Russia and the Taliban – USA Gov Policy

The United Nations envoy for Afghanistan, Tadamichi Yamamoto, has pointed out . both some progress and the severe challenges in that nation.

While the Government has committed to holding parliamentary elections which should be “fair, inclusive and transparent by the Afghan people,” the Taliban retains extensive military capabilities. It’s extreme views on women also put a damper on the fairness of any forthcoming election.

“The deteriorating security situation remains of great concern,” notes Yamamoto. He urged the Taliban to enter peace talks without preconditions and warning against attacks by foreign fighters including ISIS.

Last year, the UN Assistance Mission in Afghanistan (UNAMA) recorded the worst number of civilian casualties since record-keeping began nearly a decade ago. Deteriorating security also led to the highest-ever level of internal displacement in 2016. More than 650,000 Afghans were displaced. Returns from Pakistan exceeded 620,000 people. Displacements and returns for 2017 are likely to remain at these levels.

Yamamoto notes that due in part to the worsening security situation over the past two years, service delivery has become increasingly difficult. “We have witnessed some downward trends in key indicators, such as access to health clinics and education facilities,” he said.

As reported by the New York Analysis of Policy and Government in February, Russia has reached out to the Taliban. A senior official of that terrorist group told Reuters in early December that Russia’s relationship with the Taliban began in 2007, as Moscow shared the Taliban’s objective of forcing all U.S. troops to swiftly withdraw from Afghanistan.

A visit to your local chiropractor could help you safely and effectively manage your shoulder pain and dysfunction. cialis levitra generika People are facing cialis line prescription erectile dysfunction but are simply unaware of the thought that ladies could go through from sexual complications. In such disorders, a person must consult a doctor before buying Tadalafil pills online if you feel embarrassed in discussing your sexual problems with a short period of time. cute-n-tiny.com cheap viagra online Although, the side effects of Oral Steroid use represent high force per unit area, changes within the body’s system, enlarged prostates, and cute-n-tiny.com cheapest levitra excretory organ issues then on. “The official end of the U.S. war in Afghanistan in 2014 did not cause Russia to distance itself from the Taliban…Critics of Russian foreign policy argue that Putin’s outreach to the Taliban is a cynical ploy to undermine the legitimacy of President Ashraf Ghani’s U.S.-backed government. Some Afghan policymakers and General John Nicholson, a leading U.S. military commander in Afghanistan, have publicly given credibility to this contention…Citing a high-level Taliban official The Daily Beast reported in October 2015 that Moscow also encouraged Tajik intelligence operatives to facilitate the shipment of Russian arms to the Taliban.”

A Foreign Affairs analysis points out that “Trump inherits a more challenging situation in Afghanistan than his predecessor did. …Several other countries, including Iran and Russia, have also stepped up communication with, and provided limited material support to, the Taliban…Afghanistan’s national unity government remains weak and hamstrung by corruption…

Former U.S. Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, gave his views on the Taliban’s strength in a statement to the Senate Armed Services Committee in 2015

“The Afghan National Security Forces (ANSF)…will require continued international security sector support and funding to stave off an increasingly aggressive Taliban insurgency…Without international funding, the ANSF will probably not remain a cohesive or viable force. The Taliban will probably remain largely cohesive…and sustain its countrywide campaign to take territory in outlying areas and steadily reassert influence over significant portions of the Pashtun countryside, positioning itself for greater territorial gains …The Taliban has publicly touted the end of the mission of the International Security and Assistance Force (ISAF) and coalition drawdown as a sign of its inevitable victory, reinforcing its commitment to returning to power.”

In his February joint address to Congress, President Trump promised to “demolish and destroy” terrorist groups. The fight in Afghanistan will prove to be the most difficult due to the number of terrorist groups operating in the area. It will also be the most important, because in the absence of a western military presence, one of those terrorist organizations could gain access to Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal.

Writing in the National Interest Akhilesh Pillalamarri describes the problem: “Although Pakistan argues that its nuclear weapons are well-guarded, many experts are not so sure, pointing out that the Taliban and other militants have frequently struck at supposedly secure military bases with impunity. More worrisome, though, is Pakistan’s history of proliferation, which increases the chance that one day some element or the other in the Pakistani military will provide nuclear materials to an even more dangerous third party…”

Quick Analysis

Why the Electoral College is Vital

Proposals for radical alterations in the way Americans vote are dangerous concepts that would have dramatic consequences for the nation and its Constitution. Some, such as ranked choice voting, are an unblushing bid to prop up fringe, leftist candidates. Others. if adopted, would essentially disunite the nation and overturn its Constitution. As they consistently have after each election loss, Democrat spokespeople have flooded the airwaves with complaints about the Electoral College. Why, they ask, can’t we have a “popular vote,” and let it be done with. Since the Electoral College process is part of the original design of the U.S. Constitution, it would be necessary to pass a Constitutional amendment to change this system. The National Archives notes that over the past 200 years more than 700 proposals have been introduced in Congress to reform or eliminate the Electoral College. There have been more proposals for Constitutional amendments on changing the Electoral College than on any other subject. The answer is as simple as the name of the country: The United States of America. The incredibly successful nation created almost two and a half centuries ago was a union of separate states. Fresh off of dealing with a monarch, it was intentionally set up that way to both prevent the possibility of having an all-powerful dictator, and to prevent larger states from bullying smaller ones. Abolishing the electoral college would essentially disenfranchise smaller states from having any say in the presidency. Indeed, even less populated areas of large states would lose influence. A collection of large cities, (New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Houston, Phoenix, Philadelphia, San Antonio, San Diego, Dallas, Austin, Jacksonville, etc.) would decide the outcome in who gets the White House. Considering how badly many of those urban centers are run, that would not bode well for the future of the country! Beyond the practical policy implications, it would alienate the populations of those not living in California, Texas, New York, Florida, Pennsylvania, Illinois, who would, for the most part, be reduced to bystanders in the race for the only nationally-elected position. A Heritage study analyzed the concept of a “National Popular Vote” (NPV) this way: “The National Popular Vote (NPV) plan is the latest in a long line of schemes designed to replace the Electoral College. Imbued with the ideals of this nation’s Founders, the Electoral College has proved itself to be both effective in providing orderly elections for President and resilient in allowing a stable transfer of power of the leadership of the world’s greatest democracy. Therefore, while it would be a mistake to replace the Electoral College, replacing this system with the NPV would be a disaster. The NPV would devalue the minority interests that the Founders sought to protect, create electoral administrative problems, encourage voter fraud, and radicalize the U.S. political system. It also would likely violate the U.S. Constitution’s Compact Clause while directly contravening the Founders’ view of federalism and a representative republic. In an age of perceived political dysfunction, effective policies already in place—especially successful policies established by this nation’s Founders, such as the Electoral College—should be preserved.” Trent England, writing for the National Conference of State Legislatures outlined key reasons for the institution: “At the Constitutional Convention, the primary concern of delegates opposed to direct election was that big states would dominate presidential politics. By using a two-step election process, the Electoral College prevents one region, or a handful of major metropolitan areas, from controlling the White House. Support must be geographically distributed around the country in order to win enough states to capture an electoral vote majority. This was particularly important after the Civil War. The nation remained divided, and Democrats became dominant in the south. A combination of intense popularity with some voters and violent suppression of others allowed Democrats to receive the most popular votes in 1876 and 1888 even though they lost the Electoral College and thus those elections.” Eliminating the Electoral College would be a disaster for the United States/