KABUL, Afghanistan – The goal is to transform Afghanistan into a modern nation, fueled by a U.S.-led effort pouring $60 billion into bringing electricity, clean water, jobs, roads and education to this crippled country. But the results so far — or lack of them — threaten to do more harm than good.

The reconstruction efforts have stalled and stumbled at many turns since the U.S. military arrived in 2001, undermining President Barack Obama’s vow to deliver a safer, stable Afghanistan capable of stamping out the insurgency and keeping al-Qaida from re-establishing its bases here.

Poppy fields thrive, with each harvest of illegal opium fattening the bankrolls of terrorists and drug barons. Passable roads remain scarce and unprotected, isolating millions of Afghans who remain cut off from jobs and education. Electricity flows to only a fraction of the country’s 29 million people.

___

EDITOR’S NOTE — The United States has made an enormous and costly commitment to building a new Afghanistan, but an Associated Press investigation finds that the results have been paltry. First in an occasional series, “Fixing Afghanistan.”

Read the whole hot breaking news

Was the Taliban behind the actions of a rogue Afghan army soldier who allegedly shot dead three British servicemen overnight while they slept? The militants claimed that the incident, which included a shooting and a grenade assault, was a premeditated attack, part of a new strategy to push back against coalition forces spread out in record numbers across southern Afghanistan’s battle zones. Although the inside-job claim remains unconfirmed, the killings cast a shadow on the quality and reliability of Afghan security forces deployed in a hostile region where they are being groomed to take the reins of the country’s own security and wean themselves away from dependence on western troops.

The incident took place at a British military outpost in Nahr-e-Saraj district, a Taliban stronghold near the provincial capital of Lashkar Gah. A senior Afghan National Army (ANA) officer identified the gunman as Talib Hussein, 23, a member of the ethnic Hazara minority from Ghazni province who had served for less than a year, mainly in remote swaths of Helmand, far from home. After killing a Major in his bed, the suspect fired a rocket-propelled grenade at the base’s command center that left a British lieutenant and Nepalese Gurkha dead and four others injured, before he managed to flee outside the wire. A manhunt has ensued even as the Taliban assert he is now with them in a “safe place.” (See pictures of life in the Afghan National Army.)

It’s a strange sequence of events, given how the Hazara were brutally persecuted under a Pasthun-dominated former Taliban regime that massacred thousands. Today, Hazara Taliban are all but unheard of due to the history of bad blood and differences of orthodoxy: Hazaras are Shi’ite Muslims, considered heretics by the rigidly Sunni Taliban hardliners. By way of explanation, Gen. Ghulam Farook Parwani, the deputy corps commander for the ANA’s southern forces, alleged that Hussein was a habitual hashish smoker, a widespread phenomenon within the ranks. Even if it’s true, however, this hardly provides a clear motive for the deadly outburst. (See images of the Afghan apocalypse.)

But this is also not the first time that Afghan security forces in Helmand have turned against their foreign partners. In November, five British soldiers were gunned down by an Afghan policeman they were training in Nad-e-Ali district. In that incident, there were reports the policeman might have lashed out after being repeatedly insulted. While these cases are still isolated, they are sure to amplify existing anxieties felt by NATO military planners over the status of Afghan security forces, expected to shoulder greater responsibility when foreign troops eventually start to withdraw. Though the Afghan army is held in higher regard than the national police, which is widely deplored as corrupt and erratic, when put to the test, billions in American taxpayer dollars nonetheless appear to have yielded less than stellar results.

Their shortcomings were cast in sharp relief when U.S. Marines launched a February offensive to clear the Taliban out of Marjah, the opium-poppy trafficking area in central Helmand. Despite a game fighting spirit exhibited by many of the Afghan troops involved, U.S. officers grew more and more frustrated with the ANA’s general inability to follow complex orders and coordinate attacks against a determined foe. As the campaign wore on, they were largely consigned to a secondary role. Much to the dismay of American officers, these troubles persist in parts of Marjah where the Taliban has since regrouped with help from outside fighters trying to chip away at the Marines’ hard-won gains.(See “Protecting U.S. Supply Lines in Afghanistan.”)

Read the whole hot breaking news

WASHINGTON, Jul 8 (IPS) – In 1984,
then-U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services
Margaret Heckler famously declared, “We hope to have such a
vaccine ready for testing in approximately two years.” The
vaccine in question would prevent AIDS and the goal Heckler
set has been missed by over 26 years.

During that time,
around 25 million people have died from
the disease and the search for a vaccine continues.

Read the whole hot breaking news

LONDON (AFP) –
One of Britain’s most famous newspapers, The Times, started charging readers to access its website Friday, the first non-specialist daily here to do so.

It will now cost one pound (1.4 dollars, 1.2 euros) for a daily subscription or two pounds for a weekly one to The Times or sister publication The Sunday Times, owned by media baron Rupert Murdoch’s News Corporation.

With newspaper sales around the world in decline and advertising increasingly moving online, owners have been searching for profitable business models for struggling newspapers, many of which have been forced to close in recent years.

Last August, Murdoch announced plans to charge for all his firm’s news websites.

Business paper The Financial Times makes readers pay for online content, while the Wall Street Journal — also part of Murdoch’s media empire — is currently the only major US paper charging readers for full access online.

Read the whole hot breaking news

Perhaps it’s considered good branding for a top-flight investment bank to issue its predictions for this year’s soccer World Cup: Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan and UBS have all published their own guides to the games. But these banks would do better to heed their own advice to investors: past performance is not indicative of future results. To the discerning fan, their predictions are unapologetically shackled to the tournament’s long history – and ignore major changes to the game over the past decade. (See photos of Johannesburg’s World Cup preparations.)

Goldman Sachs notes that of the 19 World Cup tournaments to date, 12 have been won by just three countries – Brazil (5), Italy (4) and Germany (3). Uruguay won twice in the early years, while Argentina won in 1978 and 1986. England and France have each won once. And at least one of Brazil, Italy, Germany and Argentina has played in every final.

Those who follow the sport closely, however, rate Spain the strongest of the European contenders – based on the team’s form over the past three years, its abundance of talent in every position, its players’ leading roles on Spanish and English club teams that have dominated the European Champion’s League over the past five years, and the mental focus of the same basic squad and coach that won Europe’s mini-World Cup two years ago. None of that impresses the sages at UBS, who dismiss Spain on the basis of history. “Spain – favored by many – will likely not do well, and could exit before the semi-final stage.”

Such unapologetically static analysis ignores the profound impact globalization has had on the game over the past decade. The World Cup is no longer a unique quadrennial moment of international football that pitches players from different continents against one another, often for the first time. Today, most of the elite players from all 32 countries at the World Cup play each other every week in European pro leagues – for which the tournament is simply a punctuation mark between seasons. The migration of players and coaches since the 1990s has profoundly altered the global balance of power in the game. African teams have grown into major international contenders, while within Europe the movement of players towards the dominant leagues of England, Spain and Italy has had a positive effect on a number of the national teams they represent during the World Cup. Those who predict England has its best chance in years – a perennial refrain – acknowledge that this year it’s because they’re being coached by an accomplished Italian, Fabio Capello. And Brazil are rated by many as favorites to win, not because they still play their free-flowing brand of “samba soccer” but because they’ve adopted many of the dour defensive habits that have been so successful for other teams over the years. (See a history of David Beckam’s career in photos.)

For institutions focused on predicting global trends, the bankers’ prognostications are unusually backward-looking – and, unfortunately, rather Eurocentric. Goldman Sachs‘ suggestion, for example, that the unheralded Swiss side will beat Chile and Honduras may be an example, or its assumptions that Denmark will finish ahead of Cameroon and Slovakia will shut out Paraguay. Eurocentricity reaches almost comical heights in Goldman’s entry on Portugal, which likens the journey of the team to South Africa to that of the 15th century explorers that opened the way to Portugal’s colonial era. The piece hails four of Portugals key stars, expressing the hope that the “sublime Pepe, Nani, Simao and Deco” will have the same “brave disposition [as the explorers] that made their country great 500 years ago”. But although Pepe and Deco may be playing for Portugal, they’re actually Brazilian, while Nani hails from Cabo Verde; their ancestors may not have been as fond of Portuguese colonial greatness.

Read the whole hot breaking news