Tuesday, July 30, 2013


U.S.Aiding the enemy?

Aiding the enemy? ‘US won’t stop paying Afghan contractors with militant links’

The U.S. Army won’t bar Afghan contractors aiding militants from receiving contracts for reconstructing the country, a watchdog said in a report detailing the waste of resources plaguing the effort.

The military say the evidence is not conclusive.

John F. Sopko, Special Inspector General, BiographyJohn Sopko, the Special Inspector General for Afghan Reconstruction (SIGAR), voiced his concerns over the military’s reluctance over the issue in Monday’s quarterly report.

He said the U.S. Army would not bar 43 individuals and companies from receiving contracts "despite detailed supporting information demonstrating that these individuals and entities are providing material support to the insurgency in Afghanistan."

"I am deeply troubled that the U.S. military can pursue, attack and even kill terrorists and their supporters, but that some in the U.S. government believe we cannot prevent these same people from receiving a government contract," Sopko wrote.

"In other words, they may be enemies of the United States, but that is not enough to keep them from getting government contracts," the report said.

The Army said SIGAR evidence were partially based on anonymous sources and was not sufficient to bar the contractors.

"The Army Procurement Fraud Branch did receive and review the 43 recommendations late last year, but the report did not include enough supporting evidence to initiate suspension and debarment under Federal Acquisition Regulations," said Matthew Bourke, an Army spokesman.

SIGAR did not identify the contractors in the report, but said that more than 80 of them were Afghan entities and the rest were based elsewhere in the region.

The watchdog raised the issue in its April report, warning that millions of US taxpayer money poured into Afghanistan are at risk of ending up in the hands of militants. 

In over a decade’s time, the US spent almost $100 billion in aid to the Afghan government, with most of the money going to the training of Afghan security forces.

In the latest report Sopko also lashed out at the misallocation of funds revealed during the audit.

He criticized the US Agency for International Development (USAID) over its "Stability in Key Areas Program", which is aimed at strengthening local governments in Afghanistan.

Taliban militant fighters stand with their weapons 

"It's troubling that after 16 months, this program has not issued its first community grant," Sopko said adding that under the program almost $50 million, or roughly a quarter of its budget, have been spent on conferences, overhead and workshops.

USAID objected to SIGAR's findings in a letter. It suggested that the inspector general misunderstood the program's purpose and also noted that it had made significant progress as of July 1 in delivering grants.

The organization said it was slow on progress with the program due to delays in finalizing agreements with key partners in the Afghan government over how the projects would be carried out.

The delays have led to dissatisfaction and anger in the communities, according to SIGAR report. “Such disappointment may actually result in further destabilization and disaffection toward the Afghan government,” it said.

Charbagh village in Nangarhar province, Afghanistan

Sopko, who has held his position as inspector general for over a year, is among skeptics of U.S. aid to Afghanistan. He has criticized the reconstruction programs over red tape and vulnerability to corruption plaguing the Afghan government.

The U.S. is wrapping up its Afghan campaign this year.

After the planned pullout of troops is completed by 2014, only a limited military contingent not directly engaged in combat is expected to stay.

Afghan security forces are then to completely take over responsibility for security in the insurgency-ravaged country.
Tags : , , , , ,



The idea behind the text.
Respect for the truth is almost the basis of all morality.
Nothing can come from nothing.

Popular Topics


Well, the way they make shows is, they make one show. That show's called a pilot. Then they show that show to the people who make shows, and on the strength of that one show they decide if they're going to make more shows.

Like you, I used to think the world was this great place where everybody lived by the same standards I did, then some kid with a nail showed me I was living in his world, a world where chaos rules not order, a world where righteousness is not rewarded. That's Cesar's world, and if you're not willing to play by his rules, then you're gonna have to pay the price.

You think water moves fast? You should see ice. It moves like it has a mind. Like it knows it killed the world once and got a taste for murder. After the avalanche, it took us a week to climb out. Now, I don't know exactly when we turned on each other, but I know that seven of us survived the slide... and only five made it out. Now we took an oath, that I'm breaking now. We said we'd say it was the snow that killed the other two, but it wasn't. Nature is lethal but it doesn't hold a candle to man.

You see? It's curious. Ted did figure it out - time travel. And when we get back, we gonna tell everyone. How it's possible, how it's done, what the dangers are. But then why fifty years in the future when the spacecraft encounters a black hole does the computer call it an 'unknown entry event'? Why don't they know? If they don't know, that means we never told anyone. And if we never told anyone it means we never made it back. Hence we die down here. Just as a matter of deductive logic.