Afghanistan's Education Ministry is barring schoolgirls older than 12 from singing at public events. Girls above 12 years will only be allowed to sing at women-only events.

Afghanistan: Schoolgirls over 12 years banned from public singing

A night with Buddha: How statue of religious leader returned virtually in Afghanistan

Russia has rubbished reports that have emerged in the media that Moscow had tried to keep India out of the Afghan peace negotiations. Russian Embassy in India has said that such reports are based on ill-informed sources.

Russia denies trying to keep India out of Afghan peace talks

Two Afghan youths have been sentenced to five-years-jail for setting Europe's largest camp on fire on the island of Lesbos in Greece, lawyers said on Wednesday.

About 13,000 people including pregnant women, the elderly, and young children were left without any shelter in two successive fires in September that destroyed the Moria camp.&nbsp;

Watch |&nbsp;&nbsp;

<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/qatar-inhumane-conditions-of-migrant-workers-6500-migrant-workers-have-died-365912/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>

The camp was poorly kept for years, but its destruction caused the migrants to sleep on the streets for days until another tent camp could be installed.&nbsp;

Legal Centre Lesvos, a civil organisation that gives legal services to migrants and represented the two Afghans said there had been a "lack of credible evidence" put forward and they would appeal against the verdict.&nbsp;

Also read | <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/refugee-who-set-herself-on-fire-in-greece-is-charged-with-arson-366422">Refugee who set herself on fire in Greece is charged with arson</a>

"While we are disappointed with today’s result, things could have been much worse for the two young men," the organisation in a statement said, as quoted by news agency AFP.&nbsp;

"The arson conviction alone could have carried a sentence of up to 10 years in prison."

Meanwhile, four other youths who have also been detained for involvement in the case, are awaiting their trial.&nbsp;

Migrant camps often catch fire, accidentally often, but sometimes by refugees to protest the wretched conditions of the camp and refusal of granting asylum.&nbsp;

Two Afghan youths have been sentenced to five-years-jail for setting Europe's largest camp on fire on the island of Lesbos in Greece, lawyers said on Wednesday. About 13,000 people including pregnant women, the elderly, and young children were left without any shelter in two successive fires in September that destroyed the Moria camp.

Two Afghan youths have been sentenced to five-years-jail for setting Europe's largest camp on fire on the island of Lesbos in Greece, lawyers said on Wednesday. About 13,000 people including pregnant women, the elderly, and young children were left without any shelter in two successive fires in September that destroyed the Moria camp. Watch | The camp was poorly kept for years, but its destruction caused the migrants to sleep on the streets for days until another tent camp could be installed. Legal Centre Lesvos, a civil organisation that gives legal services to migrants and represented the two Afghans said there had been a "lack of credible evidence" put forward and they would appeal against the verdict. Also read | Refugee who set herself on fire in Greece is charged with arson "While we are disappointed with today’s result, things could have been much worse for the two young men," the organisation in a statement said, as quoted by news agency AFP. "The arson conviction alone could have carried a sentence of up to 10 years in prison." Meanwhile, four other youths who have also been detained for involvement in the case, are awaiting their trial. Migrant camps often catch fire, accidentally often, but sometimes by refugees to protest the wretched conditions of the camp and refusal of granting asylum.

Two Afghan youths jailed for fire in Greek migrant camp

The war in Afghanistan is called the forever war. Is India prepared to join it? India has been asked to not fight the war but to help end it. The others on the talking table could be Russia, China, Pakistan, Iran, the US, the Afghan government and the Taliban.

For four decades now, Afghanistan has been locked in a state of war. A dialogue for peace began last year. People hoped that peace would follow. So far, that hasn't happened. The peace dialogue is stalled. The war is very much on. Violence has only increased. The promise of a ceasefire was never fulfilled.

This brings us to the second proposal. Blinken wants a United Nations-led peace conference for a peace deal in Afghanistan. The US secretary of state wants the UN to convene a foreign ministers'&nbsp;meeting. This will have representatives from Russia, China, Pakistan, Iran and India plus&nbsp;the Afghan government,&nbsp;the Taliban and the US.

With no peace deal yet, there is a growing threat of a 'spring offensive' by the Taliban. Apparently, they could make rapid military gains once the American troops are gone. The US is now making a big push to restart the dialogue for peace.

And Washington wants India's help.

It wants regional powers to have a greater say in the process. At the same time, it wants the Taliban to have a seat at the table.

That's not all, it wants the Taliban to join the government in Afghanistan. So, what is Joe Biden's plan for peace in Afghanistan? And how far is India prepared to go?

Since taking office, Joe Biden and his aides have been conducting a review. They have been assessing the work done by the Trump administration. Over the weekend, Team Biden began taking its first steps towards resuming the dialogue.

US Secretary of State Antony Blinken wrote a letter.&nbsp;It was addressed to Afghanistan's President Ashraf Ghani. A copy of this was shared by a local broadcaster in Afghanistan. This letter offers clues on what America plans to do.

The first move will be to accelerate the peace talks. They went on the backburner after the American presidential election. So the dialogue that began between the Afghanistan government and the Taliban will move ahead. But, they won't be the only ones involved. The dialogue will have more players.&nbsp;

Blinken believes regional powers "share an abiding common interest in a stable Afghanistan."

That's why he wants India involved. Soon after that letter got out, reports said US envoy Zalmay Khalilzad, the man leading the negotiations from America, dialled S Jaishankar, India's external affairs minister.

While both sides have not said much about what was discussed, It's safe to assume that Afghan peace process came up.

Why is this significant?

This is a major shift. The Trump administration kept India out. Trump said all India had done was build a library in Afghanistan. He undermined the contribution of regional powers. He was criticised for depending far too much on Pakistan for a peace deal in Afghanistan.

The Biden administration is looking to change that. Secretary of State Blinken is quite direct in his letter to the Afghan president. The US wants India to participate in the peace dialogue. New Delhi should welcome the proposal. It's always better to have a say than to observe from the sidelines.

Now, the most contentious part of America's plan is this one:&nbsp;An interim power-sharing agreement between the Taliban and the elected leaders of Afghanistan. In other words, the US wants the Taliban to join the Afghan government.

That's a huge concession for a group that has not stopped violent attacks. That's giving legitimacy to terrorism as an instrument of power grab.

Reports say there is a proposal to establish a 'Transitional peace government of Afghanistan',&nbsp;with representatives from both sides.

This will be followed by national elections. It seems like Afghanistan's president does not like this idea.

Two days ago,&nbsp;Ghani said&nbsp;he is ready to talk. But he believes the only way to form a government should be through an election.

"We stand ready to discuss holding free, fair and inclusive elections under the auspices of international community. We can also talk about the date of the elections and reach a conclusion," he said.

"I advise those who go to this or that gate to gain power, is that political power in Afghanistan has a gate, and the key is the vote of the Afghan people."

So Kabul is sticking to its guns, and rightly so. It wants a democratic setup. Why should the Taliban be rewarded with a role in the govt after all that they've done?

What is the guarantee that they will end the attacks?

What explains America's concession? Its desire to exit this war. They turned a whole country into a war laboratory and now, want terrorists to join the government,&nbsp;so that the US can stick to its deadline of withdrawing troops.

Yes, there are no easy options for Joe Biden. His government is caught between a rock and a hard place. But this is a situation of America's making, as much as anybody else's.

The war in Afghanistan is called the forever war. Is India prepared to join it? India has been asked to not fight the war but to help end it. The others on the talking table could be Russia, China, Pakistan, Iran, the US, the Afghan government and the Taliban.

The war in Afghanistan is called the forever war. Is India prepared to join it? India has been asked to not fight the war but to help end it. The others on the talking table could be Russia, China, Pakistan, Iran, the US, the Afghan government and the Taliban. For four decades now, Afghanistan has been locked in a state of war. A dialogue for peace began last year. People hoped that peace would follow. So far, that hasn't happened. The peace dialogue is stalled. The war is very much on. Violence has only increased. The promise of a ceasefire was never fulfilled. This brings us to the second proposal. Blinken wants a United Nations-led peace conference for a peace deal in Afghanistan. The US secretary of state wants the UN to convene a foreign ministers' meeting. This will have representatives from Russia, China, Pakistan, Iran and India plus the Afghan government, the Taliban and the US. With no peace deal yet, there is a growing threat of a 'spring offensive' by the Taliban. Apparently, they could make rapid military gains once the American troops are gone. The US is now making a big push to restart the dialogue for peace. And Washington wants India's help. It wants regional powers to have a greater say in the process. At the same time, it wants the Taliban to have a seat at the table. That's not all, it wants the Taliban to join the government in Afghanistan. So, what is Joe Biden's plan for peace in Afghanistan? And how far is India prepared to go? Since taking office, Joe Biden and his aides have been conducting a review. They have been assessing the work done by the Trump administration. Over the weekend, Team Biden began taking its first steps towards resuming the dialogue. US Secretary of State Antony Blinken wrote a letter. It was addressed to Afghanistan's President Ashraf Ghani. A copy of this was shared by a local broadcaster in Afghanistan. This letter offers clues on what America plans to do. The first move will be to accelerate the peace talks. They went on the backburner after the American presidential election. So the dialogue that began between the Afghanistan government and the Taliban will move ahead. But, they won't be the only ones involved. The dialogue will have more players. Blinken believes regional powers "share an abiding common interest in a stable Afghanistan." That's why he wants India involved. Soon after that letter got out, reports said US envoy Zalmay Khalilzad, the man leading the negotiations from America, dialled S Jaishankar, India's external affairs minister. While both sides have not said much about what was discussed, It's safe to assume that Afghan peace process came up. Why is this significant? This is a major shift. The Trump administration kept India out. Trump said all India had done was build a library in Afghanistan. He undermined the contribution of regional powers. He was criticised for depending far too much on Pakistan for a peace deal in Afghanistan. The Biden administration is looking to change that. Secretary of State Blinken is quite direct in his letter to the Afghan president. The US wants India to participate in the peace dialogue. New Delhi should welcome the proposal. It's always better to have a say than to observe from the sidelines. Now, the most contentious part of America's plan is this one: An interim power-sharing agreement between the Taliban and the elected leaders of Afghanistan. In other words, the US wants the Taliban to join the Afghan government. That's a huge concession for a group that has not stopped violent attacks. That's giving legitimacy to terrorism as an instrument of power grab. Reports say there is a proposal to establish a 'Transitional peace government of Afghanistan', with representatives from both sides. This will be followed by national elections. It seems like Afghanistan's president does not like this idea. Two days ago, Ghani said he is ready to talk. But he believes the only way to form a government should be through an election. "We stand ready to discuss holding free, fair and inclusive elections under the auspices of international community. We can also talk about the date of the elections and reach a conclusion," he said. "I advise those who go to this or that gate to gain power, is that political power in Afghanistan has a gate, and the key is the vote of the Afghan people." So Kabul is sticking to its guns, and rightly so. It wants a democratic setup. Why should the Taliban be rewarded with a role in the govt after all that they've done? What is the guarantee that they will end the attacks? What explains America's concession? Its desire to exit this war. They turned a whole country into a war laboratory and now, want terrorists to join the government, so that the US can stick to its deadline of withdrawing troops. Yes, there are no easy options for Joe Biden. His government is caught between a rock and a hard place. But this is a situation of America's making, as much as anybody else's.

India asked to lend a hand in Afghanistan

In June 2020, a New York Times report said Russia was secretly offering bounties for US troops in Afghanistan. There have been numerous such reports, accusations and mudslinging. The United States is now looking to exit Afghanistan militarily, aAfter wasting 20 years&nbsp;&nbsp;and a trillion dollars.

Russia does not have a clear roadmap for Afghanistan. But there's something that's clear. America's exit will create a power vacuum in Kabul, one that certain neighbours would be more than happy to exploit.

The only way to check that is by ushering in strong governance in Afghanistan. The US wants India to play a role in ensuring that. As South Asia's biggest player, there is no other country better suited to do so.

India and Afghanistan have a long diplomatic history. The two countries share enormous goodwill, culture and people-to-people contacts.

But India's pitch in Afghanistan may be queered by two countries. Both have their vested interests in Kabul and a common goal to keep India out. These two countries are China and Pakistan.

China wants a slice of every country. Afghanistan is all the more special. It has a geographical proximity to Xinjiang. Afghanistan was once a safe haven for China's Uighur Muslims between 1996 and 2001 when Taliban was in power.

China does not want history to repeat itself. It also wants two other things.

One, to protect its Belt and Road interests in the region, the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor, especially. It's an approximately 62 billion dollar project. China cannot risk the safety of Gwadar port.

And two, China wants to keep India out of Afghanistan. The only way to ensure all of this is by shaking hands with the Taliban. And China is doing just that.

In the 1990s China was anti-Taliban. Today? Not so much. In 2016, China joined the quadrilateral coordination group. In 2019, China invited Taliban representatives to Beijing. In short, China has embraced the Taliban.

China has also used its cheque books to maintain good ties with the Afghan government. Reports say China provided $70 million in military aid to the Afghan govt between 2016 and 18. Beijing maintains that it wants to work with both the Taliban and the Afghan leadership.

The Taliban has thanked China for its support, by maintaining a silence on the Uighur genocide. So the Taliban's increased legitimacy will be in China's favour. It will also make Pakistan happy. Pakistan and the Taliban are long-standing allies. Islamabad has also been supporting other terror outfits like the Haqqani Network.

Why?

This is Pakistan's way of keeping India out of Afghanistan. And this is where Pakistani and Chinese interests meet. These countries are co-conspiring in Kabul.

There is nothing in it for Afghanistan. In December 2020, 10 Chinese spies were caught in Kabul. A recent example of how China is planting chaos while maintaining a facade of cooperation. China will never let democracy flourish in Afghanistan.

It will also eventually try to debt-trap the country.

China is only waiting for the peace process before it starts pouring in more millions. Now consider all the conspiracy, the careful planning, the backstage deals

Have they queered India's pitch in Afghanistan?

The next question is, how far is India prepared to go? There is no doubt that Afghanistan will become, or rather has become, a flashpoint between India and China.

Back in the 1990s, India and China were together in the anti-Taliban alliance. Today, China has an outreach programme for the Taliban, while India was largely absent from the peace negotiations. That is not to say India has had no role in the country.

India has helped rebuild Afghanistan with roads, dams, a parliament building, a cricket stadium, scholarships, capacity building, and a lot more.

Does it translate into political capital? It certainly creates immense goodwill. India's Prime Minister Narendra Modi recently held talks with Afghan President Ashraf Ghani. They signed the Shahoot dam agreement. India committed $236 million to build the dam.

Now the Taliban is set to be part of the Afghan government. India faces the difficult question of engaging with a terror group to help a country find peace. It's a turning point. But having a say is better than watching from the sidelines.

In June 2020, a New York Times report said Russia was secretly offering bounties for US troops in Afghanistan. There have been numerous such reports, accusations and mudslinging.

In June 2020, a New York Times report said Russia was secretly offering bounties for US troops in Afghanistan. There have been numerous such reports, accusations and mudslinging. The United States is now looking to exit Afghanistan militarily, aAfter wasting 20 years and a trillion dollars. Russia does not have a clear roadmap for Afghanistan. But there's something that's clear. America's exit will create a power vacuum in Kabul, one that certain neighbours would be more than happy to exploit. The only way to check that is by ushering in strong governance in Afghanistan. The US wants India to play a role in ensuring that. As South Asia's biggest player, there is no other country better suited to do so. India and Afghanistan have a long diplomatic history. The two countries share enormous goodwill, culture and people-to-people contacts. But India's pitch in Afghanistan may be queered by two countries. Both have their vested interests in Kabul and a common goal to keep India out. These two countries are China and Pakistan. China wants a slice of every country. Afghanistan is all the more special. It has a geographical proximity to Xinjiang. Afghanistan was once a safe haven for China's Uighur Muslims between 1996 and 2001 when Taliban was in power. China does not want history to repeat itself. It also wants two other things. One, to protect its Belt and Road interests in the region, the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor, especially. It's an approximately 62 billion dollar project. China cannot risk the safety of Gwadar port. And two, China wants to keep India out of Afghanistan. The only way to ensure all of this is by shaking hands with the Taliban. And China is doing just that. In the 1990s China was anti-Taliban. Today? Not so much. In 2016, China joined the quadrilateral coordination group. In 2019, China invited Taliban representatives to Beijing. In short, China has embraced the Taliban. China has also used its cheque books to maintain good ties with the Afghan government. Reports say China provided $70 million in military aid to the Afghan govt between 2016 and 18. Beijing maintains that it wants to work with both the Taliban and the Afghan leadership. The Taliban has thanked China for its support, by maintaining a silence on the Uighur genocide. So the Taliban's increased legitimacy will be in China's favour. It will also make Pakistan happy. Pakistan and the Taliban are long-standing allies. Islamabad has also been supporting other terror outfits like the Haqqani Network. Why? This is Pakistan's way of keeping India out of Afghanistan. And this is where Pakistani and Chinese interests meet. These countries are co-conspiring in Kabul. There is nothing in it for Afghanistan. In December 2020, 10 Chinese spies were caught in Kabul. A recent example of how China is planting chaos while maintaining a facade of cooperation. China will never let democracy flourish in Afghanistan. It will also eventually try to debt-trap the country. China is only waiting for the peace process before it starts pouring in more millions. Now consider all the conspiracy, the careful planning, the backstage deals Have they queered India's pitch in Afghanistan? The next question is, how far is India prepared to go? There is no doubt that Afghanistan will become, or rather has become, a flashpoint between India and China. Back in the 1990s, India and China were together in the anti-Taliban alliance. Today, China has an outreach programme for the Taliban, while India was largely absent from the peace negotiations. That is not to say India has had no role in the country. India has helped rebuild Afghanistan with roads, dams, a parliament building, a cricket stadium, scholarships, capacity building, and a lot more. Does it translate into political capital? It certainly creates immense goodwill. India's Prime Minister Narendra Modi recently held talks with Afghan President Ashraf Ghani. They signed the Shahoot dam agreement. India committed $236 million to build the dam. Now the Taliban is set to be part of the Afghan government. India faces the difficult question of engaging with a terror group to help a country find peace. It's a turning point. But having a say is better than watching from the sidelines.

Why China and Pakistan want to keep India out of Afghanistan

The dawn of 2020 brought new hope for peace in Afghanistan. A chance to end decades of violence, an opportunity to achieve some level of reconciliation.

With this aspiration in mind, the US and Taliban representatives met in Doha on the 29th of February. They signed a landmark deal with two main objectives. The Taliban agreed to not threaten the US or its allies henceforth, and the US agreed to withdraw all of its forces within 14 months. But with a caveat.

"If bad things happen, we'll go back. Let the people know, we'll go back and we'll go back so fast and we'll go back with a force like nobody's ever seen. And I don't think that will be necessary. I hope it's not necessary," said then US president Donald Trump at that time.

The 14-month deadline will expire on the 1st of May. And what both sides have achieved in these 14 months is a rather debatable topic. The negotiations have been marred by several roadblocks.

The proposed negotiations hinge on the prisoner swap. Kabul is required to free up to 5,000 Taliban prisoners in return for up to 1,000 security force captives held by the Taliban. The Taliban has released only 845 captives, while the Afghan govt has released only 4,400, insisting that the remaining 600 are too dangerous and should remain in jail.

The stalemate continues to this day. The promise of ending violence remains unfulfilled.

As of 2020 August, 3,560 Afghan security personnel had been killed in terror attacks and thousands more had been wounded.

And in October 2020, Taliban insurgents along with Islamic State terrorists carried out attacks in 27 locations across Afghanistan, killing 243 people and injuring 339.

Among those dead were 23 Afghan soldiers. The Taliban denies allegations that it is behind these attacks. It instead blames Kabul for launching new operations against insurgent-held areas.

Another deadlock is over the withdrawal of US troops. America is down to 2,500 troops in Afghanistan. The reduced military support is said to be affecting Afghanistan's efforts to roll back militant advances. Decreased airstrikes and shortage of advanced technology have slowed their ground operations.

The Joe Biden administration may have made a blunt new push for peace. But Washington is still in two minds on whether to withdraw the last of its troops by 1st of May. US Secretary of State says there will be no hasty withdrawal of troops.

A stalemate over prisoner swap, no end to violence and no commitments on the withdrawal of troops.

A year since the US-Taliban talks began, the key promises remain unfulfilled. All the peace deal has thrown up is uncertainty on the future of Afghanistan.

The dawn of 2020 brought new hope for peace in Afghanistan. A chance to end decades of violence, an opportunity to achieve some level of reconciliation. With this aspiration in mind, the US and Taliban representatives met in Doha on the 29th of February.

The dawn of 2020 brought new hope for peace in Afghanistan. A chance to end decades of violence, an opportunity to achieve some level of reconciliation. With this aspiration in mind, the US and Taliban representatives met in Doha on the 29th of February. They signed a landmark deal with two main objectives. The Taliban agreed to not threaten the US or its allies henceforth, and the US agreed to withdraw all of its forces within 14 months. But with a caveat. "If bad things happen, we'll go back. Let the people know, we'll go back and we'll go back so fast and we'll go back with a force like nobody's ever seen. And I don't think that will be necessary. I hope it's not necessary," said then US president Donald Trump at that time. The 14-month deadline will expire on the 1st of May. And what both sides have achieved in these 14 months is a rather debatable topic. The negotiations have been marred by several roadblocks. The proposed negotiations hinge on the prisoner swap. Kabul is required to free up to 5,000 Taliban prisoners in return for up to 1,000 security force captives held by the Taliban. The Taliban has released only 845 captives, while the Afghan govt has released only 4,400, insisting that the remaining 600 are too dangerous and should remain in jail. The stalemate continues to this day. The promise of ending violence remains unfulfilled. As of 2020 August, 3,560 Afghan security personnel had been killed in terror attacks and thousands more had been wounded. And in October 2020, Taliban insurgents along with Islamic State terrorists carried out attacks in 27 locations across Afghanistan, killing 243 people and injuring 339. Among those dead were 23 Afghan soldiers. The Taliban denies allegations that it is behind these attacks. It instead blames Kabul for launching new operations against insurgent-held areas. Another deadlock is over the withdrawal of US troops. America is down to 2,500 troops in Afghanistan. The reduced military support is said to be affecting Afghanistan's efforts to roll back militant advances. Decreased airstrikes and shortage of advanced technology have slowed their ground operations. The Joe Biden administration may have made a blunt new push for peace. But Washington is still in two minds on whether to withdraw the last of its troops by 1st of May. US Secretary of State says there will be no hasty withdrawal of troops. A stalemate over prisoner swap, no end to violence and no commitments on the withdrawal of troops. A year since the US-Taliban talks began, the key promises remain unfulfilled. All the peace deal has thrown up is uncertainty on the future of Afghanistan.

Despite peace talks, Afghanistan's future looks uncertain at the moment

What have U.S-Taliban peace talks achieved? Has the violence in Afghanistan ended? Have all prisoners been released? And most importantly, Will the U.S. ever withdraw all its troops from Afghanistan? Here's what WION's Palki has to say.

Gravitas: Will US withdraw troops from Afghanistan?

US special envoy for Afghanistan Zalmay Khalilzad on Monday met with Pakistan army chief General Qamar Javed Bajwa and other officials to discuss the Afghan peace process, US State Department said.&nbsp;

"US Special Representative for Afghanistan Reconciliation Khalilzad visited Islamabad today, he met Pakistani officials including Chief of Army Staff. Ambassador Khalilzad thanked Pakistani counterparts for their assistance and asked for Pakistan's continued commitment to the peace process," the US State Department Spokesperson, Ned Price said.&nbsp;

The development comes ahead of the deadline for the planned withdrawal of US troops from Afghanistan this May. Price said that Khalilzad will stay in Doha for a period of time to work on the Afghan peace process. &nbsp;

"Ambassador Khalilzad remains in the region. I understand that he had a relatively quick trip to Pakistan and I understand that he will be based in Doha for some time," Price said. &nbsp;

"I wouldn't want to prejudge how things may unfold in coming hours and in coming days." A statement from the US Embassy in Islamabad said Khalilzad had 'stressed the need to accelerate progress towards a just and durable peace in Afghanistan' during the meetings with Bajwa and with government officials.&nbsp;

"Ambassador Khalilzad emphasised Pakistan's continued important role in the peace process, especially to help Afghans achieve a political settlement and comprehensive ceasefire,'' the statement added.&nbsp;

The US Special Envoy Zalmay Khalilzad has earlier this week visited Kabul and Doha in the last week. The Afghan government on Monday said Islamabad is a direct party to the Afghanistan conflict and treating it as a 'normal neighbour' would not help the peace process in the war-torn country.&nbsp;

"Pakistan is a direct party to the Afghan conflict and crisis. Treating them as normal neighbour won't help the peace process. Defining their role in war and peace must be part of the discussion. Silence, sugar coating, appeasement or simply ignoring it won't help. Taliban leaders are in Pakistan," Afghanistan First Vice President Amrullah Saleh said.&nbsp;

(With inputs from agencies)&nbsp;

US special envoy for Afghanistan Zalmay Khalilzad on Monday met with Pakistan army chief General Qamar Javed Bajwa and other officials to discuss the Afghan peace process, US State Department said.

US special envoy for Afghanistan Zalmay Khalilzad on Monday met with Pakistan army chief General Qamar Javed Bajwa and other officials to discuss the Afghan peace process, US State Department said. "US Special Representative for Afghanistan Reconciliation Khalilzad visited Islamabad today, he met Pakistani officials including Chief of Army Staff. Ambassador Khalilzad thanked Pakistani counterparts for their assistance and asked for Pakistan's continued commitment to the peace process," the US State Department Spokesperson, Ned Price said. The development comes ahead of the deadline for the planned withdrawal of US troops from Afghanistan this May. Price said that Khalilzad will stay in Doha for a period of time to work on the Afghan peace process. "Ambassador Khalilzad remains in the region. I understand that he had a relatively quick trip to Pakistan and I understand that he will be based in Doha for some time," Price said. "I wouldn't want to prejudge how things may unfold in coming hours and in coming days." A statement from the US Embassy in Islamabad said Khalilzad had 'stressed the need to accelerate progress towards a just and durable peace in Afghanistan' during the meetings with Bajwa and with government officials. "Ambassador Khalilzad emphasised Pakistan's continued important role in the peace process, especially to help Afghans achieve a political settlement and comprehensive ceasefire,'' the statement added. The US Special Envoy Zalmay Khalilzad has earlier this week visited Kabul and Doha in the last week. The Afghan government on Monday said Islamabad is a direct party to the Afghanistan conflict and treating it as a 'normal neighbour' would not help the peace process in the war-torn country. "Pakistan is a direct party to the Afghan conflict and crisis. Treating them as normal neighbour won't help the peace process. Defining their role in war and peace must be part of the discussion. Silence, sugar coating, appeasement or simply ignoring it won't help. Taliban leaders are in Pakistan," Afghanistan First Vice President Amrullah Saleh said. (With inputs from agencies)

US envoy Khalilzad meets Pak Army chief to discuss Afghan peace 

Reiterating that several Taliban leaders are based in Pakistan, the Afghan government on Monday said Islamabad is a direct party to the Afghanistan conflict and treating it as a 'normal neighbour' would not help the peace process in the war-torn country. &nbsp;

Speaking at the seventh anniversary of the death of Marshall Mohammad Qasim Fahim, Afghanistan First Vice President Amrullah Saleh said without Pakistan, talks with the Taliban is 'useless', Sputnik reported.&nbsp;

"Pakistan is a direct party to the Afghan conflict and crisis. Treating them as normal neighbour won't help the peace process. Defining their role in war and peace must be part of the discussion. Silence, sugar coating, appeasement or simply ignoring it won't help. Taliban leaders are in Pakistan," Afghanistan First Vice President Amrullah Saleh said. &nbsp;

Pakistan has been long blamed for providing support to Taliban terrorists in Afghanistan. It is no secret that scores of top Afghan Taliban leaders are hidden in Pakistan.&nbsp;

In December, a series of videos surfaced showing senior Taliban leaders meeting their followers and Taliban fighters in Pakistan.&nbsp;

In the videos, Taliban deputy leader Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar, the head of the Taliban political office, was seen holding a briefing with the Taliban cadre on the Afghanistan peace negotiations and acknowledging the presence of the Taliban's top leadership in Pakistan.&nbsp;

Reacting to the videos, Afghanistan's Ministry of Foreign Affairs said, "The presence of Taliban leaders in Pakistan clearly violates Afghanistan's national sovereignty".&nbsp;

Afghanistan had also urged Islamabad 'not to allow its territory to be used by insurgents and elements, who insist on continuing the war and bloodshed'.&nbsp;

"Meaningful peace and security will not come to Afghanistan until the issue of Pakistan's relentless disposition to meddle in Afghanistan's affairs is properly addressed, and it is wishful thinking to believe otherwise," Professor asserted that Pakistan needs to mend its ways.&nbsp;

The UN Analytical Support and Sanctions Monitoring Team to the 1988 Sanctions Committee, which oversees sanctions on the Taliban, in its 2019 report had acknowledged that nearly 5,000 terrorists belonging to Lashkar-e-Tayyiba, which is based in Pakistan, were active in Kunar and Nangarhar provinces of Afghanistan alone.&nbsp;

In December, former Pakistan senator Afrasiab Khattak said Pakistan is using the Taliban as a 'tool' for its dominance in Afghanistan under the pretext of strategic depth.&nbsp;

"They [Pakistan] want dominance in Afghanistan under the pretext of strategic depth and they have pursued this policy. They see the Taliban as a tool for themselves," Khattak said in an interview with TOLOnews. &nbsp;

"We can say that their (the Taliban's) approach has changed if they stop violence and say that they will feel the people's pain," Khattak said.&nbsp;

(With inputs from agencies)&nbsp;

Reiterating that several Taliban leaders are based in Pakistan, the Afghan government on Monday said Islamabad is a direct party to the Afghanistan conflict and treating it as a 'normal neighbour' would not help the peace process in the war-torn country.

Reiterating that several Taliban leaders are based in Pakistan, the Afghan government on Monday said Islamabad is a direct party to the Afghanistan conflict and treating it as a 'normal neighbour' would not help the peace process in the war-torn country. Speaking at the seventh anniversary of the death of Marshall Mohammad Qasim Fahim, Afghanistan First Vice President Amrullah Saleh said without Pakistan, talks with the Taliban is 'useless', Sputnik reported. "Pakistan is a direct party to the Afghan conflict and crisis. Treating them as normal neighbour won't help the peace process. Defining their role in war and peace must be part of the discussion. Silence, sugar coating, appeasement or simply ignoring it won't help. Taliban leaders are in Pakistan," Afghanistan First Vice President Amrullah Saleh said. Pakistan has been long blamed for providing support to Taliban terrorists in Afghanistan. It is no secret that scores of top Afghan Taliban leaders are hidden in Pakistan. In December, a series of videos surfaced showing senior Taliban leaders meeting their followers and Taliban fighters in Pakistan. In the videos, Taliban deputy leader Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar, the head of the Taliban political office, was seen holding a briefing with the Taliban cadre on the Afghanistan peace negotiations and acknowledging the presence of the Taliban's top leadership in Pakistan. Reacting to the videos, Afghanistan's Ministry of Foreign Affairs said, "The presence of Taliban leaders in Pakistan clearly violates Afghanistan's national sovereignty". Afghanistan had also urged Islamabad 'not to allow its territory to be used by insurgents and elements, who insist on continuing the war and bloodshed'. "Meaningful peace and security will not come to Afghanistan until the issue of Pakistan's relentless disposition to meddle in Afghanistan's affairs is properly addressed, and it is wishful thinking to believe otherwise," Professor asserted that Pakistan needs to mend its ways. The UN Analytical Support and Sanctions Monitoring Team to the 1988 Sanctions Committee, which oversees sanctions on the Taliban, in its 2019 report had acknowledged that nearly 5,000 terrorists belonging to Lashkar-e-Tayyiba, which is based in Pakistan, were active in Kunar and Nangarhar provinces of Afghanistan alone. In December, former Pakistan senator Afrasiab Khattak said Pakistan is using the Taliban as a 'tool' for its dominance in Afghanistan under the pretext of strategic depth. "They [Pakistan] want dominance in Afghanistan under the pretext of strategic depth and they have pursued this policy. They see the Taliban as a tool for themselves," Khattak said in an interview with TOLOnews. "We can say that their (the Taliban's) approach has changed if they stop violence and say that they will feel the people's pain," Khattak said. (With inputs from agencies)

Treating Pak as 'normal neighbour' won't help Afghan peace process: Saleh 

About 52 percent of women in Afghanistan have experienced violence in their homes, according to the World Health Organization.

Woman shot in the face in Afghanistan.

As a newborn, Fawzia Koofi was left to die in the sun. As a lawmaker, she survived 2 assassination attempts. Today, she is negotiating peace with the Taliban. This International Women's Day, Palki Sharma brings you an exclusive conversation with Koofi.

The Interview: Story of Fawzia Koofi, Afghan MP and Peace Negotiator

US special envoy to Afghanistan Zalmay Khalilzad has proposed a shake up of peace process in the country including, interim government and conference of key players, say reports. However, his plans have faced objections, said Reuters quoting sources.&nbsp;

Afghan-born U.S. diplomat Zalmay Khalilzad is on a visit to Kabul, Doha and other regional capitals, his first since U.S. President Joe Biden's administration began reviewing its options for the peace process and as time runs out before a May 1 U.S. troop withdrawal deadline.

As per reports,&nbsp;Khalilzad is trying to build consensus around alternative options with all Afghan sides and key regional players as peace negotiations in Doha is making&nbsp;little progress and violence in Afghanistan is escalating

"(The United States) thinks Doha isn't working and needs impetus and an alternate approach," Reuters quoted a source as saying.

In Kabul, Khalilzad met Abdullah Abdullah, the chief peace envoy, President Ashraf Ghani and other political and civil society leaders, including former President Hamid Karzai.

Three diplomatic sources, two sources on the teams of political leaders who met with Khalilzad and two international sources in Kabul said one of the envoy's main proposals was an interim government arrangement, referred to as a participatory or representative government.

A former Afghan government official familiar with the matter said Khalilzad shared a document detailing the power-sharing proposal and that it revised a paper he circulated in December.

Another proposal was a meeting with a similar format to the 2001 Bonn conference, to involve representatives from a wide range of Afghan parties meeting in person while international agencies and diplomats push them to a solution.

Anti-Taliban leaders met under international auspices in the German city of Bonn after the 2001 U.S.-led invasion ousted the insurgents from power and agreed on a provisional administration and a roadmap for forming a permanent government and writing a new constitution.

&nbsp;"We're considering a number of different ideas that might accelerate the process," State Department spokesman Ned Price told reporters on Friday.

"The United States is not making any formal proposals and is continuing to review all relevant options for future force posture - and all means all," a State Department spokesperson said on Saturday. "Ambassador Khalilzad has discussed a range of ways to move the diplomacy forward, nothing more."

(With Reuters inputs)

US special envoy to Afghanistan Zalmay Khalilzad has proposed a shake up of peace process in the country including, interim government and conference of key players, say reports.

US special envoy to Afghanistan Zalmay Khalilzad has proposed a shake up of peace process in the country including, interim government and conference of key players, say reports. However, his plans have faced objections, said Reuters quoting sources. Afghan-born U.S. diplomat Zalmay Khalilzad is on a visit to Kabul, Doha and other regional capitals, his first since U.S. President Joe Biden's administration began reviewing its options for the peace process and as time runs out before a May 1 U.S. troop withdrawal deadline. As per reports, Khalilzad is trying to build consensus around alternative options with all Afghan sides and key regional players as peace negotiations in Doha is making little progress and violence in Afghanistan is escalating "(The United States) thinks Doha isn't working and needs impetus and an alternate approach," Reuters quoted a source as saying. In Kabul, Khalilzad met Abdullah Abdullah, the chief peace envoy, President Ashraf Ghani and other political and civil society leaders, including former President Hamid Karzai. Three diplomatic sources, two sources on the teams of political leaders who met with Khalilzad and two international sources in Kabul said one of the envoy's main proposals was an interim government arrangement, referred to as a participatory or representative government. A former Afghan government official familiar with the matter said Khalilzad shared a document detailing the power-sharing proposal and that it revised a paper he circulated in December. Another proposal was a meeting with a similar format to the 2001 Bonn conference, to involve representatives from a wide range of Afghan parties meeting in person while international agencies and diplomats push them to a solution. Anti-Taliban leaders met under international auspices in the German city of Bonn after the 2001 U.S.-led invasion ousted the insurgents from power and agreed on a provisional administration and a roadmap for forming a permanent government and writing a new constitution. "We're considering a number of different ideas that might accelerate the process," State Department spokesman Ned Price told reporters on Friday. "The United States is not making any formal proposals and is continuing to review all relevant options for future force posture - and all means all," a State Department spokesperson said on Saturday. "Ambassador Khalilzad has discussed a range of ways to move the diplomacy forward, nothing more." (With Reuters inputs)

US Afghanistan envoy proposes shake-up of Afghan peace process: Report

A female doctor was killed in a bomb blast in the eastern Afghan city of Jalalabad in what appeared to be another targeted hit, officials said Thursday, just days after three women media workers were gunned down in the area.&nbsp;

Journalists, religious scholars, activists and judges have all been victims of a recent wave of political assassinations across Afghanistan, forcing many into hiding -- with some fleeing the country.

In the latest incident, the doctor was killed after a magnetic bomb was attached to the vehicle she was travelling in, according to a spokesman from the provincial governor’s office. A child was also injured by the explosion.&nbsp;

Also read | <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/afghanistan-taliban-suspect-behind-killing-of-three-female-media-workers-arrested-367585">Afghanistan: Taliban suspect behind killing of three female media workers arrested</a>

“She was commuting in a rickshaw when the bomb went off,” the spokesman told AFP.

Another spokesman from a provincial hospital also confirmed the incident and toll. &nbsp;

No group has claimed responsibility for the blast.&nbsp;

The attack comes two days after three female media workers were gunned down in Jalalabad in separate attacks that were just minutes apart.&nbsp;

The local Islamic State group affiliate said its gunmen carried out the killing of what it called "journalists working for one of the media stations loyal to the apostate Afghan government".

Afghan and US officials have blamed the Taliban for the wave of violence, but the group has denied the charges.

The assassinations have been acutely felt by women, whose rights were crushed under the Taliban's five-year rule, including being banned from working.

Intelligence officials have previously linked the renewed threat against female professionals to demands at the peace talks for their rights to be protected.

The attacks come as speculation is rife over America's future in Afghanistan after the administration of President Joe Biden announced plans to review the withdrawal agreement signed with the Taliban last year that paved the way for foreign troops to leave the country by May.

A female doctor was killed in a bomb blast in the eastern Afghan city of Jalalabad in what appeared to be another targeted hit, officials said Thursday, just days after three women media workers were gunned down in the area.

A female doctor was killed in a bomb blast in the eastern Afghan city of Jalalabad in what appeared to be another targeted hit, officials said Thursday, just days after three women media workers were gunned down in the area. Journalists, religious scholars, activists and judges have all been victims of a recent wave of political assassinations across Afghanistan, forcing many into hiding -- with some fleeing the country. In the latest incident, the doctor was killed after a magnetic bomb was attached to the vehicle she was travelling in, according to a spokesman from the provincial governor’s office. A child was also injured by the explosion. Also read | Afghanistan: Taliban suspect behind killing of three female media workers arrested “She was commuting in a rickshaw when the bomb went off,” the spokesman told AFP. Another spokesman from a provincial hospital also confirmed the incident and toll. No group has claimed responsibility for the blast. The attack comes two days after three female media workers were gunned down in Jalalabad in separate attacks that were just minutes apart. The local Islamic State group affiliate said its gunmen carried out the killing of what it called "journalists working for one of the media stations loyal to the apostate Afghan government". Afghan and US officials have blamed the Taliban for the wave of violence, but the group has denied the charges. The assassinations have been acutely felt by women, whose rights were crushed under the Taliban's five-year rule, including being banned from working. Intelligence officials have previously linked the renewed threat against female professionals to demands at the peace talks for their rights to be protected. The attacks come as speculation is rife over America's future in Afghanistan after the administration of President Joe Biden announced plans to review the withdrawal agreement signed with the Taliban last year that paved the way for foreign troops to leave the country by May.

Female doctor killed in eastern Afghanistan after murder of media workers

Three women journalists who worked for a local TV and Radio channel were killed and two wounded on their way home in Afghanistan. The women were killed in two separate incidents.

3 women journalists killed, 2 wounded in Afghanistan

After the killing of three women media workers in the eastern Afghan city of Jalalabad have sent shockwaves across the world, the police said that the suspect, who is connected to the Taliban, has been arrested.&nbsp;

Provincial police chief Juma Gul Hemat said that Qari Basir, the main attacker, was arrested and that he was related to the Taliban, news agency Reuters reported.&nbsp;

Watch |&nbsp;

<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/3-women-journalists-killed-2-wounded-in-afghanistan-367557/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>

&nbsp;

The Taliban has denied any involvement in the attack.&nbsp;

Also read | <a href="https://www.wionews.com/south-asia/three-female-media-workers-shot-to-death-in-eastern-afghanistan-367484">Three female media workers shot to death in eastern Afghanistan</a>

A local Islamic State group affiliate said its men were behind the killing of what it described as "journalists working for one of the media stations loyal to the apostate Afghan government".

Afghan and US authorities have blamed the Taliban for the fresh wave of violence.&nbsp;

Zalmai Latifi, the director of Enikass TV where the three women worked, said that they&nbsp;were going on foot when they were shot, AFP news agency reported.

All three were recent high school graduates aged between 18 and 20, and worked in the broadcaster's dubbing department.&nbsp;

Government sources said the women were shot in the head, the Reuters report said&nbsp;

A fourth woman was also seriously injured in the attack and is admitted in a hospital, a hospital spokesperson said.&nbsp;

Attacks by terror groups on prominent journalists, scholars, human rights activists have seen a spike recently amid a peace process&nbsp;between the Taliban and the Afghanistan government.

After the killing of three women media workers in the eastern Afghan city of Jalalabad have sent shockwaves across the world, the police said that the suspect, who is connected to the Taliban, has been arrested.

After the killing of three women media workers in the eastern Afghan city of Jalalabad have sent shockwaves across the world, the police said that the suspect, who is connected to the Taliban, has been arrested. Provincial police chief Juma Gul Hemat said that Qari Basir, the main attacker, was arrested and that he was related to the Taliban, news agency Reuters reported. Watch | The Taliban has denied any involvement in the attack. Also read | Three female media workers shot to death in eastern Afghanistan A local Islamic State group affiliate said its men were behind the killing of what it described as "journalists working for one of the media stations loyal to the apostate Afghan government". Afghan and US authorities have blamed the Taliban for the fresh wave of violence. Zalmai Latifi, the director of Enikass TV where the three women worked, said that they were going on foot when they were shot, AFP news agency reported. All three were recent high school graduates aged between 18 and 20, and worked in the broadcaster's dubbing department. Government sources said the women were shot in the head, the Reuters report said A fourth woman was also seriously injured in the attack and is admitted in a hospital, a hospital spokesperson said. Attacks by terror groups on prominent journalists, scholars, human rights activists have seen a spike recently amid a peace process between the Taliban and the Afghanistan government.

Afghanistan: Taliban suspect behind killing of three female media workers arrested

Special US Representative for Afghanistan Reconciliation Zalmay Khalilzad is travelling to Kabul and Qatar this week, according to an official announcement.

Zalmay Khalilzad to meet Afghan leaders in Kabul and Doha

US Special Representative for Afghanistan Zalmay Khalilzad on Monday arrived in Kabul and held meeting with Abdullah Abdullah, the head of Afghanistan`s High Council for National Reconciliation. Both leaders discussed Afghan peace process.

"As always pleased to meet HE Zalmay Khalilzad and his accompanying delegation. We discussed the peace process, talks in Doha, the US current review and the steps forward. We reiterated our call for an immediate end to violence and the acceleration of the peace talks," Abdullah tweeted

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
As always pleased to meet HE Zalmay Khalilzad <a href="https://twitter.com/US4AfghanPeace?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@US4AfghanPeace</a> &amp; his accompanying delegation. We discussed the peace process, talks in Doha, the US current review &amp; the steps forward. We reiterated our call for an immediate end to violence &amp; the acceleration of the peace talks. <a href="https://t.co/DC4SK0c3p9">pic.twitter.com/DC4SK0c3p9</a>
— Dr. Abdullah Abdullah (@DrabdullahCE) <a href="https://twitter.com/DrabdullahCE/status/1366267112705122307?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 1, 2021</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

The meet between the two leaders came just hours after US State Department announced resumption of talks with Taliban

"Special Representative for Afghanistan Reconciliation Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad and his team will travel to Kabul, Doha and additional regional capitals," the US State Department had said in a statement on Sunday.

"He (Khalilzad) will resume discussions on the way ahead with the Islamic Republic and Afghan leaders, Taliban representatives and regional countries whose interests are best served by the achievement of just and durable political settlement and permanent and comprehensive ceasefire," the release added.

This is Khalilzad's first visit to Afghanistan after Joe Biden took charge as US president.

He is also expected to visit Islamabad and New Delhi as indicated in the release.The resumption of dialogue with the Taliban under Joe Biden`s administration clearly shows that the US is continuing its Afghan policy on the lines undertaken by former president Donald Trump.

India, which has completed huge developmental and infrastructure projects in Afghanistan, will be watching the US move closely.

According to informed sources, Pakistan is fully backing the Taliban and wants to install them in Kabul, this can pose a major threat to India`s efforts in building democratic and development institutions in the war-torn country. India`s position is clear that any government formation in Kabul should be Afghan-led and Afghan-owned.

(With ANI inputs)

US Special Representative for Afghanistan Zalmay Khalilzad on Monday arrived in Kabul and held meeting with Abdullah Abdullah, the head of Afghanistan`s High Council for National Reconciliation.

US Special Representative for Afghanistan Zalmay Khalilzad on Monday arrived in Kabul and held meeting with Abdullah Abdullah, the head of Afghanistan`s High Council for National Reconciliation. Both leaders discussed Afghan peace process. "As always pleased to meet HE Zalmay Khalilzad and his accompanying delegation. We discussed the peace process, talks in Doha, the US current review and the steps forward. We reiterated our call for an immediate end to violence and the acceleration of the peace talks," Abdullah tweeted As always pleased to meet HE Zalmay Khalilzad @US4AfghanPeace & his accompanying delegation. We discussed the peace process, talks in Doha, the US current review & the steps forward. We reiterated our call for an immediate end to violence & the acceleration of the peace talks. pic.twitter.com/DC4SK0c3p9 — Dr. Abdullah Abdullah (@DrabdullahCE) March 1, 2021 × The meet between the two leaders came just hours after US State Department announced resumption of talks with Taliban "Special Representative for Afghanistan Reconciliation Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad and his team will travel to Kabul, Doha and additional regional capitals," the US State Department had said in a statement on Sunday. "He (Khalilzad) will resume discussions on the way ahead with the Islamic Republic and Afghan leaders, Taliban representatives and regional countries whose interests are best served by the achievement of just and durable political settlement and permanent and comprehensive ceasefire," the release added. This is Khalilzad's first visit to Afghanistan after Joe Biden took charge as US president. He is also expected to visit Islamabad and New Delhi as indicated in the release.The resumption of dialogue with the Taliban under Joe Biden`s administration clearly shows that the US is continuing its Afghan policy on the lines undertaken by former president Donald Trump. India, which has completed huge developmental and infrastructure projects in Afghanistan, will be watching the US move closely. According to informed sources, Pakistan is fully backing the Taliban and wants to install them in Kabul, this can pose a major threat to India`s efforts in building democratic and development institutions in the war-torn country. India`s position is clear that any government formation in Kabul should be Afghan-led and Afghan-owned. (With ANI inputs)

US Afghanistan special envoy meets Abdullah Abdullah to discuss peace process

At least three family members of an assassinated journalist have reportedly been killed in western Afghanistan. The incident comes in the rising wave of attacks targeting journalists and civic figures.

Afghanistan: Slain journalist's family killed

The Taliban prison is a ruined house, a cave, a filthy basement in an abandoned dwelling, or a village mosque. Beatings or worse are a certainty, and the sentence is indefinite. Food, if there is any, is stale bread and cold beans. A bed is the floor or a dirty carpet. The threat of death — screamed, shouted, sometimes inflicted — is ever-present.

Malik Mohammadi, a calm 60-year-old farmer, watched the Taliban put to death his 32-year-old son Nasrullah, an army officer, in one such prison. Over a period of nine days last year, Nasrullah, an epileptic, was refused medicine by his captors. He was denied food. His father saw blood coming from his mouth, and bruises from beatings. On the 10th day, he died.

Watch |&nbsp;

<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/afghanistan-slain-journalists-family-killed-366738/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>

“The Taliban beat him,” Mohammadi said quietly. “I watched the killing of my son.”

Such repression is part of the Taliban’s strategy of control in the territories under their rule. While the Afghan government and Taliban negotiators in Qatar fitfully talk about meeting for talks, even as the idea of real peace recedes, the reality is that the insurgents already hold much of the country. An approaching U.S. withdrawal, coupled with a weak Afghan security force scarcely able to defend itself, means the group is likely to maintain this authority and its brutal ways of invoking submission.

One of the Taliban’s most fearsome tools for doing so is a loose network of prisons, an improvised archipelago of mistreatment and suffering, in which the insurgents inflict harsh summary judgment on their fellow Afghans, arbitrarily stopping them on the highway. Mostly, they are looking for soldiers and government workers. The government too has been accused of mistreatment in its prisons, with the United Nations recently finding that nearly one-third of the Afghan army’s prisoners have been tortured.

In the Taliban’s case, the detained are locked up in hidden makeshift prisons, a universe of incarceration in which the hapless charges are often moved, day after day, from ruined house to isolated mosque, and back again — without any sense of how long their detention will last. The approach is anything but discriminating.

“It keeps coming back to me in my sleep,” said Sayed Hiatullah, a 42-year-old shopkeeper in Faizabad. Last year, Hiatullah was falsely accused at a Taliban checkpoint of working for state security. He was imprisoned for 25 days.

“I wake up and scream,” he said. “It was the darkest, most bitter period in my life. I was in shock for six months,” Hiatullah said.

“I relive my memories 100%, every second, every minute,” said Atiqullah Hassanzada, 31, an ex-soldier captured last year on his way to a military hospital in Kabul, speaking on the floor of his home. “I was beaten on the backs of my thighs and on the shoulder,” he said.

Faizabad, a town in Afghanistan’s far north and the capital of Badakhshan province, is inhabited by numerous ex-prisoners of the Taliban, as the insurgents control many of the roads from here to the capital, Kabul. Making that journey means exposure to Taliban checkpoints, and capture.

In Faizabad, the Taliban’s technique is to incarcerate and punish first and ask questions later. There is no judge and no court. Local villagers are forced to provide food. While thousands of Afghans have been detained in this way, there are no statistics. Afghan special forces said they recently freed more than 40 detainees from a Taliban prison in Baghlan province, a not uncommon incident in local news broadcasts. On Monday, 23 more were freed in Kunduz province, after being “extensively tortured” by the Taliban, said the Afghan Ministry of Defense.

The effect of these arbitrary imprisonments is one of terror. “I begged them, crying, to release me,” said Hiatullah. “They would beat me even more.”

“The Taliban stopped the vehicle and arrested me,” said Naqibullah Momand, traveling to his home in Kunduz province last year. “They put their hand on my heart to check my heartbeat,” said the 26-year-old television presenter.

For the Taliban, a rapid beat would have indicated guilt; Momand forced himself to remain calm, but he still ended up spending 29 days locked in a two-room house with 20 others, sleeping on a dirty carpet on the floor, a single lightbulb illuminated all night, before his captors conceded he wasn’t a member of the Afghan military.

Capture is only the beginning of the torment. Local commanders, often very young, have unrestrained control over their prisoners.

“The low-level Taliban members’ behavior is very bad,” said Fazul-Ahmad Aamaj, an elderly, semiofficial mediator in Faizabad, the best-known of about 15 in Badakhshan. People whose relatives have been captured often turn to Aamaj for help. He has secured the release of dozens of the group’s captives, through negotiations involving family, tribal elders and money.

Rahmatullah Danishjo, a university student captured on the road to Kabul, on his way from Wardak province in September 2019, was trussed up and taken to a village mosque. For him and other prisoners, the holy place hardly proved to be a sanctuary.

For local commanders, the mosque makes an ideal jail. “It’s the one central place in the village; in a lot of the villages, the mosque is synonymous with the Taliban,” said Ashley Jackson, co-director of the Centre for the Study of Armed Groups, who has studied Taliban justice extensively. “It’s the way they enforce behavior.”

The Taliban also operate a parallel network of civil courts in which religious scholars judge land disputes and family quarrels. These courts, with their swift judgments, have gained a reputation of sorts for efficiency and are welcomed by many Afghans, particularly compared to the government’s corrupted justice system. Taliban courts also judge murders and perceived moral and religious infractions. Here the emphasis is on “punishment”; the system “relies on beatings and other forms of torture,” Human Rights Watch said in a report last year.

Crimes perceived as political, like working for the Afghan government, or fighting for it, inhabit a different universe. There are no courts for such crimes. Local Taliban commanders have absolute authority “to arrest anyone they deem suspicious,” Human Rights Watch said.

Mohammed Aman, 31, a government engineer, said he was pulled over on the highway from Ghazni to Kabul one afternoon in November, handcuffed and taken to a mosque. “There were 10 or 11 others, handcuffed to a chain, inside the mosque,” he said. “We were praying, early in the morning. They came, and they beat us,” said Danishjo, who was held in another mosque.

“They beat us with sticks for maybe, five minutes. They hit us in the back,” he said. “They were beating us on the hands.”

“One of the Taliban flogged us in the courtyard of the mosque,” said Abdel Qadir Sharifi, 25, who was captured when his military base was overrun. “I believed they were going to kill me.”

Death is the ever-present threat, sometimes inflicted but more often used as a fearsome bargaining chip to gain what the Taliban want: money, a prisoner exchange, or a painfully extracted pledge to renounce government service. The deliberate, often slow, putting to death of captives also occurs.

Summoned along with village elders to negotiate his son’s release in exchange for Taliban prisoners, Mohammadi was able to see his son three times during Nasrullah’s brief captivity.

“They tried to sit him up. But he kept falling down,” Mohammadi recalled. The Taliban shouted at him: “‘Do you see what is happening to your son?’’’

The next day the Taliban moved Nasrullah to a ruined house. By the ninth day, he had lost consciousness. He was filthy, covered in urine and excrement.

His captors allowed Mohammadi to wash him in cold water. But it was too late. “He was dying,” his father said. “The last time I saw him, it was in the yard of the destroyed house,” he said.

After the death of his son, the Taliban tormented him. “Why don’t you cry?” they asked. “I told them, I don’t want to cry in front of the trees and the stones,” said Mohammadi.

“I cried alone,” he said.

His other son, Rohullah Hamid, 35, a lawyer in Kabul, who took part in the failed effort to get his brother released, said: “Every day, dozens of Afghans die because of the Taliban. The Taliban are the enemy of humanity.” 
&nbsp;

The Taliban prison is a ruined house, a cave, a filthy basement in an abandoned dwelling, or a village mosque. Beatings or worse are a certainty, and the sentence is indefinite.

The Taliban prison is a ruined house, a cave, a filthy basement in an abandoned dwelling, or a village mosque. Beatings or worse are a certainty, and the sentence is indefinite. Food, if there is any, is stale bread and cold beans. A bed is the floor or a dirty carpet. The threat of death — screamed, shouted, sometimes inflicted — is ever-present. Malik Mohammadi, a calm 60-year-old farmer, watched the Taliban put to death his 32-year-old son Nasrullah, an army officer, in one such prison. Over a period of nine days last year, Nasrullah, an epileptic, was refused medicine by his captors. He was denied food. His father saw blood coming from his mouth, and bruises from beatings. On the 10th day, he died. Watch | “The Taliban beat him,” Mohammadi said quietly. “I watched the killing of my son.” Such repression is part of the Taliban’s strategy of control in the territories under their rule. While the Afghan government and Taliban negotiators in Qatar fitfully talk about meeting for talks, even as the idea of real peace recedes, the reality is that the insurgents already hold much of the country. An approaching U.S. withdrawal, coupled with a weak Afghan security force scarcely able to defend itself, means the group is likely to maintain this authority and its brutal ways of invoking submission. One of the Taliban’s most fearsome tools for doing so is a loose network of prisons, an improvised archipelago of mistreatment and suffering, in which the insurgents inflict harsh summary judgment on their fellow Afghans, arbitrarily stopping them on the highway. Mostly, they are looking for soldiers and government workers. The government too has been accused of mistreatment in its prisons, with the United Nations recently finding that nearly one-third of the Afghan army’s prisoners have been tortured. In the Taliban’s case, the detained are locked up in hidden makeshift prisons, a universe of incarceration in which the hapless charges are often moved, day after day, from ruined house to isolated mosque, and back again — without any sense of how long their detention will last. The approach is anything but discriminating. “It keeps coming back to me in my sleep,” said Sayed Hiatullah, a 42-year-old shopkeeper in Faizabad. Last year, Hiatullah was falsely accused at a Taliban checkpoint of working for state security. He was imprisoned for 25 days. “I wake up and scream,” he said. “It was the darkest, most bitter period in my life. I was in shock for six months,” Hiatullah said. “I relive my memories 100%, every second, every minute,” said Atiqullah Hassanzada, 31, an ex-soldier captured last year on his way to a military hospital in Kabul, speaking on the floor of his home. “I was beaten on the backs of my thighs and on the shoulder,” he said. Faizabad, a town in Afghanistan’s far north and the capital of Badakhshan province, is inhabited by numerous ex-prisoners of the Taliban, as the insurgents control many of the roads from here to the capital, Kabul. Making that journey means exposure to Taliban checkpoints, and capture. In Faizabad, the Taliban’s technique is to incarcerate and punish first and ask questions later. There is no judge and no court. Local villagers are forced to provide food. While thousands of Afghans have been detained in this way, there are no statistics. Afghan special forces said they recently freed more than 40 detainees from a Taliban prison in Baghlan province, a not uncommon incident in local news broadcasts. On Monday, 23 more were freed in Kunduz province, after being “extensively tortured” by the Taliban, said the Afghan Ministry of Defense. The effect of these arbitrary imprisonments is one of terror. “I begged them, crying, to release me,” said Hiatullah. “They would beat me even more.” “The Taliban stopped the vehicle and arrested me,” said Naqibullah Momand, traveling to his home in Kunduz province last year. “They put their hand on my heart to check my heartbeat,” said the 26-year-old television presenter. For the Taliban, a rapid beat would have indicated guilt; Momand forced himself to remain calm, but he still ended up spending 29 days locked in a two-room house with 20 others, sleeping on a dirty carpet on the floor, a single lightbulb illuminated all night, before his captors conceded he wasn’t a member of the Afghan military. Capture is only the beginning of the torment. Local commanders, often very young, have unrestrained control over their prisoners. “The low-level Taliban members’ behavior is very bad,” said Fazul-Ahmad Aamaj, an elderly, semiofficial mediator in Faizabad, the best-known of about 15 in Badakhshan. People whose relatives have been captured often turn to Aamaj for help. He has secured the release of dozens of the group’s captives, through negotiations involving family, tribal elders and money. Rahmatullah Danishjo, a university student captured on the road to Kabul, on his way from Wardak province in September 2019, was trussed up and taken to a village mosque. For him and other prisoners, the holy place hardly proved to be a sanctuary. For local commanders, the mosque makes an ideal jail. “It’s the one central place in the village; in a lot of the villages, the mosque is synonymous with the Taliban,” said Ashley Jackson, co-director of the Centre for the Study of Armed Groups, who has studied Taliban justice extensively. “It’s the way they enforce behavior.” The Taliban also operate a parallel network of civil courts in which religious scholars judge land disputes and family quarrels. These courts, with their swift judgments, have gained a reputation of sorts for efficiency and are welcomed by many Afghans, particularly compared to the government’s corrupted justice system. Taliban courts also judge murders and perceived moral and religious infractions. Here the emphasis is on “punishment”; the system “relies on beatings and other forms of torture,” Human Rights Watch said in a report last year. Crimes perceived as political, like working for the Afghan government, or fighting for it, inhabit a different universe. There are no courts for such crimes. Local Taliban commanders have absolute authority “to arrest anyone they deem suspicious,” Human Rights Watch said. Mohammed Aman, 31, a government engineer, said he was pulled over on the highway from Ghazni to Kabul one afternoon in November, handcuffed and taken to a mosque. “There were 10 or 11 others, handcuffed to a chain, inside the mosque,” he said. “We were praying, early in the morning. They came, and they beat us,” said Danishjo, who was held in another mosque. “They beat us with sticks for maybe, five minutes. They hit us in the back,” he said. “They were beating us on the hands.” “One of the Taliban flogged us in the courtyard of the mosque,” said Abdel Qadir Sharifi, 25, who was captured when his military base was overrun. “I believed they were going to kill me.” Death is the ever-present threat, sometimes inflicted but more often used as a fearsome bargaining chip to gain what the Taliban want: money, a prisoner exchange, or a painfully extracted pledge to renounce government service. The deliberate, often slow, putting to death of captives also occurs. Summoned along with village elders to negotiate his son’s release in exchange for Taliban prisoners, Mohammadi was able to see his son three times during Nasrullah’s brief captivity. “They tried to sit him up. But he kept falling down,” Mohammadi recalled. The Taliban shouted at him: “‘Do you see what is happening to your son?’’’ The next day the Taliban moved Nasrullah to a ruined house. By the ninth day, he had lost consciousness. He was filthy, covered in urine and excrement. His captors allowed Mohammadi to wash him in cold water. But it was too late. “He was dying,” his father said. “The last time I saw him, it was in the yard of the destroyed house,” he said. After the death of his son, the Taliban tormented him. “Why don’t you cry?” they asked. “I told them, I don’t want to cry in front of the trees and the stones,” said Mohammadi. “I cried alone,” he said. His other son, Rohullah Hamid, 35, a lawyer in Kabul, who took part in the failed effort to get his brother released, said: “Every day, dozens of Afghans die because of the Taliban. The Taliban are the enemy of humanity.”

'I wake up and scream': Secret Taliban prisons terrorize thousands

A number of Pakistani military personnel have been penalised for negligence over the escape of a high-profile former Pakistani Taliban figure from custody, an armed services spokesman said on Wednesday.

Liaqat Ali, the former public face of the militant Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) and better known by his pseudonym Ehsanullah Ehsan, escaped last year three years after he handed himself in to the military.

"All those responsible for it were tried and penalised," Major General Babar Iftikhar, spokesman for Pakistan`s Armed Forces, told reporters in the city of Rawalpindi where the army is headquartered.

He said those penalised were military personnel but did not give details including the number or identity of whose who were prosecuted. The military`s media wing denied that any of those penalised had any involvement or collusion with Ehsan during the escape, saying it was a case of negligence.

Ehsan was TTP`s spokesman for nearly a decade, issuing statements and holding press conferences in the group`s stronghold near the Afghan border. He proclaimed TTP`s responsibility for deadly bombings and attacks, including the 2012 shooting of education activist Malala Yousafzai.&nbsp;

On Twitter earlier this month, Yousafzai responded to a threatening tweet directed at her by an account allegedly belonging to Ehsan, asking the military and government how he had been able to escape.

A government statement last year confirming the escape said had said Ehsan evaded custody during a counter-terror operation in which he was accompanying soldiers to find Taliban leaders, as he had agreed to do after his surrender.

Ehsan has issued statements through various Twitter accounts since his escape and has said on social media that he is abroad.

Iftikhar, the military spokesman, said that his tweet this month was via a fake account and that Ehsan`s location was not confirmed, but efforts were underway to recapture him.

A number of Pakistani military personnel have been penalised for negligence over the escape of a high-profile former Pakistani Taliban figure from custody, an armed services spokesman said on Wednesday.

A number of Pakistani military personnel have been penalised for negligence over the escape of a high-profile former Pakistani Taliban figure from custody, an armed services spokesman said on Wednesday. Liaqat Ali, the former public face of the militant Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) and better known by his pseudonym Ehsanullah Ehsan, escaped last year three years after he handed himself in to the military. "All those responsible for it were tried and penalised," Major General Babar Iftikhar, spokesman for Pakistan`s Armed Forces, told reporters in the city of Rawalpindi where the army is headquartered. He said those penalised were military personnel but did not give details including the number or identity of whose who were prosecuted. The military`s media wing denied that any of those penalised had any involvement or collusion with Ehsan during the escape, saying it was a case of negligence. Ehsan was TTP`s spokesman for nearly a decade, issuing statements and holding press conferences in the group`s stronghold near the Afghan border. He proclaimed TTP`s responsibility for deadly bombings and attacks, including the 2012 shooting of education activist Malala Yousafzai. On Twitter earlier this month, Yousafzai responded to a threatening tweet directed at her by an account allegedly belonging to Ehsan, asking the military and government how he had been able to escape. A government statement last year confirming the escape said had said Ehsan evaded custody during a counter-terror operation in which he was accompanying soldiers to find Taliban leaders, as he had agreed to do after his surrender. Ehsan has issued statements through various Twitter accounts since his escape and has said on social media that he is abroad. Iftikhar, the military spokesman, said that his tweet this month was via a fake account and that Ehsan`s location was not confirmed, but efforts were underway to recapture him.

Pakistan military personnel punished over escape of Taliban figure

Separate roadside bomb explosions in Afghanistan killed at least three people including a child and wounded 20 others on Sunday.

Kabul police spokesperson Ferdaws Faramarz said that a roadside bomb explosion targetted a police car, killing the driver and a nearby child as well as wounding five other civilians.

The injured people also include children.

The second explosion was caused by a bomb placed in a crowded market in southern Helmand province, killing one civilian and wounding 15 others including two police.

No group immediately claimed responsibility for any of the attacks.

Afghan police officials says that an investigation were underway.

Afghanistan has seen a nationwide spike in bombings, targetted killings and violence on the battlefield as peace negotiations in Qatar between the Taliban and the Afghan government have stalled. It's been over a month since the sides last met to discuss how to proceed.

Separate roadside bomb explosions in Afghanistan killed at least three people including a child and wounded 20 others on Sunday. Kabul police spokesperson Ferdaws Faramarz said that a roadside bomb explosion targetted a police car, killing the driver and a nearby child as well as wounding five other civilians.

Separate roadside bomb explosions in Afghanistan killed at least three people including a child and wounded 20 others on Sunday. Kabul police spokesperson Ferdaws Faramarz said that a roadside bomb explosion targetted a police car, killing the driver and a nearby child as well as wounding five other civilians. The injured people also include children. The second explosion was caused by a bomb placed in a crowded market in southern Helmand province, killing one civilian and wounding 15 others including two police. No group immediately claimed responsibility for any of the attacks. Afghan police officials says that an investigation were underway. Afghanistan has seen a nationwide spike in bombings, targetted killings and violence on the battlefield as peace negotiations in Qatar between the Taliban and the Afghan government have stalled. It's been over a month since the sides last met to discuss how to proceed.

Roadside bombs in Afghanistan kill three, wound 20

NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg said on Thursday the alliance had made "no final decision" on the future of its Afghanistan mission, as new US President Joe Biden weighs pulling out troops.&nbsp;

While defence ministers held off on making that call at a two-day virtual conference, they did decide to expand a NATO training mission in Iraq from 500 to "around 4,000" personnel.&nbsp;

The fate of NATO's 9,600-strong support mission in Afghanistan was top of the agenda after former US leader Donald Trump struck a deal with the Taliban to pull troops out.

Biden's administration is reviewing whether to stick to a looming May 1 deadline to withdraw or risk a bloody backlash from the insurgents by staying.

"We are faced with many dilemmas and there are no easy options. At this stage, we have made no final decision on the future of our presence," Stoltenberg said at a news conference.&nbsp;

"But as the May 1st deadline is approaching, NATO allies will continue to closely consult and coordinate in the coming weeks."

Stoltenberg insisted the Taliban must live up to commitments under the deal with the US, including making progress in peace talks with Kabul, reducing violence and cutting ties to "international terrorist groups".

"NATO's goal is to ensure that Afghanistan never again becomes a safe haven for terrorists that would attack our homelands," he said.

The Taliban has launched a string of offensives threatening at least two provincial capitals and warned NATO ministers not to seek a "continuation of occupation and war" by staying.&nbsp;

"The protection of our troops remains paramount, and we will take all necessary measures to keep them safe," Stoltenberg said.&nbsp;

Allies are waiting anxiously for Biden to make his decision on whether to end two decades of involvement in Afghanistan -- but say they are willing to remain if the US stays too. &nbsp;

While Trump cut US forces to just 2,500 troop in January, the other NATO members rely on the American capabilities to keep the mission going.&nbsp;

US officials said new Defence Secretary Lloyd Austin, keen to revitalise ties after years of tensions under Trump, was going to listen to the allies and pass on their input to Biden.&nbsp;

Secretary of State Antony Blinken discussed the review with Afghan President Ashraf Ghani in a call on Wednesday and vowed the US would consult closely "on the way ahead", Washington said. &nbsp;&nbsp;

- Iraq expansion -

On Iraq, defence ministers agreed to bolster a NATO training mission aimed at strengthening the country's military as it looks to curb the resurgence of the Islamic State group.&nbsp;

"The size of our mission will increase from 500 personnel to around 4,000," Stoltenberg said, adding that the increases would be "incremental".&nbsp;

"Training activities will now include more Iraqi security institutions, and areas beyond Baghdad."

Stoltenberg insisted that the mission was being carried out "at the request of the Iraqi government".&nbsp;

"It is carried out with full respect for Iraq's sovereignty and territorial integrity," he said.

NATO has had a small non-combat mission in the country since 2018 to train and advise Iraqi forces.&nbsp;

The alliance announced plans to expand the mission last year under pressure from Trump to increase NATO's role in the Middle East.&nbsp;

That move was put on hold by the coronavirus pandemic and worries about instability, but is now being pushed through with strong backing from Iraqi Prime Minister Mustafa al-Kadhimi.&nbsp;

There is currently also a force from a US-led coalition against IS based mainly in the northern city of Arbil in Iraq's Kurdish region.&nbsp;

Since Iraq declared victory over IS in late 2017, the coalition presence has been reduced to fewer than 3,500 troops, of whom 2,500 are American.

The expanded NATO mission is expected to take over some of the training currently being conducted by the anti-IS coalition.&nbsp;

The announcement comes amid fears over rising tensions in Iraq after a rocket attack on Monday killed a foreign contractor for the US military in Arbil.

NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg said on Thursday the alliance had made "no final decision" on the future of its Afghanistan mission, as new US President Joe Biden weighs pulling out troops.

NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg said on Thursday the alliance had made "no final decision" on the future of its Afghanistan mission, as new US President Joe Biden weighs pulling out troops. While defence ministers held off on making that call at a two-day virtual conference, they did decide to expand a NATO training mission in Iraq from 500 to "around 4,000" personnel. The fate of NATO's 9,600-strong support mission in Afghanistan was top of the agenda after former US leader Donald Trump struck a deal with the Taliban to pull troops out. Biden's administration is reviewing whether to stick to a looming May 1 deadline to withdraw or risk a bloody backlash from the insurgents by staying. "We are faced with many dilemmas and there are no easy options. At this stage, we have made no final decision on the future of our presence," Stoltenberg said at a news conference. "But as the May 1st deadline is approaching, NATO allies will continue to closely consult and coordinate in the coming weeks." Stoltenberg insisted the Taliban must live up to commitments under the deal with the US, including making progress in peace talks with Kabul, reducing violence and cutting ties to "international terrorist groups". "NATO's goal is to ensure that Afghanistan never again becomes a safe haven for terrorists that would attack our homelands," he said. The Taliban has launched a string of offensives threatening at least two provincial capitals and warned NATO ministers not to seek a "continuation of occupation and war" by staying. "The protection of our troops remains paramount, and we will take all necessary measures to keep them safe," Stoltenberg said. Allies are waiting anxiously for Biden to make his decision on whether to end two decades of involvement in Afghanistan -- but say they are willing to remain if the US stays too. While Trump cut US forces to just 2,500 troop in January, the other NATO members rely on the American capabilities to keep the mission going. US officials said new Defence Secretary Lloyd Austin, keen to revitalise ties after years of tensions under Trump, was going to listen to the allies and pass on their input to Biden. Secretary of State Antony Blinken discussed the review with Afghan President Ashraf Ghani in a call on Wednesday and vowed the US would consult closely "on the way ahead", Washington said. - Iraq expansion - On Iraq, defence ministers agreed to bolster a NATO training mission aimed at strengthening the country's military as it looks to curb the resurgence of the Islamic State group. "The size of our mission will increase from 500 personnel to around 4,000," Stoltenberg said, adding that the increases would be "incremental". "Training activities will now include more Iraqi security institutions, and areas beyond Baghdad." Stoltenberg insisted that the mission was being carried out "at the request of the Iraqi government". "It is carried out with full respect for Iraq's sovereignty and territorial integrity," he said. NATO has had a small non-combat mission in the country since 2018 to train and advise Iraqi forces. The alliance announced plans to expand the mission last year under pressure from Trump to increase NATO's role in the Middle East. That move was put on hold by the coronavirus pandemic and worries about instability, but is now being pushed through with strong backing from Iraqi Prime Minister Mustafa al-Kadhimi. There is currently also a force from a US-led coalition against IS based mainly in the northern city of Arbil in Iraq's Kurdish region. Since Iraq declared victory over IS in late 2017, the coalition presence has been reduced to fewer than 3,500 troops, of whom 2,500 are American. The expanded NATO mission is expected to take over some of the training currently being conducted by the anti-IS coalition. The announcement comes amid fears over rising tensions in Iraq after a rocket attack on Monday killed a foreign contractor for the US military in Arbil.

NATO puts holds on Afghanistan decision, expands in Iraq

No final decision has been made by NATO on the subject of troop withdrawal from Afghanistan. The Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg has said that the alliance is seeking a lasting and sustainable political agreement in Afghanistan.

NATO holds post-Trump talks as Afghan decision looms

Afghan National Army (ANA) commandos have freed 23 security personnel and a civilian from a Taliban-run prison in northern Kunduz province, reported Pajhwok Afghan News.&nbsp;

The rescue operation by ANA was carried on Wednesday night, reported Xinhua. &nbsp;

"The special operation was launched in Kabuli Qishlaq village of Haqtash district on Wednesday night. No armed clash took place following the raid as the militants manning the Taliban hideout fled before troops' arrival," said Mohammad Omar Haqtash, a local official.&nbsp;

The freed people received medical treatment after they were shifted to an army camp, according to the official.&nbsp;

The Taliban is yet to comment on the ANA rescue operations. More details are awaited. &nbsp;

Also Read:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/south-asia/afghanistan-sends-investigators-to-look-into-the-massive-fire-at-afghan-iran-border-363816">Afghanistan sends investigators to look into the massive fire at Afghan-Iran border</a>

Meanwhile, on Wednesday, the Afghan National Defence and Security Forces (ANDSF) killed 11 Taliban terrorists and wounded another four in the Babur area of Arghandab district, Kandahar province.&nbsp;

The operation conducted by the ANDSF with the help of the air force aimed to clear the Babur area from the Taliban insurgents. The local Babur school, closed for a long period of time due to security reasons, has now reopened to students.&nbsp;

The Taliban controls around two-thirds of Afghan territory, including all districts around the capital. Despite the claims of general support in the controlled lands, the Taliban continue to oppose all attempts at holding democratic elections in the country. &nbsp;

The peace efforts also appeared to be undermined by the Joe Biden administration's ongoing revision of the Taliban-US deal, signed by Donald Trump administration in February 2020.&nbsp;

Afghan National Army (ANA) commandos have freed 23 security personnel and a civilian from a Taliban-run prison in northern Kunduz province, reported Pajhwok Afghan News.

Afghan National Army (ANA) commandos have freed 23 security personnel and a civilian from a Taliban-run prison in northern Kunduz province, reported Pajhwok Afghan News. The rescue operation by ANA was carried on Wednesday night, reported Xinhua. "The special operation was launched in Kabuli Qishlaq village of Haqtash district on Wednesday night. No armed clash took place following the raid as the militants manning the Taliban hideout fled before troops' arrival," said Mohammad Omar Haqtash, a local official. The freed people received medical treatment after they were shifted to an army camp, according to the official. The Taliban is yet to comment on the ANA rescue operations. More details are awaited. Also Read: Afghanistan sends investigators to look into the massive fire at Afghan-Iran border Meanwhile, on Wednesday, the Afghan National Defence and Security Forces (ANDSF) killed 11 Taliban terrorists and wounded another four in the Babur area of Arghandab district, Kandahar province. The operation conducted by the ANDSF with the help of the air force aimed to clear the Babur area from the Taliban insurgents. The local Babur school, closed for a long period of time due to security reasons, has now reopened to students. The Taliban controls around two-thirds of Afghan territory, including all districts around the capital. Despite the claims of general support in the controlled lands, the Taliban continue to oppose all attempts at holding democratic elections in the country. The peace efforts also appeared to be undermined by the Joe Biden administration's ongoing revision of the Taliban-US deal, signed by Donald Trump administration in February 2020.

Afghan Army frees 23 security personnel from Taliban jail in Kunduz

The previous two presidents of the United States declared that they wanted to pull all US&nbsp;troops out of Afghanistan, and they both decided in the end that they could not do it.

Now President Joe Biden is facing the same issue, with a deadline less than three months away.

The Pentagon, uncertain what the new commander in chief will do, is preparing variations on a plan to stay, a plan to leave and a plan to withdraw very, very slowly — a reflection of the debate now swirling in the White House. The current deadline is May 1, in keeping with a much-violated peace agreement that calls for the complete withdrawal of the remaining 2,500 US&nbsp;forces.

The deadline is a critical decision point for Biden, and it will come months before the 20th anniversary of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks that prompted the US-led invasion of Afghanistan to root out al-Qaida.

Two decades later, the strategic goals have shifted many times, from counterterrorism and democratization to nation-building, and far more limited goals that President Barack Obama’s administration called “Afghan good enough.” Biden — who argued as vice president throughout Obama’s term for a minimal presence — will have to decide whether following his instincts to get out would run too high a risk of a takeover of the country’s key cities by the Taliban.

Biden, one senior aide noted, started his long career in the Senate just before the United States evacuated its personnel from Saigon, the capital of South Vietnam; the image of helicopters plucking Americans and a few Vietnamese from a roof was a searing symbol of a failed strategy. Biden is highly aware of the risks of something similar transpiring in Kabul, the Afghan capital, if all Western troops leave, and he has privately described the possibility as haunting, aides said.

But the president also questions whether the small remaining contingent of Americans can accomplish anything after 20 years in which almost 800,000 U.S. troops have deployed, or whether it will ever be possible to bring them home.

Biden has kept in place Zalmay Khalilzad, the longtime diplomat who had negotiated the peace agreement under President Donald Trump, in hopes of continuity in dealing with the Taliban and the Afghan government. But the key advisers on the issue are Secretary of State Antony Blinken and the national security adviser, Jake Sullivan — along with Jon Finer, Sullivan’s deputy.

By all accounts, Biden will be guided by his own experience, and he has yet to make a decision. Allies will be looking for some indications at a NATO summit meeting that starts Wednesday, though Biden’s aides say they are not rushing a critical decision.

“We are conducting a rigorous review of the situation we’ve inherited, including all relevant options and with full consideration of the consequences of any potential course of action,” said Emily J. Horne, a spokeswoman for the National Security Council. “It would be wrong for anyone to assume the outcome of that process at this point.”

At the same time, the Taliban and the Afghan government are gearing up for a violent spring. Administration officials last week started discussions over how to proceed with Afghan officials whom Trump left out of his deal with the Taliban.

One option under consideration, aides said, would be to extend the May 1 troop withdrawal deadline by six months to give all sides more time to decide how to proceed. But it is unclear that the Taliban would agree — or whether Biden would.

At the center of the decision-making is a new American president who has had to stand by for 20 years while other leaders ignored his advice on Afghanistan and committed large numbers of U.S. troops to a war effort there, overriding his argument that all the United States needed was a streamlined, focused counterterrorism presence.

The decision is harder because if Biden decides to withdraw, he will bear some responsibility — and much of the blame — if there is a collapse of the elected Afghan government that U.S. troops and their NATO allies have fought and died for and spent billions of dollars propping up.

In the panoply of foreign policy decisions facing the president, he and his senior national security aides do not view Afghanistan as the most far-reaching. The right relationship with China is far more central to American prosperity. Carrying through on Biden’s promise not to let Russia roll over the United States is more important to its security. The Iranian nuclear program looms over Middle East calculations. Afghanistan is deeply personal to him, and the most influential voice the president will listen to may be his own.

“His head is more in the game on this because he has been connecting with these people around the world for years,” said Brian Katulis, a senior fellow at the Center for American Progress, a Washington think tank with close ties to the Biden administration.

Katulis recalled bumping into Biden at the Marriott Hotel in Islamabad in 2008, when the president was a senator visiting the country as part of a congressional tour with his colleagues John Kerry, who would become secretary of state, and Chuck Hagel, who would become secretary of defense. It was midnight in the hotel’s executive club, Katulis recalled, and Biden wanted to chat South Asia. For two hours.

“He was just energized by this issue,” Katulis said.

The May 1 deadline, enshrined in a peace deal reached with the Taliban nearly a year ago, will be the focus of the meeting in Brussels this week of allied defense ministers, including Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin. There are now more than twice as many troops from NATO allies in Afghanistan as there are Americans, and as they gauge their own commitment to the country, they are looking to Biden and Austin for a road map.

The president is already being lobbied by the same voices that, for the past 20 years, have advocated maintaining at least a limited troop presence in Afghanistan.

In December, before Biden was inaugurated, the bipartisan, congressionally appointed Afghan Study Group run by the United States Institute of Peace met with his foreign policy advisers to brief them on a report on Afghanistan. The report, which was released Feb. 3, argued, in essence, for abandoning the May 1 timetable by saying that the Taliban had not met the conditions for a US&nbsp;withdrawal as set by the Trump-Taliban agreement.

The group said that going to zero troops, as the Trump-Taliban agreement called for, would lead to civil war, set back American interests in the region and render pointless the sacrifice of 3,500 coalition troops killed prosecuting the U.S.-led war effort in Afghanistan.

John F. Kirby, the new Pentagon press secretary, insisted that the Biden administration stood by the agreement, with its commitment for a full troop withdrawal, but he expressed pessimism that the Taliban would do what they were supposed to: Cut ties with al-Qaida and reduce violence.

“Without them meeting their commitments to renounce terrorism and to stop the violent attacks against the Afghan National Security Forces, it’s very hard to see a specific way forward for the negotiated settlement,” Kirby said. “But we’re still committed to that.”

But that was the standard line from the Pentagon even during the Trump administration. What is unclear at this point is where Biden falls on the spectrum.

When he was vice president, he battled Pentagon leaders in urging his boss, Obama, to limit the number of US&nbsp;troops in Afghanistan.

“Joe and a sizable number of NSC staffers,” Obama wrote in his memoir, “A Promised Land,” viewed a proposal by Gen. Stanley McChrystal to surge tens of thousands of troops into the country “as just the latest attempt by an unrestrained military to drag the country deeper into a futile, wildly expensive nation-building exercise, when we could and should be narrowly focused on counterterrorism efforts.”

Although Biden lost the argument in 2009, Obama came around to his position by the end of his presidency after hundreds of Americans and allied troops had been killed and the gains of the surge had been mostly lost to the Taliban.

Biden must decide whether it is possible to defeat terrorist groups even if there is no physical troop presence. Aides say he is acutely aware that most Americans are tired of the war and doubtful that continued spending, in blood and treasure, will accomplish anything. And Afghanistan, without doubt, has receded in the public consciousness.

For Biden, that could change the instant that Afghanistan is used again as a base from which to launch another terrorist attack on the United States or Western targets. For an example, he needs only to look to Iraq and the rise of the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria, which followed Obama’s withdrawal of U.S. troops in 2011 after the end of the combat mission there.

Critics contend that the Taliban have not yet pledged to cut ties to al-Qaida and other terrorist groups threatening the United States, as the February 2020 agreement called for.

Moreover, some analysts say that the Taliban, bolstered by battlefield triumphs and success at the bargaining table in Qatar in winning the release of more than 5,000 prisoners, remain confident they can wait out the new administration and have little incentive to compromise.

Gen. Joseph Dunford, a retired four-star Marine general and a former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, who helped lead the Afghan Study Group, said the United States still had leverage. Dunford, a former top commander in Afghanistan, said that beyond increased battlefield pressure, the Taliban want international recognition as a legitimate political movement and a relief from punishing economic sanctions.

One option gaining traction among some former diplomats and Afghanistan specialists is for Washington, working with its allies, to negotiate a monthslong extension to the troop withdrawal deadline. That would buy time for the new administration to bolster the peace talks in Qatar; rally support from other states in the region, including Pakistan; and conduct a new assessment of the future terrorism threat in Afghanistan.

“It won’t be easy, but it’s feasible,” said Laurel E. Miller, a former top State Department official who worked on Afghanistan and Pakistan diplomacy for Obama and Trump. “The Taliban has an interest in keeping the process going because the process has been working for them.”

If that approach fails, however, the Taliban have threatened to resume attacks against American and other NATO forces if the United States unilaterally decides to keep its 2,500 troops in the country beyond the May deadline. The U.S. forces are now hunkered down in about a dozen bases and perform two main missions: counterterrorism operations and advising Afghan security forces at various headquarters.

Preparing for the possibility of renewed attacks against Americans, the military’s Central Command has been ordered to draw up a wide range of options to cover whether troops stay or go, and to counter even higher levels of Taliban violence, Pentagon officials say.

The administration could, for instance, temporarily increase the number of troops in the country, reversing Trump’s order to cut forces in the final weeks of his term. That could prove politically risky for Biden as he seeks to push higher-priority legislation, such as pandemic relief, through Congress.

Another option would be to increase the number of American airstrikes against Taliban targets across the country, like the fighters threatening major Afghan cities such as Kabul and Kandahar. This could require sending more strike aircraft to land at bases in the Middle East or ensuring that an aircraft carrier with its strike wing is operating in the Persian Gulf region, military officials said.

Kelly A. Ayotte, a former Republican senator from New Hampshire and another leader of the congressionally mandated Afghanistan commission, summed up the sentiment of not only panel members but many administration officials.

“It is not whether we leave,” she said, “but it’s how we leave.”

The previous two presidents of the United States declared that they wanted to pull all US troops out of Afghanistan, and they both decided in the end that they could not do it.

The previous two presidents of the United States declared that they wanted to pull all US troops out of Afghanistan, and they both decided in the end that they could not do it. Now President Joe Biden is facing the same issue, with a deadline less than three months away. The Pentagon, uncertain what the new commander in chief will do, is preparing variations on a plan to stay, a plan to leave and a plan to withdraw very, very slowly — a reflection of the debate now swirling in the White House. The current deadline is May 1, in keeping with a much-violated peace agreement that calls for the complete withdrawal of the remaining 2,500 US forces. The deadline is a critical decision point for Biden, and it will come months before the 20th anniversary of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks that prompted the US-led invasion of Afghanistan to root out al-Qaida. Two decades later, the strategic goals have shifted many times, from counterterrorism and democratization to nation-building, and far more limited goals that President Barack Obama’s administration called “Afghan good enough.” Biden — who argued as vice president throughout Obama’s term for a minimal presence — will have to decide whether following his instincts to get out would run too high a risk of a takeover of the country’s key cities by the Taliban. Biden, one senior aide noted, started his long career in the Senate just before the United States evacuated its personnel from Saigon, the capital of South Vietnam; the image of helicopters plucking Americans and a few Vietnamese from a roof was a searing symbol of a failed strategy. Biden is highly aware of the risks of something similar transpiring in Kabul, the Afghan capital, if all Western troops leave, and he has privately described the possibility as haunting, aides said. But the president also questions whether the small remaining contingent of Americans can accomplish anything after 20 years in which almost 800,000 U.S. troops have deployed, or whether it will ever be possible to bring them home. Biden has kept in place Zalmay Khalilzad, the longtime diplomat who had negotiated the peace agreement under President Donald Trump, in hopes of continuity in dealing with the Taliban and the Afghan government. But the key advisers on the issue are Secretary of State Antony Blinken and the national security adviser, Jake Sullivan — along with Jon Finer, Sullivan’s deputy. By all accounts, Biden will be guided by his own experience, and he has yet to make a decision. Allies will be looking for some indications at a NATO summit meeting that starts Wednesday, though Biden’s aides say they are not rushing a critical decision. “We are conducting a rigorous review of the situation we’ve inherited, including all relevant options and with full consideration of the consequences of any potential course of action,” said Emily J. Horne, a spokeswoman for the National Security Council. “It would be wrong for anyone to assume the outcome of that process at this point.” At the same time, the Taliban and the Afghan government are gearing up for a violent spring. Administration officials last week started discussions over how to proceed with Afghan officials whom Trump left out of his deal with the Taliban. One option under consideration, aides said, would be to extend the May 1 troop withdrawal deadline by six months to give all sides more time to decide how to proceed. But it is unclear that the Taliban would agree — or whether Biden would. At the center of the decision-making is a new American president who has had to stand by for 20 years while other leaders ignored his advice on Afghanistan and committed large numbers of U.S. troops to a war effort there, overriding his argument that all the United States needed was a streamlined, focused counterterrorism presence. The decision is harder because if Biden decides to withdraw, he will bear some responsibility — and much of the blame — if there is a collapse of the elected Afghan government that U.S. troops and their NATO allies have fought and died for and spent billions of dollars propping up. In the panoply of foreign policy decisions facing the president, he and his senior national security aides do not view Afghanistan as the most far-reaching. The right relationship with China is far more central to American prosperity. Carrying through on Biden’s promise not to let Russia roll over the United States is more important to its security. The Iranian nuclear program looms over Middle East calculations. Afghanistan is deeply personal to him, and the most influential voice the president will listen to may be his own. “His head is more in the game on this because he has been connecting with these people around the world for years,” said Brian Katulis, a senior fellow at the Center for American Progress, a Washington think tank with close ties to the Biden administration. Katulis recalled bumping into Biden at the Marriott Hotel in Islamabad in 2008, when the president was a senator visiting the country as part of a congressional tour with his colleagues John Kerry, who would become secretary of state, and Chuck Hagel, who would become secretary of defense. It was midnight in the hotel’s executive club, Katulis recalled, and Biden wanted to chat South Asia. For two hours. “He was just energized by this issue,” Katulis said. The May 1 deadline, enshrined in a peace deal reached with the Taliban nearly a year ago, will be the focus of the meeting in Brussels this week of allied defense ministers, including Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin. There are now more than twice as many troops from NATO allies in Afghanistan as there are Americans, and as they gauge their own commitment to the country, they are looking to Biden and Austin for a road map. The president is already being lobbied by the same voices that, for the past 20 years, have advocated maintaining at least a limited troop presence in Afghanistan. In December, before Biden was inaugurated, the bipartisan, congressionally appointed Afghan Study Group run by the United States Institute of Peace met with his foreign policy advisers to brief them on a report on Afghanistan. The report, which was released Feb. 3, argued, in essence, for abandoning the May 1 timetable by saying that the Taliban had not met the conditions for a US withdrawal as set by the Trump-Taliban agreement. The group said that going to zero troops, as the Trump-Taliban agreement called for, would lead to civil war, set back American interests in the region and render pointless the sacrifice of 3,500 coalition troops killed prosecuting the U.S.-led war effort in Afghanistan. John F. Kirby, the new Pentagon press secretary, insisted that the Biden administration stood by the agreement, with its commitment for a full troop withdrawal, but he expressed pessimism that the Taliban would do what they were supposed to: Cut ties with al-Qaida and reduce violence. “Without them meeting their commitments to renounce terrorism and to stop the violent attacks against the Afghan National Security Forces, it’s very hard to see a specific way forward for the negotiated settlement,” Kirby said. “But we’re still committed to that.” But that was the standard line from the Pentagon even during the Trump administration. What is unclear at this point is where Biden falls on the spectrum. When he was vice president, he battled Pentagon leaders in urging his boss, Obama, to limit the number of US troops in Afghanistan. “Joe and a sizable number of NSC staffers,” Obama wrote in his memoir, “A Promised Land,” viewed a proposal by Gen. Stanley McChrystal to surge tens of thousands of troops into the country “as just the latest attempt by an unrestrained military to drag the country deeper into a futile, wildly expensive nation-building exercise, when we could and should be narrowly focused on counterterrorism efforts.” Although Biden lost the argument in 2009, Obama came around to his position by the end of his presidency after hundreds of Americans and allied troops had been killed and the gains of the surge had been mostly lost to the Taliban. Biden must decide whether it is possible to defeat terrorist groups even if there is no physical troop presence. Aides say he is acutely aware that most Americans are tired of the war and doubtful that continued spending, in blood and treasure, will accomplish anything. And Afghanistan, without doubt, has receded in the public consciousness. For Biden, that could change the instant that Afghanistan is used again as a base from which to launch another terrorist attack on the United States or Western targets. For an example, he needs only to look to Iraq and the rise of the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria, which followed Obama’s withdrawal of U.S. troops in 2011 after the end of the combat mission there. Critics contend that the Taliban have not yet pledged to cut ties to al-Qaida and other terrorist groups threatening the United States, as the February 2020 agreement called for. Moreover, some analysts say that the Taliban, bolstered by battlefield triumphs and success at the bargaining table in Qatar in winning the release of more than 5,000 prisoners, remain confident they can wait out the new administration and have little incentive to compromise. Gen. Joseph Dunford, a retired four-star Marine general and a former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, who helped lead the Afghan Study Group, said the United States still had leverage. Dunford, a former top commander in Afghanistan, said that beyond increased battlefield pressure, the Taliban want international recognition as a legitimate political movement and a relief from punishing economic sanctions. One option gaining traction among some former diplomats and Afghanistan specialists is for Washington, working with its allies, to negotiate a monthslong extension to the troop withdrawal deadline. That would buy time for the new administration to bolster the peace talks in Qatar; rally support from other states in the region, including Pakistan; and conduct a new assessment of the future terrorism threat in Afghanistan. “It won’t be easy, but it’s feasible,” said Laurel E. Miller, a former top State Department official who worked on Afghanistan and Pakistan diplomacy for Obama and Trump. “The Taliban has an interest in keeping the process going because the process has been working for them.” If that approach fails, however, the Taliban have threatened to resume attacks against American and other NATO forces if the United States unilaterally decides to keep its 2,500 troops in the country beyond the May deadline. The U.S. forces are now hunkered down in about a dozen bases and perform two main missions: counterterrorism operations and advising Afghan security forces at various headquarters. Preparing for the possibility of renewed attacks against Americans, the military’s Central Command has been ordered to draw up a wide range of options to cover whether troops stay or go, and to counter even higher levels of Taliban violence, Pentagon officials say. The administration could, for instance, temporarily increase the number of troops in the country, reversing Trump’s order to cut forces in the final weeks of his term. That could prove politically risky for Biden as he seeks to push higher-priority legislation, such as pandemic relief, through Congress. Another option would be to increase the number of American airstrikes against Taliban targets across the country, like the fighters threatening major Afghan cities such as Kabul and Kandahar. This could require sending more strike aircraft to land at bases in the Middle East or ensuring that an aircraft carrier with its strike wing is operating in the Persian Gulf region, military officials said. Kelly A. Ayotte, a former Republican senator from New Hampshire and another leader of the congressionally mandated Afghanistan commission, summed up the sentiment of not only panel members but many administration officials. “It is not whether we leave,” she said, “but it’s how we leave.”

Stay or go? Biden, long a critic of Afghan deployments, faces a deadline

The Defence Ministers of NATO will be meeting virtually for the first time under Joe Biden's Presidency. The summit will focus on the situation in Afghanistan.

WION Fineprint: NATO Defence Ministers to meet virtually

Afghanistan on Monday sent investigators to its western border with Iran to investigate the fire that tore through customs post. At least 60 people were injured in the fire on Saturday (January 13) &nbsp;as hundreds of fuel vehicles exploded in the blaze this disrupted power supply and caused millions of dollars of damage. The cause of the fire was unknown.

Herat police spokesman Abdul Ahad Walizada said a 10-person investigating team included four officials from Kabul, including a director of the criminal division of the interior ministry.

Herat's governor Waheed Qatali told media that there were no reports of deaths and they were still investigating.

A tanker caught fire, triggering the blaze, but the cause of that fire was still unclear, he said.

Amin Babak, a spokesman for Afghanistan's Chamber of Commerce and Investment, said around 600 vehicles waiting to complete customs inspections had been damaged in the fire. More than half contained fuel and gas and some had been looted, he said.

Babak said the losses for Afghan traders were estimated at around USD 100 million. This is another blow for Afghanistan economy which is already struggling due COVID pandemic.

Omar Joya, chief economist at the Kabul-based Biruni Institute, said that the blaze could lead to a temporary increase in domestic oil prices, but that importers had sufficient capital to import new oil so prices would likely stabilise relatively quickly.

(With Reuters inputs)

Afghanistan on Monday sent investigators to its western border with Iran to investigate the fire that tore through customs post. At least 60 people were injured in the fire on Saturday (January 13) as hundreds of fuel vehicles exploded in the blaze this disrupted power supply and caused millions of dollars of damage.

Afghanistan on Monday sent investigators to its western border with Iran to investigate the fire that tore through customs post. At least 60 people were injured in the fire on Saturday (January 13) as hundreds of fuel vehicles exploded in the blaze this disrupted power supply and caused millions of dollars of damage. The cause of the fire was unknown. Herat police spokesman Abdul Ahad Walizada said a 10-person investigating team included four officials from Kabul, including a director of the criminal division of the interior ministry. Herat's governor Waheed Qatali told media that there were no reports of deaths and they were still investigating. A tanker caught fire, triggering the blaze, but the cause of that fire was still unclear, he said. Amin Babak, a spokesman for Afghanistan's Chamber of Commerce and Investment, said around 600 vehicles waiting to complete customs inspections had been damaged in the fire. More than half contained fuel and gas and some had been looted, he said. Babak said the losses for Afghan traders were estimated at around USD 100 million. This is another blow for Afghanistan economy which is already struggling due COVID pandemic. Omar Joya, chief economist at the Kabul-based Biruni Institute, said that the blaze could lead to a temporary increase in domestic oil prices, but that importers had sufficient capital to import new oil so prices would likely stabilise relatively quickly. (With Reuters inputs)

Afghanistan sends investigators to look into the massive fire at Afghan-Iran border

At least 60 people have been injured after oil and gas tankers got destroyed by multiple blasts causing a massive fire at Afghanistan's biggest trade crossing with Iran, officials said on Sunday.

Fire Truck Explodes: Over 300 fuel vehicled gutted in fire

At least 20 people have been injured after at least 100 oil and gas tankers got destroyed by multiple blasts causing a massive fire at Afghanistan's biggest trade crossing with Iran, officials said on Sunday.

The huge fire, which erupted Saturday afternoon at Islam Qala port, has majorly been doused and an investigation has been launched to find the cause.&nbsp;

Also read | <a href="https://www.wionews.com/south-asia/inferno-on-afghanistan-iran-border-as-dozens-of-oil-tankers-catch-fire-363450">Inferno on Afghanistan-Iran border as dozens of oil tankers catch fire</a>

"We were told that 100 or 200 tankers have been destroyed, but this number could be higher. We need more time to find out the extent of the damage," Jailani Farhad, the spokesman for the governor of Herat province scene, was reported as saying by news agency AFP.&nbsp;

Watch |&nbsp;

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Video of the massive fuel tanker explosion today on the <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Iran?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#Iran</a>-<a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Afghanistan?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#Afghanistan</a> border. <a href="https://t.co/1iMo4taaF7">pic.twitter.com/1iMo4taaF7</a>
— Jason Brodsky (@JasonMBrodsky) <a href="https://twitter.com/JasonMBrodsky/status/1360591498799165443?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 13, 2021</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

&nbsp;

Around 20 people also lost their lives in the fire, he added.&nbsp;

However, a western official monitoring the developments told news agency Reuters that 60 people had been wounded.&nbsp;

Videos shared on social media showed massive flames of black smoke billowing into the sky.&nbsp;

Two blasts also occurred, which were so powerful to be spotted by Nasa satellites in space.

The finance ministry said preliminary probe suggests that the fire started in a tanker before rapidly reaching others, causing "heavy financial losses".&nbsp;

Initial estimates were of "millions of dollars of losses", Younus Qazi Zada, the head of the Herat Chamber of Commerce said.&nbsp; 
&nbsp;

At least 20 people have been injured after at least 100 oil and gas tankers got destroyed by multiple blasts causing a massive fire at Afghanistan's biggest trade crossing with Iran, officials said on Sunday.

At least 20 people have been injured after at least 100 oil and gas tankers got destroyed by multiple blasts causing a massive fire at Afghanistan's biggest trade crossing with Iran, officials said on Sunday. The huge fire, which erupted Saturday afternoon at Islam Qala port, has majorly been doused and an investigation has been launched to find the cause. Also read | Inferno on Afghanistan-Iran border as dozens of oil tankers catch fire "We were told that 100 or 200 tankers have been destroyed, but this number could be higher. We need more time to find out the extent of the damage," Jailani Farhad, the spokesman for the governor of Herat province scene, was reported as saying by news agency AFP. Watch | Video of the massive fuel tanker explosion today on the #Iran-#Afghanistan border. pic.twitter.com/1iMo4taaF7 — Jason Brodsky (@JasonMBrodsky) February 13, 2021 Around 20 people also lost their lives in the fire, he added. However, a western official monitoring the developments told news agency Reuters that 60 people had been wounded. Videos shared on social media showed massive flames of black smoke billowing into the sky. Two blasts also occurred, which were so powerful to be spotted by Nasa satellites in space. The finance ministry said preliminary probe suggests that the fire started in a tanker before rapidly reaching others, causing "heavy financial losses". Initial estimates were of "millions of dollars of losses", Younus Qazi Zada, the head of the Herat Chamber of Commerce said.

Blasts spotted from space as 100 tankers destroyed in Iran-Afghanistan border

Dozens of oil and gas tankers carrying millions of dollars worth of fuel caught fire on Saturday, creating an inferno at Afghanistan's biggest trade crossing with Iran, officials said.

The blaze broke out early afternoon at Islam Qala port, some 120 kilometres from the city of Herat, engulfing the tankers that were parked nearby after crossing the border.&nbsp;

"There were between 200 and 300 fuel tankers there and we managed to save some, but most have been engulfed and the fire is so huge that nobody can get to within even a kilometre of it," said Younus Qazi Zada, the head of Herat Chamber of Commerce.

"The initial estimate is of millions of dollars of losses, but we have to wait till the fire is extinguished for a proper assessment of damage."

At least 17 people have been taken to hospital, some of them with serious burns, said Ibrahim Mohammadi, the head of Herat ambulance service.

Jailani Farhad, the spokesman for the governor of western Herat province, said dozens of tankers were ablaze.

"We don't have the required facilities to contain it, so through the foreign ministry, we have asked the government of Iran to help us contain the fire," he said.&nbsp;

The cause of the fire was unknown, he added.

Videos posted on social media show towering flames and huge clouds of thick black smoke billowing into the sky.

Islam Qala is one of the major ports in Afghanistan, through which most official trade with Iran is conducted.&nbsp;

Taking advantage of the situation, Taliban insurgents attacked a nearby security post after the blaze broke out, Farhad added.&nbsp;

Dozens of oil and gas tankers carrying millions of dollars worth of fuel caught fire on Saturday, creating an inferno at Afghanistan's biggest trade crossing with Iran, officials said.

Dozens of oil and gas tankers carrying millions of dollars worth of fuel caught fire on Saturday, creating an inferno at Afghanistan's biggest trade crossing with Iran, officials said. The blaze broke out early afternoon at Islam Qala port, some 120 kilometres from the city of Herat, engulfing the tankers that were parked nearby after crossing the border. "There were between 200 and 300 fuel tankers there and we managed to save some, but most have been engulfed and the fire is so huge that nobody can get to within even a kilometre of it," said Younus Qazi Zada, the head of Herat Chamber of Commerce. "The initial estimate is of millions of dollars of losses, but we have to wait till the fire is extinguished for a proper assessment of damage." At least 17 people have been taken to hospital, some of them with serious burns, said Ibrahim Mohammadi, the head of Herat ambulance service. Jailani Farhad, the spokesman for the governor of western Herat province, said dozens of tankers were ablaze. "We don't have the required facilities to contain it, so through the foreign ministry, we have asked the government of Iran to help us contain the fire," he said. The cause of the fire was unknown, he added. Videos posted on social media show towering flames and huge clouds of thick black smoke billowing into the sky. Islam Qala is one of the major ports in Afghanistan, through which most official trade with Iran is conducted. Taking advantage of the situation, Taliban insurgents attacked a nearby security post after the blaze broke out, Farhad added.

Inferno on Afghanistan-Iran border as dozens of oil tankers catch fire

afghanistan-0

Afghanistan, News on Afghanistan, stories on Afghanistan, articles on Afghanistan, Afghanistan stories at Wion, Afghanistan news, Afghanistan latest news

afghanistan 0