-month delay, was characterized by low turnout, massive fraud, and international
paralysis. After Karzai initially emerged as the outright winner with more than 50 percent of the vote, the confirmation of large-scale
fraud significantly reduced his total, necessitating a November runoff against his main opponent, former foreign minister Abdullah
Abdullah. However, Abdullah withdrew before the vote could be held, arguing that the flaws in the electoral system had not been
adequately addressed, and Karzai was declared the winner.
Lingering doubts about the Karzai administration’s legitimacy and integrity, combined with the continued deterioration in security, posed
a major challenge to the central and provincial governments as they struggled to control areas under their jurisdiction, deliver basic
services, and engage in vital reconstruction efforts. These problems also had a negative effect on the ability of civil society and
humanitarian organizations to operate freely.
Click here to read more »
Australia's new Afghan prisoner policy could violate international law
14 December 2010
The Australian government’s newly announced policy of transferring prisoners detained in Afghanistan to Afghan and United States
forces could violate international law, Amnesty International warned today.
On 14 December 2010, Australian Minister of Defence, Stephen Smith, announced an agreement for managing detainees, with allegedly
‘high risk’ prisoners handed over to the US, ‘low risk’ prisoners handed to Afghan forces, and the remainder of those being held
released.
“The handover of detainees to the US and Afghan forces raises real concerns about potential human rights abuses,” said Sam Zarifi,
Amnesty International’s Asia-Pacific director.
“The US continues to hold prisoners without access to fair legal processes. And the Afghan National Directorate of Security, which runs
some of the detention facilities, is all too often linked to disturbing accounts of torture and mistreatment.”
Smith’s announcement of the new framework formalises arrangements between the three countries that have been in place since the
planned withdrawal of Dutch forces from Uruzgan province on 1 August 2010. Until that time, Dutch troops had taken responsibility for
detainees captured by the Australian Defence Force.
“This is a step backwards for the treatment of detainees in Afghanistan,” said Sam Zarifi. “Several major NATO members, including the
Dutch, had put in place safeguards to ensure that detainees would not be handed over to the US and recognized the real problems
associated with the NDS. With this agreement, the Australians seem to have failed to learn any of the hard lessons of the recent past.”
According to the Australian Ministry of Defence, Australia has apprehended more than 300 detainees in Afghanistan since 1 August who
were held at a temporary facility at Tarin Kowt in Uruzgan. Most were subsequently released, but 64 prisoners were handed over to US
or Afghan forces, with the majority transferred to the Afghans.
Click here to read more »
14 December 2010
The Australian government’s newly announced policy of transferring prisoners detained in Afghanistan to Afghan and United States
forces could violate international law, Amnesty International warned today.
On 14 December 2010, Australian Minister of Defence, Stephen Smith, announced an agreement for managing detainees, with allegedly
‘high risk’ prisoners handed over to the US, ‘low risk’ prisoners handed to Afghan forces, and the remainder of those being held
released.
“The handover of detainees to the US and Afghan forces raises real concerns about potential human rights abuses,” said Sam Zarifi,
Amnesty International’s Asia-Pacific director.
“The US continues to hold prisoners without access to fair legal processes. And the Afghan National Directorate of Security, which runs
some of the detention facilities, is all too often linked to disturbing accounts of torture and mistreatment.”
Smith’s announcement of the new framework formalises arrangements between the three countries that have been in place since the
planned withdrawal of Dutch forces from Uruzgan province on 1 August 2010. Until that time, Dutch troops had taken responsibility for
detainees captured by the Australian Defence Force.
“This is a step backwards for the treatment of detainees in Afghanistan,” said Sam Zarifi. “Several major NATO members, including the
Dutch, had put in place safeguards to ensure that detainees would not be handed over to the US and recognized the real problems
associated with the NDS. With this agreement, the Australians seem to have failed to learn any of the hard lessons of the recent past.”
According to the Australian Ministry of Defence, Australia has apprehended more than 300 detainees in Afghanistan since 1 August who
were held at a temporary facility at Tarin Kowt in Uruzgan. Most were subsequently released, but 64 prisoners were handed over to US
or Afghan forces, with the majority transferred to the Afghans.
Click here to read more »
Afghanistan: Taliban Body Count a Poor Measure of Success
For US Review, Security and Justice Are Best Tests of Progress, Not Kill/Capture Rates
December 15, 2010
(New York) - The Obama administration should not backtrack on its commitment to make the protection of Afghan civilians a priority as
it releases its assessment of the military situation in Afghanistan, Human Rights Watch said today. Strengthening civilian protection
requires continued efforts to reduce civilian harm in military operations, improve due process for detainees, and sever US ties with
abusive armed groups, Human Rights Watch said.
"There is a danger that under pressure for ‘results' the US will revert to Taliban body counts as a benchmark of success," said Rachel
Reid, Afghanistan researcher at Human Rights Watch. "President Obama should make clear that battlefield gains will be short-lived
without a military and political strategy that protects rights."
On December 16, 2010, the US government will release an assessment of the impact of an increase of 30,000 troops in Afghanistan over
the past year to its current strength of approximately 100,000 troops.
In recent months, President Hamid Karzai and others have repeatedly expressed concerns about civilian loss of life during military
operations by US and NATO forces in southern Kandahar province. Although accurate estimates of civilian casualties in these operations
have not yet been published, the International Committee of the Red Cross has reported a 25 percent increase in patients admitted with
conflict related injuries to Kandahar's Mirwais hospital - the main hospital in southern Afghanistan - in 2010, compared with 2009.
During a visit by Human Rights Watch to Mirwais hospital on October 30 and 31, doctors confirmed this rise, and patients told Human
Rights Watch of the deep concerns many Kandaharis have about increased levels of civilian casualties.
One young patient, Zahir Shah, age 20, told Human Rights Watch that he suffered shrapnel wounds and that two of his brothers,
Mohammad, age 8, and Wakil Ahmad, age 12, were killed in a missile strike following a US search operation in Zheray district,
Kandahar. "In the night the Taliban come and tell us that we can't leave our homes, and plant mines on our land," Shah said. "Then the
Americans come and do their operations and fire bombs and missiles on us, and we're caught in the middle."
Khodai Nazari, from Panjwaii district of Kandahar, said that a raid by US forces led to a firefight with the Taliban and US airstrikes. "I
wish they would not do these operations in our villages," Nazari said. "It would be safer for us if they stayed away."
Recent interviews, news releases, and tweets by US and NATO officials suggest that a rapid rise in the kill/capture rate of suspected
Taliban insurgents is being used as a sign of success in Afghanistan operations. Most recently NATO media officials told reporters that
more than 2,600 Taliban had been killed between June and December, with more than 4,000 arrests. This is in sharp contrast to counter-
insurgency guidelines issued as recently as August, which stated that US and NATO forces would not "kill or capture our way to
victory."
Click here to read more »
For US Review, Security and Justice Are Best Tests of Progress, Not Kill/Capture Rates
December 15, 2010
(New York) - The Obama administration should not backtrack on its commitment to make the protection of Afghan civilians a priority as
it releases its assessment of the military situation in Afghanistan, Human Rights Watch said today. Strengthening civilian protection
requires continued efforts to reduce civilian harm in military operations, improve due process for detainees, and sever US ties with
abusive armed groups, Human Rights Watch said.
"There is a danger that under pressure for ‘results' the US will revert to Taliban body counts as a benchmark of success," said Rachel
Reid, Afghanistan researcher at Human Rights Watch. "President Obama should make clear that battlefield gains will be short-lived
without a military and political strategy that protects rights."
On December 16, 2010, the US government will release an assessment of the impact of an increase of 30,000 troops in Afghanistan over
the past year to its current strength of approximately 100,000 troops.
In recent months, President Hamid Karzai and others have repeatedly expressed concerns about civilian loss of life during military
operations by US and NATO forces in southern Kandahar province. Although accurate estimates of civilian casualties in these operations
have not yet been published, the International Committee of the Red Cross has reported a 25 percent increase in patients admitted with
conflict related injuries to Kandahar's Mirwais hospital - the main hospital in southern Afghanistan - in 2010, compared with 2009.
During a visit by Human Rights Watch to Mirwais hospital on October 30 and 31, doctors confirmed this rise, and patients told Human
Rights Watch of the deep concerns many Kandaharis have about increased levels of civilian casualties.
One young patient, Zahir Shah, age 20, told Human Rights Watch that he suffered shrapnel wounds and that two of his brothers,
Mohammad, age 8, and Wakil Ahmad, age 12, were killed in a missile strike following a US search operation in Zheray district,
Kandahar. "In the night the Taliban come and tell us that we can't leave our homes, and plant mines on our land," Shah said. "Then the
Americans come and do their operations and fire bombs and missiles on us, and we're caught in the middle."
Khodai Nazari, from Panjwaii district of Kandahar, said that a raid by US forces led to a firefight with the Taliban and US airstrikes. "I
wish they would not do these operations in our villages," Nazari said. "It would be safer for us if they stayed away."
Recent interviews, news releases, and tweets by US and NATO officials suggest that a rapid rise in the kill/capture rate of suspected
Taliban insurgents is being used as a sign of success in Afghanistan operations. Most recently NATO media officials told reporters that
more than 2,600 Taliban had been killed between June and December, with more than 4,000 arrests. This is in sharp contrast to counter-
insurgency guidelines issued as recently as August, which stated that US and NATO forces would not "kill or capture our way to
victory."
Click here to read more »
Statement by President Karzai in the OSCE Summit in Astana
Dec 01, 2010
Mr. Chairman,
Under your able chairmanship, the Organization of Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) has made considerable progress and has
taken important steps in areas such as security, environmental protection and combating organized crime.
Afghanistan appreciates the increasingly close relationship with the OSCE since being granted the status of partner State in the year
2003. The 2007 Madrid Ministerial Council decision on OSCE engagement with Afghanistan marked a milestone in the extension of our
co-operation. Officials from concerned ministries of Afghanistan have benefited from a number of valuable programs. Another good
example has been the OSCE contribution in sending observers to Afghanistan’s elections, fighting against organized crimes and helping
build the capacity of our border security forces.
After three decades of war and destruction, Afghanistan has entered a new phase of its political, social and economic life where most of
the OSCE member states are supporting us in our efforts for reconstruction, capacity building and counter terrorism.
Afghanistan has achieved considerable progress in developing a vibrant economy, strengthened state institutions and rebuilding
infrastructure, empowering institutions of public service particularly health, education and promotion of rule of law.
We believe all these achievements give us the strength and determination to prepare Afghanistan to gradually take over the responsibility
for providing its own security within the next four years.
During the deliberations of the NATO Summit in Lisbon last month, we agreed with NATO and ISAF member states that the process of
transition to Afghanistan should be completed by the end of 2014. The agreement with the international community to hand over
responsibility to Afghans does not mean an end to our continued cooperation with NATO. We will continue to need support from NATO
and regional countries against the common threats we all face.
International terrorism is a major threat to Afghanistan, our region and the world. Afghanistan is the first and foremost victim of this
menace. While the Afghan people are keen participants of the campaign against terrorism, they are suffering the consequences of 30
years of war and instability. It is the utmost wish of the Afghan people to see peace and stability in Afghanistan. To that end, the Afghan
Consultative Peace Jirga in July 2010 recommended that a High Council for Peace be formed to pursue peace and reconciliation. We
hope that the international community and our neighbors will support Afghanistan in bringing peace to our people.
Click here to read more »
Dec 01, 2010
Mr. Chairman,
Under your able chairmanship, the Organization of Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) has made considerable progress and has
taken important steps in areas such as security, environmental protection and combating organized crime.
Afghanistan appreciates the increasingly close relationship with the OSCE since being granted the status of partner State in the year
2003. The 2007 Madrid Ministerial Council decision on OSCE engagement with Afghanistan marked a milestone in the extension of our
co-operation. Officials from concerned ministries of Afghanistan have benefited from a number of valuable programs. Another good
example has been the OSCE contribution in sending observers to Afghanistan’s elections, fighting against organized crimes and helping
build the capacity of our border security forces.
After three decades of war and destruction, Afghanistan has entered a new phase of its political, social and economic life where most of
the OSCE member states are supporting us in our efforts for reconstruction, capacity building and counter terrorism.
Afghanistan has achieved considerable progress in developing a vibrant economy, strengthened state institutions and rebuilding
infrastructure, empowering institutions of public service particularly health, education and promotion of rule of law.
We believe all these achievements give us the strength and determination to prepare Afghanistan to gradually take over the responsibility
for providing its own security within the next four years.
During the deliberations of the NATO Summit in Lisbon last month, we agreed with NATO and ISAF member states that the process of
transition to Afghanistan should be completed by the end of 2014. The agreement with the international community to hand over
responsibility to Afghans does not mean an end to our continued cooperation with NATO. We will continue to need support from NATO
and regional countries against the common threats we all face.
International terrorism is a major threat to Afghanistan, our region and the world. Afghanistan is the first and foremost victim of this
menace. While the Afghan people are keen participants of the campaign against terrorism, they are suffering the consequences of 30
years of war and instability. It is the utmost wish of the Afghan people to see peace and stability in Afghanistan. To that end, the Afghan
Consultative Peace Jirga in July 2010 recommended that a High Council for Peace be formed to pursue peace and reconciliation. We
hope that the international community and our neighbors will support Afghanistan in bringing peace to our people.
Click here to read more »
1 September 2010
Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission (AIHRC)
Statement on the report of the Working Group on the use of mercenaries as a means of violating human rights and impeding
the exercise of the rights of people to self-determination
Human Rights Council, 15th session
Mr. President
I have the honor of speaking on behalf of the Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission (AIHRC).
The Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission welcomes the comprehensive report of the Working Group on the use of
mercenaries as a means of violating human rights and impeding the exercise of the rights of people to self-determination. The report is
based on a detailed study and country mission to Afghanistan. The AIHRC thanks the Working Group for making reference to the
AIHRC’s role and findings.
The AIHRC concurs with the concerns raised by the Working Group about misconducts by security companies in Afghanistan and their
various implications.
The AIHRC is also concerned about the involvement of key figures of international and domestic security companies in corruption and
illegal businesses.
Such activities include, inter alia:
Creating conjuring insecure situations with the objective to securing their business and extending contracts;
Providing Anti Government Elements with bribes to ensure that the movements of convoys of military and humanitarian supplies are
safe; and
Providing recruitment facilities of security companies as safe haven for suspects or alleged perpetrators of human rights violations and
crimes against humanity.
The AIHRC is also concerned about the lack of the Government’s capacity to monitor security companies’ compliance with international
and domestic laws.
The AIHRC believes that if the Government fails to prosecute the managers and personnel of security companies for their misconducts,
citizens will lose their trust in the Afghan Government, which in turn will damage the Government’s accountability and transparency.
A recently adopted Presidential Decree foresees that all security companies, without exception, should be closed down within four
months, and staff members of the domestic companies should be recruited by Afghanistan’s National Police.
However, the AIHRC doubts that the Government will have sufficient capacity to implement these provisions within four months.
To fill this security gap, the AIHRC urges the international stakeholders to support the Afghan government in strengthening the national
security departments.
Click here to read more »
Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission (AIHRC)
Statement on the report of the Working Group on the use of mercenaries as a means of violating human rights and impeding
the exercise of the rights of people to self-determination
Human Rights Council, 15th session
Mr. President
I have the honor of speaking on behalf of the Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission (AIHRC).
The Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission welcomes the comprehensive report of the Working Group on the use of
mercenaries as a means of violating human rights and impeding the exercise of the rights of people to self-determination. The report is
based on a detailed study and country mission to Afghanistan. The AIHRC thanks the Working Group for making reference to the
AIHRC’s role and findings.
The AIHRC concurs with the concerns raised by the Working Group about misconducts by security companies in Afghanistan and their
various implications.
The AIHRC is also concerned about the involvement of key figures of international and domestic security companies in corruption and
illegal businesses.
Such activities include, inter alia:
Creating conjuring insecure situations with the objective to securing their business and extending contracts;
Providing Anti Government Elements with bribes to ensure that the movements of convoys of military and humanitarian supplies are
safe; and
Providing recruitment facilities of security companies as safe haven for suspects or alleged perpetrators of human rights violations and
crimes against humanity.
The AIHRC is also concerned about the lack of the Government’s capacity to monitor security companies’ compliance with international
and domestic laws.
The AIHRC believes that if the Government fails to prosecute the managers and personnel of security companies for their misconducts,
citizens will lose their trust in the Afghan Government, which in turn will damage the Government’s accountability and transparency.
A recently adopted Presidential Decree foresees that all security companies, without exception, should be closed down within four
months, and staff members of the domestic companies should be recruited by Afghanistan’s National Police.
However, the AIHRC doubts that the Government will have sufficient capacity to implement these provisions within four months.
To fill this security gap, the AIHRC urges the international stakeholders to support the Afghan government in strengthening the national
security departments.
Click here to read more »
RAWA, 01.06.2010
Peace with Criminals, War with People!
Statement of the Revolutionary Association of the Women of Afghanistan (RAWA) on “Consultative Peace Jirga”
By inviting criminals like the Taliban, the leaders of Gulbuddin Hekmatyar’s party and other “Jehadi leaders” to be part of a “Consultative
Peace Jirga,” Mr. Karzai is committing yet another treason against the Afghan people. Like any puppet, anti-people ruler, he initially
compromised with all the murderers associated with April 27th 1978 (former Russian puppets) and April 28 1992 (the Northern Alliance
warlords) and installed them in key posts of his government. He then went to the extent of assigning the two most notorious warlords
Karim Khalili and Qasim Fahim as his vice presidents. Now, he calls the Taliban and Hekmatyar party terrorists “Afghan sons” and tries
to either share power with them, or offer them the opportunity of asylum and amnesty to their leaders in any country of their choice. He
is also offering jobs to their gunmen so he can prolong his mafia-style rule with ease of mind.
A known terrorist from Hekmatyar’s Islamic Party called Farooq Wardak has been awarded the responsibility of running the Jirga.
Additionally, the delegates from Hekmatyar’s blood-thirsty party in Kabul were received like showbiz celebrities with local Afghan media
being offered in their service. The infamous criminals Mullah Wakil Ahmad Motawakal, Mullah Zaef, Humayun Jarir, Abdul Hadi
Arghandewal, Sabaoon, Mullah Rocketi and many other such terrorists of the Taliban and Islamic Party have had their reputations
sugarcoated in the past few years. All these things not only illuminate the true nature and goal of this Jirga, but also constitute an insult to
our people who have sought their liberation in the prosecution and punishment of Khaliqi, Parchami, Jehadi and Taliban criminals, but
instead still feel the heavy load of these brutal enemies on their wounded bodies.
Without receiving a green light from their US masters, the puppet government of Afghanistan could never raise a hue and cry about this
“Consultative Peace Jirga.” It could also not consider making peace with the Taliban and Islamic Party assassins while they are
apparently still on the “Black List” of the US government. This in itself proves that the US doesn’t just want a puppet government, but
also a stable and efficient government to easily change Afghanistan into a strong military base in Asia, extend its grip on the oil and gas
of the Central Asian Republics and maintain its supremacy in competition with rivals such as China and other regional powers. For the
US and allies, the deeply criminal, treacherous, anti-democracy and anti-independence essence of this puppet regime has no significance
at all. Apart from a handful of sold-off intellectuals of Afghanistan, this reality is crystal clear to even our children that the claim of the
US about bringing “democracy” and “women’s liberation” to Afghanistan was the biggest lie of the century. In fact, it was even more
striking than the claims of the US about the existence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and more comic than its pretence of
having an opposition to fundamentalist bands and governments.
At the height of a piercing outcry over a “Peace Jirga,” the Taliban intensified their inhuman brutalities by killing school children,
teachers, men, and women of Kabul and other cities, but Karzai and his spokesmen expressed with detestable indifference that,
“Inshallah, with national unity soon we will emerge from these problems”! If their own sister, mother or daughter were raped, killed
publicly or torn to pieces by suicide bombings, would they still call these killings “problems” they have with Taliban, their “disaffected
brothers”? But considering the power-lust and impunity of the ruling mafia, they may still not call the Taliban criminals, and their acts as
crimes, because despite having some differences, in the final stage they regard themselves from the same ranks and deem it necessary to
become united in order to run the state machinery in front of people’s wrath. Both the Taliban and the ruling mafia know well that the
day US/NATO occupation forces leave Afghanistan; all the tribes of Afghanistan will consider unity amongst themselves to topple their
bloody rule.
Click here to read more>>
Peace with Criminals, War with People!
Statement of the Revolutionary Association of the Women of Afghanistan (RAWA) on “Consultative Peace Jirga”
By inviting criminals like the Taliban, the leaders of Gulbuddin Hekmatyar’s party and other “Jehadi leaders” to be part of a “Consultative
Peace Jirga,” Mr. Karzai is committing yet another treason against the Afghan people. Like any puppet, anti-people ruler, he initially
compromised with all the murderers associated with April 27th 1978 (former Russian puppets) and April 28 1992 (the Northern Alliance
warlords) and installed them in key posts of his government. He then went to the extent of assigning the two most notorious warlords
Karim Khalili and Qasim Fahim as his vice presidents. Now, he calls the Taliban and Hekmatyar party terrorists “Afghan sons” and tries
to either share power with them, or offer them the opportunity of asylum and amnesty to their leaders in any country of their choice. He
is also offering jobs to their gunmen so he can prolong his mafia-style rule with ease of mind.
A known terrorist from Hekmatyar’s Islamic Party called Farooq Wardak has been awarded the responsibility of running the Jirga.
Additionally, the delegates from Hekmatyar’s blood-thirsty party in Kabul were received like showbiz celebrities with local Afghan media
being offered in their service. The infamous criminals Mullah Wakil Ahmad Motawakal, Mullah Zaef, Humayun Jarir, Abdul Hadi
Arghandewal, Sabaoon, Mullah Rocketi and many other such terrorists of the Taliban and Islamic Party have had their reputations
sugarcoated in the past few years. All these things not only illuminate the true nature and goal of this Jirga, but also constitute an insult to
our people who have sought their liberation in the prosecution and punishment of Khaliqi, Parchami, Jehadi and Taliban criminals, but
instead still feel the heavy load of these brutal enemies on their wounded bodies.
Without receiving a green light from their US masters, the puppet government of Afghanistan could never raise a hue and cry about this
“Consultative Peace Jirga.” It could also not consider making peace with the Taliban and Islamic Party assassins while they are
apparently still on the “Black List” of the US government. This in itself proves that the US doesn’t just want a puppet government, but
also a stable and efficient government to easily change Afghanistan into a strong military base in Asia, extend its grip on the oil and gas
of the Central Asian Republics and maintain its supremacy in competition with rivals such as China and other regional powers. For the
US and allies, the deeply criminal, treacherous, anti-democracy and anti-independence essence of this puppet regime has no significance
at all. Apart from a handful of sold-off intellectuals of Afghanistan, this reality is crystal clear to even our children that the claim of the
US about bringing “democracy” and “women’s liberation” to Afghanistan was the biggest lie of the century. In fact, it was even more
striking than the claims of the US about the existence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and more comic than its pretence of
having an opposition to fundamentalist bands and governments.
At the height of a piercing outcry over a “Peace Jirga,” the Taliban intensified their inhuman brutalities by killing school children,
teachers, men, and women of Kabul and other cities, but Karzai and his spokesmen expressed with detestable indifference that,
“Inshallah, with national unity soon we will emerge from these problems”! If their own sister, mother or daughter were raped, killed
publicly or torn to pieces by suicide bombings, would they still call these killings “problems” they have with Taliban, their “disaffected
brothers”? But considering the power-lust and impunity of the ruling mafia, they may still not call the Taliban criminals, and their acts as
crimes, because despite having some differences, in the final stage they regard themselves from the same ranks and deem it necessary to
become united in order to run the state machinery in front of people’s wrath. Both the Taliban and the ruling mafia know well that the
day US/NATO occupation forces leave Afghanistan; all the tribes of Afghanistan will consider unity amongst themselves to topple their
bloody rule.
Click here to read more>>
| Click map for larger view |
| Click flag for Country Report |
Hamid Karzai
President of the Islamic Republic
since 7 December 2004
President of the Islamic Republic
since 7 December 2004
| TRAFFICKING IN PERSONS |
None reported.
Mohammad Qasim Fahim Khan
First Vice President of the Islamic Republic
since 19 November 2009
First Vice President of the Islamic Republic
since 19 November 2009
Abdul Karim Khalili
Second Vice President of the Islamic Republic
since 7 December 2004
Second Vice President of the Islamic Republic
since 7 December 2004
