What you Need to Know about BDS

Posted on April 2, 2015April 2, 2015 by Denise Simon

The pro-Palestinian group has satellite factions all over Europe and the United States. Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions formally began in 2001 at the United Nations General Assembly with the Durban NGO Action Plan.

This movement is composed of a relatively small number of full-time, well-financed, anti-Israel activists, who are inspired and encouraged by senior figures in the Palestinian public, including Omar Barghouti, Mustafa Barghouti, Nabil Sha’att, and others. They organize events mostly throughout Europe and in North America, raise funds, and arrange seminars, conferences, and demonstrations in support of isolating and boycotting Israel in every way possible. They claim to enjoy the support of hundreds of Arab, Palestinian, and other non-governmental organizations signatory to their basic documentation. However, upon examination, many of these NGOs appear to be either fictional, non-existent, and even, in some cases, front-organizations for Hamas and other terror groups.
Their mode of operation includes stalking members of the general public on the streets and arranging seminars intended to “brainwash” activists with factually inaccurate, misleading, and false information and accusations regarding Israel. It also includes threats of action against companies, suppliers, stores, academic institutions, as well as performers, unless they disassociate themselves from any Israel-related connection. In many cases this constitutes blatant harassment of the general public, and arbitrary denial of basic rights to freedom of choice, freedom to use public areas in shopping malls and streets, freedom to enter stores, freedom to purchase, freedom to conduct commercial relations, and freedom to choose cultural and artistic events. The BDS campaign thereby abuses democratic rights and freedoms in the social, cultural, commercial, and educational spheres of those countries in which it is conducted.

*** It is working sadly.

Anti-Israel Groups Praise Virginia State Bar for Boycotting Israel

Anti-Israel groups are rallying around the Virginia State Bar after the legal group announced the cancellation of a planned trip to Israel. The support is coming in the form of a letter signed by 40 groups, which are part of the anti-Israel Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) campaign.

“We write to commend the Virginia State Bar Association for its decision to cancel its Midyear Legal Seminar in Jerusalem. By cancelling the planned seminar, the Virginia State Bar Association has reaffirmed its commitment to the principles of equality enshrined in U.S. law,” reads the letter addressed to the president of the Virginia State Bar, Kevin E. Martingayle.

In thanking the Virginia State Bar Association, we agree with the sentiments expressed by Representative Keith Ellison in 2013 when he stated, “American citizens deserve to travel without fear of being turned away based on their race, religion, or countries they have visited.”

Israel’s routine discrimination against U.S. citizens entering Israel and the occupied Palestinian territory is both well documented and ongoing. In the process of denying entry to U.S. citizens, Israel often subjects them to humiliating searches, intensive interrogations, and invasions of personal privacy, including demanding access to private email accounts.

Those affected by Israel’s policies include teachers, college students, world-renowned university professors, architects, clergy, interfaith delegations, people visiting sick relatives, married couples giving birth, humanitarian workers, human rights monitors, and descendants of signers of the U.S. constitution. In recent years, Israel’s refusal to end its discrimination against U.S. citizens prevented it from entering the Visa Waiver Program and prompted strong condemnations from lawmakers, the administration, and human rights organizations.

In March of 2014, State Department Spokeswoman Jen Psaki said, “The Department of Homeland Security and State remain concerned with the unequal treatment that Palestinian Americans and other Americans of Middle Eastern origin experience at Israel’s border and checkpoints.”

In 2013, sixteen Members of Congress wrote to then-Israeli Ambassador Oren, saying, “we are concerned that Israeli border officials are disproportionally singling out, detaining, and denying entry to Arab and Muslim Americans.” In their letter, Members of Congress quoted a spokesperson for Former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, who said, “we expect all American citizens to be accorded the rights that any other American citizen would be accorded…there are no second classes.”

As an association that prides itself on diversity and respect for equal rights, members of the Virginia State Bar Association should reasonably expect to have their civil rights upheld in the course of pursuing professional development opportunities. As you referenced in your cancellation notification, one additional issue with the planned seminar was the insufficient number of individuals who had signed-up to attend. In all likelihood, the low participation rate reflected a justifiable reluctance among practicing attorneys to subject themselves to mistreatment based on their race, religion, or political opinions. Had the gathering occurred as planned, some members of Virginia’s esteemed bar would have undoubtedly suffered discrimination and humiliation at the hands of Israeli border officials and possibly been denied entry outright.

Furthermore, given that membership in the Virginia State Bar Association is required for all practicing attorneys in the state, it is incumbent upon the association to avoid activities which may inherently discriminate against its members. Indeed, such action is required under the Virginia Human Rights Act and federal statutes governing discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, sex, pregnancy, childbirth or related medical conditions, age, and disability.

Again, we commend the Virginia State Bar Association for its commitment to upholding the civil rights of its diverse membership. We look forward to the day when everyone living in Israel/Palestine will enjoy equal treatment under the law regardless of race or religion; and all who desire to visit may do so without fear of discrimination or humiliation.

Sincerely,

American Muslims for Palestine
Christian Peacemaker Teams – Palestine
Friends of Sabeel North America
Institute for Policy Studies – New Internationalism Project
Jewish Voice for Peace
Lutherans for Justice in the Holy Land
Methodist Federation for Social Action
National Lawyers Guild – International Committee
Palestine Solidarity Legal Support
Peace Action
United Methodist Kairos Response
US Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation
US Palestinian Community Network

Local and Regional Organizations:
14 Friends of Palestine
Al-Nakba Awareness Project
Bay Area Women in Black
Birmingham Peace Project
Bryn Mawr Peace Coalition
Cape Codders for Peace and Justice
Carolina Peace Resource Center
Citizens for Justice in the Middle East – Kansas City
Coloradans for Justice in Palestine
Committee for Justice in Palestine at The Ohio State University
Committee for Palestinian Rights
Corvallis-Albany Friends of Middle East Peace
Friends of Palestine – Wisconsin
Hilton Head for Peace
Interfaith Council for Peace in the Middle East
Israel-Palestine Task Force, California Nevada Conference, United Methodist Church
Jewish Voice for Peace – Bay Area Chapter
Jewish Voice for Peace – Boston Chapter
Jewish Voice for Peace – DC Metro Chapter
Jewish Voice for Peace – St. Louis Chapter
Massachusetts Peace Action
MidEast: Just Peace
Minnesota Break the Bonds Campaign
Peace for Palestine – West Boston
St. Louis Palestine Solidarity Committee
Upper New York United Methodist Task Force on Israel Palestine
Vancouver for Peace

Homeland at Risk by Putin’s Nukes?

Posted on April 2, 2015April 2, 2015 by Denise Simon

Russian analyst urges nuclear attack on Yellowstone National Park and San Andreas fault line

A Russian geopolitical analyst says the best way to attack the United States is to detonate nuclear weapons to trigger a supervolcano at Yellowstone National Park or along the San Andreas fault line on California’s coast.

The president of the Academy of Geopolitical Problems based in Moscow, Konstantin Sivkov said in an article for a Russian trade newspaper on Wednesday, VPK News, that Russia needed to increase its military weapons and strategies against the “West” which was “moving to the borders or Russia”.

He has a conspiracy theory that NATO – a political and military alliance which counts the US, UK, Canada and many countries in western Europe as members – was amassing strength against Russia and the only way to combat that problem was to attack America’s vulnerabilities to ensure a “complete destruction of the enemy”.

Conspiracy theory: The president of the Academy of Geopolitical Problems based in Moscow, Konstantin Sivkov.

“Geologists believe that the Yellowstone supervolcano could explode at any moment. There are signs of growing activity there. Therefore it suffices to push the relatively small, for example the impact of the munition megaton class to initiate an eruption. The consequences will be catastrophic for the United States – a country just disappears,” he said.

“Another vulnerable area of the United States from the geophysical point of view, is the San Andreas fault – 1300 kilometers between the Pacific and North American plates … a detonation of a nuclear weapon there can trigger catastrophic events like a coast-scale tsunami which can completely destroy the infrastructure of the United States.”

He said the Russian geography on the other hand would protect it from a tsunami or a volcano attack. Few people live on the coast in Russia and Siberia which rests on basalt would withstand similar attacks.

Russian target number 2: The San Andreas fault line, here pictured on the Carrizo Plain in California.

Mr Sivkov, who spoke at the 2013 Moscow Economic Forum, said by 2020 to 2025 Russia would have amassed “asymmetric weapons” in its arsenal for the attack.

“The situation for us today is comparably worse than half a century ago,” he said.

“The weakened economic potential in Russia, the loss of the ‘spiritual core of what was the communist idea’, and the lack of large-scale community allies in Europe such as the Warsaw Pact, Russia simply cannot compete against the NATO and its allies.”

In December last year, the vocal military strategist told Russian newspaper, Pravda.ru that there is a “developing standoff between Russia and the West” and the US’s ultimate goal was to “destroy Russia”.

Mr Sivkov accused American politicians of committing several crimes including causing the deaths of 1,200,000 people in Iraq. He believed the only way for the “American elite” to be held accountable was for its military forces to be destroyed.

“American politicians have committed a variety of crimes. Will anyone be held accountable for those crimes? What about the international law, the UN and other organisations? Are they doing anything?” he asked.

Mr Sivkov told Pravda that the idea of the US preparing for a serious war against Russia using cruise missiles was plausible given that it had already launched a thousand missiles in Yugoslavia and Iraq.

*** Putin has issued nuclear weapons threats in several regions.

Russia Threatens Danish Warships With Nuclear Weapons

Danish warships could become targets for Russian nuclear missiles if Denmark joins NATO’s missile defence system, Russia has warned, in comments that have sparked outrage in Copenhagen.

Russia’s ambassador to Denmark, Mikhail Vanin, made the comments in an opinion piece published by the Danish national newspaper Jyllands-Posten, on Saturday.

“I don’t think the Danes fully understand the consequences of what will happen if Denmark joins the American-controlled missile defence. If it happens, Danish warships will become targets for Russian atomic missiles,” Vanin wrote.

*** There is more:

Putin threatens nuclear war: Russian leader will take any necessary step to drive Nato out of Baltics and defend Crimea

Vladimir Putin is planning to exploit the threat of nuclear war to force Nato out of countries bordering Russia, it has been claimed.

A secret meeting between intelligence figures in Moscow and Washington reportedly revealed Putin will consider any attempt to return the Crimean peninsula to Ukraine as declaration of war and will take any necessary step – including using nuclear weapons – to retain control of the region.

Notes from the meeting are also said to have revealed that Putin is planning imminent ‘destabilising actions’ in pro-Western Baltic states in a direct challenge to Nato’s promise to defend the countries from Soviet-style Russian expansionism.

These disturbances are thought to likely involve cyber attacks or ramping up local ethnic tensions in Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania intended to unsettle the region.

Government Website Stops you From Knowing

Posted on April 1, 2015April 1, 2015 by Denise Simon

The government spends your money, without your knowledge or approval on things you don’t know about or approve of. There was a website that by law you could use to search for spending by keyword or even by zipcode. Not so much as more, due to redesign likely with malice. Perhaps we need to determine what the administration’s definition of ‘transparency’ is this week. Exactly why does the Pentagon need Viagra for anyway?

Obama Admin’s New Spending Website Rolls Back Transparency

Data previously available at click of a button now a needle in a haystack

A redesign of a transparency website that provides information on federal spending by the Obama administration now makes it much more difficult to see how taxpayer dollars are spent.

Usaspending.gov, a website mandated by law to provide detailed information on every federal contract over $3,000, received a makeover on Tuesday. Users can no longer search federal spending by keywords, sort contracts by date, or easily find detailed information on awards, which are delivered in bulk.

Information, such as how much the Pentagon spends on Viagra, used to be available at the click of a button. Locating those same contracts on the new website is virtually impossible, akin to finding a needle in a haystack.

In its previous form, the website provided easy access to how taxpayer dollars are spent, as it happens. A user now must have the federal grant identification number to see details of a contract.

In another aspect of the overhaul, the online address of each of the website’s individual pages now begins with the word “transparency.”

The new version of Usaspending.gov provides a “spending map” to search by zip code, and “agency profiles,” which only provide totals of funding, sub-awards, and transactions. The results list the highest dollar amounts by company, but provide no links to specific contracts.

The list of agencies does not include smaller government bodies such as the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA), but does include the “Barry Goldwater Scholarship and Excellence in Education Foundation.” Results for the profile of “Other Small Agencies” returns zero grants or contracts, with the reply “no data found.”

The public can search by recipient, though those results are also limited. A user must click on every contract to find a short description of what the spending involves.

The new website also does not allow users to search multiple years simultaneously.

“If you select more than one Fiscal Year, you will only be able to select one Spending Type,” the website says. “You can only select a maximum of three Fiscal Years at a time.”

A user can download federal spending data by agency. However, those results—in either Extensible Markup Language (XML) or spreadsheet form—return vast amounts of convoluted data.

Those files are also separated by prime awards, sub-awards, contracts, grants, loans, and “other financial assistance” categories, making it necessary for users to download multiple large files when searching for all agency spending that used to be available at the click of a button.

An advanced search allows a user to see all of an agency’s spending, separated by contract type, though the results are only available alphabetically. A user cannot sort the data by date, making it impossible to see agency spending day to day. One can download the results to sort by date in a spreadsheet, but they include no description of what the contracts are for.

Downloading data on spending by the State Department nearly crashed this reporter’s computer.

Search results are also not indexed on Google, making the website’s search engine the only avenue for citizens and reporters to find information within the site. Microsoft Sharepoint operates the new website’s search, and the results are limited.

For example, a search of “contracts” returned zero results.

The Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006 required the creation of a website that provided “full disclosure to the public of all entities or organizations receiving federal funds beginning in Fiscal Year (FY) 2007.” The website became Usaspending.gov.

“The purpose of the act is to provide the public with information about how their tax dollars are spent in greater detail in order to build public trust in government and credibility in the professionals who use these dollars,” according to an explanation of the website from the Department of Education.

The website is also designed to “encourage openness and communication about effectiveness,” to “make more data and information available to the public,” and to “increase the transparency of the grant application and award process.”

The Bush administration law mandated a “single searchable website, accessible by the public for free.”

The website must also include the following information on each award of federal spending: “The name of the entity receiving the award; the amount of the award; information on the award including transaction type, funding agency, etc.; the location of the entity receiving the award; and a unique identifier of the entity receiving the award.”

The redesign of the website makes this information much more difficult to locate.

Users reacted negatively to the website’s change on Twitter.

“Wow, the USAspending.gov redesign is not good,” wrote one user. “Basic search is broken, advanced search forces you to use multiple variables…”

“Feds really screwed up USASpending.gov with redesign,” said another. “Less functionality, more constraints, less data (FY2008 now earliest).”

Another user noted that there is now less access to information.

“[In case you missed it] ICYMI USAspending.gov has been redesigned to show far less detailed procurement data,” they said. “‘Improvements’ brought to [you] by the FedGov.”

The website was not perfect prior to its reboot. The Government Accountability Office (GAO) found that Usaspending.gov was missing billions of dollars in federal awards, and the vast majority of federal contracts included errors.

The federal government had purchased the website back from the contractor running Usaspending.gov, Global Computer Enterprises, Inc. last October. GCE, which had operated the website since 2003, declared bankruptcy last year.

The website was previously overseen by the Office of Management and Budget, before the Treasury Department’s Bureau of the Fiscal Service took it over in January.

The bureau was tasked with “making improvements to the site’s usability, presentation, and search functionalities” for its re-launch, which went live on Tuesday.

Requests for comment from the Bureau of the Fiscal Service’s office of public affairs were not returned.

“This is the most transparent administration in history,” President Barack Obama declared in February 2013, arguing that information on laws and regulations were “put online for everyone to see.”

Boehner in Israel During Successful Missile Test

Posted on April 1, 2015April 1, 2015 by Denise Simon

JERUSALEM (AP) – Israeli officials announced Wednesday that a joint U.S.-Israeli missile-defense system has successfully passed a new test and is expected to be operational next year – a development that would provide an important tool in protecting the country against Hezbollah militants in Lebanon.

The Defense Ministry said the David’s Sling system had successfully intercepted targets in a series of tests conducted with the U.S. Missile Defense Agency, calling it a “major milestone.”

“We believe that next year it’s going to be operational,” Defense Minister Moshe Yaalon told journalists at an appearance with visiting U.S. House Speaker John Boehner. With Boehner nodding in agreement, Yaalon said the project was an example of strong U.S.-Israeli relations.

David’s Sling is meant to counter medium-range missiles possessed by enemies throughout the region, most notably Hezbollah. The militant group, which battled Israel during a monthlong war in 2006, is believed to possess tens of thousands of rockets and missiles. The system also aims to protect against low-altitude cruise missiles fired from longer distances.

David’s Sling is part of what Israel calls a “multi-layer” missile defense system that includes the Arrow, which is being developed to intercept longer-range missiles from Iran, and the Iron Dome rocket-defense system, which is already operational.

The test was announced as world powers were trying to wrap up a nuclear agreement with Iran. Israel has objected to the emerging agreement, saying much of Iran’s nuclear infrastructure would remain intact. It also has said Iran’s continued development of long-range missiles is a sign of Iran’s bad intentions.

Iran says its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes only.

David’s Sling is being developed by Israeli defense company Rafael with American defense giant Raytheon as sub-contractor. Israel Aerospace Industries’ Elta subsidiary and Israeli defense contractor Elbit Systems are also involved in the project.

*** Meanwhile, it is important to understand what Saudi Arabia is doing

CAIRO — As America talks to Iran, Saudi Arabia is lashing out against it.
The kingdom, Iran’s chief regional rival, is leading airstrikes against an Iranian-backed faction in Yemen; backing a blitz in Idlib, Syria, by jihadists fighting the Iranian-backed Assad regime; and warning Washington not to allow the Iranian-backed militia to capture too much of Iraq during the fight to roll back the Islamic State, according to Arab diplomats familiar with the talks.
Through Egypt, a major beneficiary of Saudi aid, the kingdom is backing plans for a combined Arab military force to combat Iranian influence around the region. With another major aid recipient, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia is also expected to step up its efforts to develop a nuclear bomb, potentially setting off an arms race in the region.

All this comes just a few weeks after the death of King Abdullah and the passing of the throne to a new ruler, King Salman, who then installed his 34-year-old son Mohamed in the powerful dual roles of defense minister and chief of the royal court.
“Taking matters into our own hands is the name of the game today,” said Jamal Khashoggi, a veteran Saudi journalist and former adviser to the government. “A deal will open up the Saudi appetite and the Turkish appetite for more nuclear programs. But for the time being Saudi Arabia is moving ahead with its operations to pull the carpet out from underneath the Iranians in our region.”

With the approach of a self-imposed Tuesday night deadline for the framework of a nuclear deal between Iran and the Western powers, the talks themselves are already changing the dynamics of regional politics.

The proposed deal would trade relief from economic sanctions on Iran for insurance against the risk that Iran might rapidly develop a nuclear bomb. But many Arab analysts and diplomats say that security against the nuclear risk may come at the cost of worsening ongoing conflicts around the Middle East as Saudi Arabia and its Sunni Muslim allies push back against what they see as efforts by Shiite-led Iran to impose its influence — often on sectarian battle lines.

Unless Iran pulls back, “you will see more direct Arab responses and you will see a higher level of geopolitical tension in the whole region,” argued Nabil Fahmy, a veteran Egyptian diplomat and former foreign minister.

In Yemen, where a bombing campaign by a Saudi-led coalition killed dozens of civilians in an errant strike on a camp for displaced families, the Saudis accuse Iran of supporting the Houthi movement, which follows a form of Shiite Islam and recently came close to taking control of the country’s four largest cities. (Western diplomats say Iran has provided money to the group but does not control it.) In Bahrain, across a short causeway from Saudi Arabia, the kingdom and its allies accuse Iran of backing opposition from the Shiite majority against the Sunni monarchy.

And Iran has also cultivated clients in government in the great Arab capitals of Damascus, Baghdad and Beirut, the last through its proxy, Hezbollah.
Even if the proposed deal constrains Iran’s nuclear ambitions, the Saudis and their allies note, the pact would do nothing to stop Iran from projecting its influence through such local proxies and conventional arms. Sanctions relief from the deal could even revive the Iranian economy with a flood of new oil revenues.

“The Americans seem nonchalant about this, like, ‘This is your sectarian problem, you deal with it,’ ” Mr. Khashoggi said. “So the Saudis went ahead with this Yemen operation.”

Watching Secretary of State John Kerry pursue a deal in Lausanne, Switzerland, many in Saudi Arabia and other Arab states say their ultimate fear is that the talks could lead to a broader détente or even alliance between Washington and Tehran.
Washington is already tacitly coordinating with Iran in its fight against ISIS in Iraq. As a result, the American-led military campaign is effectively strengthening the Iranian-backed government in Syria by weakening its most dangerous foe, Arab diplomats and analysts say.
So they wonder what else Mr. Kerry is talking about with his Iranian counterpart, Mohammad Javad Zarif, “on those long walks together” in Lausanne, said Salman Shaikh, director of the Brookings Doha Center, in Qatar. “Is there something going on underneath the table?”
Easing the hostility between the United States and Iran would tear up what has been a bedrock principle of regional politics since the Iranian revolution and the storming of the American embassy in 1979. “But let’s not forget that we are still dealing with the Islamic Republic of Iran,” Mr. Shaikh said, reflecting the skeptical views of many in the Saudi Arabian camp.

“There is a disbelief in the Arab world that these negotiations are only about the nuclear file, and a frequent complaint here is that we are kept in the dark, we are not consulted,” said Gamal Abdel Gawad Soltan, a political scientist at the American University in Cairo. “The U.S. is much less trusted as an ally, as an insurance policy towards the security threats facing the governments in the region, and so those governments decide to act on their own.”
President Obama has argued that a verifiable deal is the best way to secure the Arab states because it is the most effective way to ensure that Iran does not obtain a nuclear bomb. Even military action to take out Iran’s nuclear facilities, the Obama administration argues, would set it back only temporarily.

To read the full summary from the NYT’s, go here.

Obama Used Bergdahl as a Pawn

Posted on April 1, 2015April 1, 2015 by Denise Simon

Consider this timeline:

January 2009: Obama signs executive order calling for Gitmo to be shuttered within a year, while his national security team considers if the five Taliban leaders are safe for release.

2011: White House and State Department officials open secret talks with the Taliban in Germany and the Persian Gulf to discuss their release from Gitmo as part of “peace talks.”

Jan. 3, 2012: The Taliban announce they are prepared to open a political office in Qatar to conduct peace negotiations in exchange for the release of the Taliban commanders. (“The releases would be to reciprocate for Tuesday’s announcement,” according to “The Guardian.”)

April 2012: Working with the White House, Karzai sends delegation of Afghan government officials to Gitmo to interview the Taliban prisoners and secure their oath to cut ties with al-Qaida.

Many more details here.

The matter of Qatar, the Taliban and bin Ladin has a long history that continues to be exploited by the U.S. government. It is no wonder that the Taliban created a satellite office in Doha.

April, 7, 2011 Ambassador Elizabeth McKune sent a classified cable:

S E C R E T DOHA 001093

E.O. 12958: DECL: 04/07/11
TAGS: PREL [External Political Relations], PTER [Terrorists and Terrorism], AF [Afghanistan], PA [Paraguay], QA [Qatar]
SUBJECT: TALIBAN PROPOSAL FOR BIN LADEN ISLAMIC
TRIBUNAL

REF: A) STATE 61624 B) DOHA 888 C) DOHA 1036

CLASSIFIED BY AMBASSADOR ELIZABETH MCKUNE FOR
REASONS 1.5 (B) AND (D)

¶1. (S) AMBASSADOR PRESENTED REF A DEMARCHE TO
FOREIGN MINISTER HAMAD BIN JASIM AL THANI (HBJ) ON
APRIL 7. SHORTLY AFTER AMBASSADOR BEGAN TALKING
POINTS, HBJ INTERRUPTED AND SAID “WE DON’T WANT A
TRIAL HERE OF BIN LADEN. THERE WILL BE NO TRIAL
HERE OR ANYWHERE ELSE, UNLESS ALL COUNTRIES ARE IN
AGREEMENT, INCLUDING THE U.S.” HE ADDED THAT WERE
THE TALIBAN TO APPROACH THE GOQ WITH SUCH A
PROPOSAL, THE GOQ WOULD AGREE TO STUDY IT BUT
PROMISE NOTHING.

¶2. (C) HBJ CONFIRMED THAT A TALIBAN DELEGATION
WAS ARRIVING IN QATAR TODAY (APRIL 7). THE
AMBASSADOR REMINDED HIM THAT THE US IS THE SINGLE
LARGEST CONTRIBUTOR OF HUMANITARIAN AID TO
AFGHANISTAN. SHE ASKED WHETHER MINISTER OF STATE
AL MAHMOUD HAD BRIEFED HIM ON HER PREVIOUS
DEMARCHES ON THE TALIBAN (REFS B AND D). HBJ
RESPONDED, “YES.”

¶3. (C) COMMENT: HBJ GRANTED THE MEETING WITH THE
AMBASSADOR WITHIN AN HOUR OF THE REQUEST. HE WAS
CLEARLY PLEASED THAT A/S WALKER HAD CALLED. WE
WILL GET A READ OUT ON THE TALIBAN’S VISIT WHEN IT
IS CONCLUDED.

The Taliban chose the 5 commanders they wanted back from Gitmo, Barack Obama did not choose them but did approve the request. Congress would never have approved, then it got twisted to throw in Bergdahl for the win by the White House.

The Taliban’s conditions:

Demands

The Taliban will enter discussions with an eye on winning a few confidence-building concessions, including the release of Taliban detainees held in prisons under the control of the Afghan government. The release of the “Taliban five” held by the United States at its Guantanamo facility will also come up.

The Taliban is also expected to ask for sanctions against its members to be eased. The United Nations’ Al-Qaeda and Taliban sanctions committee has blacklisted more than 100 people linked to the Taliban, subjecting them to travel bans and asset freezes. At the request of the Afghan government, the UN Security Council has delisted several dozen names as part of a move to encourage the group to hold peace talks with Kabul.

The Taliban will seek to get formal recognition from Washington as a legitimate political entity.

The Taliban is also expected to float more contentious and ambitious demands, such as changes to the Afghan Constitution and other concessions that would give them considerable influence over the country’s social and judicial affairs.

“The Taliban are likely to want significant influence in justice, anticorruption, education, and social affairs,” says Matt Waldman, an Afghanistan analyst based in London. “These are the most notable areas where the Taliban will seek influence, in particular justice [and rule of law.] Taliban leaders feel they are best equipped to deliver justice and administer justice in Afghanistan.”