World

KABUL — The number of civilians killed and wounded in Afghanistan rose 14 per cent last year, the UN said Saturday, as NATO troops draw down after more than a decade of war.

A total of 8,615 civilian casualties were recorded in 2013, with 2,959 killed and 5,656 wounded, according to the United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan’s annual report.

The death toll almost reached the record of 2011, with UNAMA saying that civilians killed or wounded in the crossfire of fighting between government and Taliban-led insurgent forces marked a new trend last year.

UNAMA put this down to the reduction of ground and air operations by the US-led NATO force as it withdraws by the end of 2014.

Afghan forces have been taking an increasing role in the fight against the Taliban as the coalition pulls out.

More than 50,000 NATO-led combat troops who are still in Afghanistan are due to leave by the year-end.

Last year also marked the highest casualties for women and children with a 36 per cent increase in women and 34 per cent increase in children’s casualties, the report added.

Most of the casualties to women and children were caused by “ground engagements” and improvised explosive devices (IEDs), the Taliban’s weapon of choice.

The total rise in deaths, up 7 per cent from 2012, and injuries, up 17 per cent, reverses the decline recorded the previous year.

“The trend has been reversed in comparison to what we were telling here last year,” Jan Kubis, the UN envoy in Afghanistan, told reporters.

“In 2012, we were very happy to report the decrease, not anymore, unfortunately.”

The death toll almost matches the peak figure of 3,133 recorded in 2011. The conflict has claimed the lives of 14,064 civilians in the past five years.

UNAMA attributed the vast majority — 74 per cent — of civilian deaths and injuries to “anti-government elements” led by the Taliban.

The Afghan interior ministry in a statement accused insurgents of using civilians as “human shields” and of “deliberately targeting” them.

Taliban spokesman Zabiullah Mujahid said the report was “biased” and blamed Western forces for civilian casualties.

Caught in the crossfire

The number of civilians killed or wounded in crossfire during ground battles rose 43 per cent on 2012, with 534 dead and 1,793 wounded.

UNAMA said the new trend reflects the “changing dynamics of the conflict” as NATO handed over security duties to the Afghans.

“The fifth and final transfer of security responsibility from international military forces to Afghan security forces began in June 2013 and left security gaps in some areas that Afghan forces had not yet filled,” the report said.

“As a result, certain areas were vulnerable to attack by anti-government elements which often led to civilian casualties.”

Only Taliban IEDs caused more civilian casualties than crossfire, the report said.

The trend highlights the challenges faced by local forces as their better-equipped foreign partners leave, and comes as Washington and Kabul squabble over a proposed security deal that would allow some US forces to stay on beyond 2014.

Washington is proposing that 5,000 to 10,000 US soldiers are deployed from 2015 to train and assist Afghan security forces in their battle against the Taliban militants.

But President Hamid Karzai has said that before he signs the so-called Bilateral Security Agreement (BSA), the US must stop military operations and bring the Taliban to the negotiating table.

Local forces

Karzai, who has ruled the country since the fall of the Taliban in 2001, has suggested that a decision on whether to sign the BSA would fall to his successor, to be chosen in elections due on April 5.

The Taliban have threatened to target the campaign, and the Afghan police and army face a major challenge with little support from the dwindling number of NATO troops.

UNAMA recorded 25 attacks on election workers and facilities in 2013, resulting in four civilian deaths.

“Current risk assessments indicate that insecurity will impact participation of civilians in the 2014 elections in some areas,” the report said.

Atiqullah Amarkhil, a former army officer, said a lack of air support in Afghanistan’s military means more ground operations that cause civilian deaths.

It “ultimately means more bloody engagements between Afghan security forces who lack an effective air power and the insurgents”, in the coming years, he said.

An International Security Assistance Force statement said: “Throughout 2014, we will work with our Afghan partners to ensure we continue to take all actions necessary to reduce civilian casualties.”

The UNAMA paper also voiced concern at what it called “verified reports” of rights violations by Afghan national security forces.

It reiterated longstanding concerns about the Afghan Local Police (ALP), branded by critics as a thuggish militia.

The report said civilian casualties attributed to the ALP tripled from 2012 to 121 — 32 killed and 89 wounded.

It said most of these came from ALP members carrying out “summary executions, punishments and revenge actions”.

KIEV — The threat of new protest violence in Ukraine is tapering off but the country’s two-month-old political and economic crisis remains far from being resolved, the European Union’s foreign policy chief said Wednesday.

EU envoy Catherine Ashton spoke after meeting with President Viktor Yanukovych, who has been the focus of months of massive protests demanding his resignation.

The protesters have built a large tent camp in the central square of Kiev, the capital, and have erected high barricades of snow and scrap materials to cut off key downtown sections.

An uneasy truce between police and protesters has been held since late January after the protests erupted into four days of violent clashes. Officials say three people died in the melee, two of them of gunshot wounds.

“Although there is a sense that violence is decreasing, there is still great concern about the situation on the ground,” Ashton told reporters.

She said 28-nation EU has been discussing financial aid to Ukraine, but dismissed suggestions floated by some opposition leaders that the country deserves something akin to the Marshall Plan, the successful US initiative to rebuild European economies after World War II.

The perilous state of Ukraine’s economy, which relies on energy-inefficient heavy industries and gas imports from Russia, is a key issue in the crisis. Ukraine’s reserve funds fell some 25 per cent over the past year and in December officials said the country would need at least $10 billion in the near future to pay its debts.

Ashton met Tuesday evening with one of the opposition leaders heading the protests against Yanukovych, which erupted over his decision to shun the EU and turn to Moscow for a desperately needed rescue loan instead.

Opposition leader Arseniy Yatsenyuk told The Associated Press that no specifics of Western aid were put forth by Ashton in their talks.

He also charged that Ukraine’s president was “targeting ways how to buy time and drag us into never-ending talks and discussions”.

The Ukrainian currency, the hryvna, has fallen some 7 per cent since the protests began in late November and some Ukrainians think Yanukovych sees the drop as working in his favor.

“Yanukovych thinks that the collapse of the hryvna is scaring Ukrainians and they will stop the protests. But the collapse of the economy will only speed up the exit of these talentless authorities,” said Oleg Ternovskiy, a small businessman in Kiev.

In late November, Yanukovych backed off from an expected agreement to deepen economic relations with the EU, fearing that the bloc was not offering an adequate cushion for the trade that could be lost with Russia, which wanted Ukraine to join a Moscow-led customs union. Yanukovych subsequently obtained a $15 billion aid package from Russian President Vladimir Putin, including getting lower gas prices from Russia.

The turn toward Moscow angered those who resent the long shadow that Russia casts on Ukraine. The protests began on that note but have since morphed into demands for more human rights, less corruption, Yanukovych’s resignation and a new election.

EU officials have indicated that aid to Ukraine could be sweetened but no specifics have been offered.

The West likely would seek a resolution to Ukraine’s political crisis before offering more aid.

No resolution is in sight, however. Prime Minister Mykola Azarov resigned last week so the Cabinet is operating only as a placeholder. The leader of his party’s faction, Olexander Efremov, said Wednesday he expected a new premier to be nominated next week.

Yanukovych offered the premiership to Yatsenyuk, who turned it down. Under the current system, the prime minister has relatively little power compared with the president. The opposition is seeking a return to an older system under which the premier and parliament have more authority.

Russia has released $3 billion of its aid to Ukraine, but Putin indicated last week that future tranches would be delayed until a new government is formed.

ISLAMABAD — Pakistan’s planned peace talks with Taliban insurgents stumbled as they began on Tuesday, with government negotiators missing a preliminary meeting citing doubts over the militants’ team.

The faltering start will fuel scepticism about whether negotiations with the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) can achieve a meaningful and lasting peace accord.

Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif caused surprise last week by announcing a team to begin dialogue with the TTP, which has been waging a violent insurgency since 2007.

Many observers had been anticipating a military offensive against TTP strongholds in Pakistan’s tribal areas, following a bloody start to the year. More than 110 people were killed in militant attacks in January, many of them military personnel.

Tentative efforts towards peace talks last year came to an abrupt halt in November when the TTP leader Hakimullah Mehsud was killed in a US drone strike.

Teams representing the Taliban and government had been due to gather in Islamabad at 2:00pm (0900 GMT) on Tuesday to chart a “roadmap” for talks.

But the government delegation did not show up. One of its members, senior journalist Rahimullah Yusufzai, said they wanted to clarify who was on the Taliban team and what powers they had.

The TTP initially named five negotiators but cricketer-turned-politician Imran Khan declined to take part and another was pulled out by his political party.

“We told them we are ready to meet them after we get an explanation about one issue, that their committee will consist of three members,” Yusufzai told AFP.

“We also seek explanations on other issues, like how powerful this committee is.”

The head of the Taliban team, hardline cleric Maulana Sami-ul-Haq, accused the government of not taking the talks seriously.

“Today it has been exposed how serious the government is about talks,” Haq told AFP.

“They are making a joke of talks and joking with the nation. On one side they are saying they are talking to the Taliban and on the other side they are making joke of these talks.”

The TTP’s main spokesman Shahidullah Shahid told AFP that Haq and his two colleagues had their blessing.

“The three-member committee is final now and we have our full confidence in it to hold talks,” he said.

Bleak hopes

The talks will be watched keenly in the West. Stability in nuclear-armed Pakistan is seen as important to neighbouring Afghanistan, where US-led NATO troops are pulling out after more than a decade of war.

Washington has long pressured Pakistan to take action against militants using the tribal areas as a base to attack NATO forces across the border.

Talk of a full offensive in North Waziristan gathered momentum last month when the air force bombarded suspected Taliban hideouts following two major attacks on military targets.

But no operation was launched and critics accused Sharif’s government of dithering in response to the resurgent violence.

Even before Tuesday’s abortive start, media held out scant hope for the talks, with the two sides appearing to have virtually no common ground.

The TTP has said in the past that it opposes democracy and wants Islamic Sharia law imposed throughout Pakistan, while the government has stressed the country’s constitution must remain paramount.

English-language daily The Nation predicted the “peace talks balloon will burst soon enough”.

“The ambiguity and confusion still exists because the political leadership has been extremely hesitant towards taking a clear stand and calling a spade a spade for a change,” it said in an editorial on Tuesday.

The News predicted the process would be “long and excruciating... since neither committee contains anyone with the authority to make decisions”.

In the past, localised peace deals between the authorities and the TTP have quickly fallen apart.

Fragile security

Highlighting the fragile security situation, a prominent Shiite Muslim leader was shot dead in the northwestern city of Peshawar on Tuesday in an apparent sectarian attack.

The government team for the talks consists of senior journalists Irfan Siddiqui and Yusufzai, former diplomat Rustam Shah Mohmand and retired major Mohammad Aamir, formerly of the Inter Services Intelligence agency.

Haq said his team was ready to move on from Tuesday’s abortive start and urged the government to come to the negotiating table.

“We once again invite the government committee to come and talk to us. We will not make anything a point of prestige,” he told reporters.

“We believe that the pressure is now growing on the Prime Minister. He makes sincere offers but later comes under US pressure.”

In the past the militants have called for their prisoners to be released and for Pakistani troops to be pulled out of the seven tribal areas along the Afghan border.

KIEV — The mayor of a western city warned that his police would fight any troops sent in by the president. The governor of an eastern region posted an image of an opposition lawmaker beaten bloody, saying he couldn’t contain his laughter.

Two months into Ukraine’s anti-government protests, the two sides are only moving further apart.

To be sure, Ukraine has never been monolithic. Russia and Europe have vied for dominance for centuries, fostering deep cultural differences between the mostly Ukrainian-speaking western and central regions that yearn for ties with the West, and the Russian-speaking east and south that looks to Russia for support.

As the crisis has deepened, each side has grown stronger in its convictions — and those who stood in the middle have been forced to choose sides.

The demonstrations began with an old question: Should Ukraine follow a European path or move closer into Russia’s sphere? In November, President Viktor Yanukovych — after years of touting a political and economic treaty with the European Union — had abruptly walked out on it in favor of a bailout loan from Russia. But the crisis changed significantly a week later when riot police violently broke up a small, peaceful rally in the middle of the night on Kiev’s central square.

Suddenly, the calls for EU integration were replaced with demands for Yanukovych’s ouster and a new government that would guarantee human rights and democratic freedoms. Slogans such as “Ukraine is Europe” were replaced by “Down with the gang!”

The divide deepened further as peaceful protests turned ever more violent. Last month, after four protesters were killed, and police were widely reported to have beaten and abused activists, the opposition’s anger became more intense. And Yanukovych’s supporters were appalled by images of riot policemen set aflame by protesters’ Molotov cocktails, the toppling of a statue of former Soviet leader Vladimir Lenin and the occupation of government buildings.

The differing visions are rooted in cultural realities. To the west, protest-friendly Lviv feels like a typical European city, with cobblestone streets, Catholic churches and outdoor cafes. To the east, the Yanukovych stronghold of Kharkiv is an industrial city with massive Soviet architecture and a giant Lenin statue.

Linguistics also come into play in a country where roughly 40 per cent of people speak Ukrainian at home, a third speak Russian and a quarter speak both. The two languages are closely related, and it is not uncommon for one Ukrainian to address another in one language and hear a response in another. Most speakers on Kiev’s Independent Square address the crowds in Ukrainian, but both languages are heard at the barricades.

But what for years have been friendly rivalries became tense feuds as the violence increased. The mayors of western and eastern cities traded barbs, while on the streets of Kiev — roughly in the centre of the country — angry protesters tossed firebombs and rocks at police, who responded with tear gas and rubber bullets.

Police were caught on video humiliating and abusing a protester, who had been stripped naked and made to stand in the snow. Pro-government activists largely from eastern Ukraine — allegedly hired by the government — descended on Kiev to harass protesters.

Protesters formed “self-defence units” that detained the pro-government activists and forced some to march through the streets with their hands bound. Social networks filled with pages giving the addresses of riot policemen with calls for retaliation.

Protesters accused Yanukovych of staining his hands with blood, while Yanukovych supporters charged that the protesters were nationalists bent on tearing the country apart.

The country now stands split nearly down the middle. According to a December poll by the Razumkov Centre think tank, 50 per cent of Ukrainians supported the protests while 43 per cent opposed them. The poll, which interviewed 2,010 people across Ukraine in person, had a margin of error of 2.3 per centage points.

And as the country has polarised, Razumkov found, both Yanukovych and the main opposition leaders have risen in popularity, while the number of people who support neither side has fallen. Support for Yanukovych rose from 19 per cent in October to 29 per cent in December, while opposition leader Vitali Klitschko rose from 16 per cent to 22 per cent and Arseniy Yatsenyuk from 6 per cent to 12 per cent.

The sides now appear to be at a stalemate.

Yanukovych, whose fraud-ridden presidential victory was reversed by the 2004 Orange Revolution, has no desire to yield to protests once again. Instead, he has promoted hardliners within his government, offered only limited concessions and essentially decided to wait out the demonstrators.

Those demonstrators are a determined bunch, as can be seen in the giant tent camp that has withstood the bitter cold and several assaults by government forces. But they appear unable to significantly broaden their movement into parts of the country where the opposition is weak, as some of the protesters use nationalist rhetoric that alienates even liberal eastern Ukrainians. They have also been unable to break Yanukovych’s control of parliament, where most lawmakers obey his orders.

As more than 100 protesters languish in jail and lawmakers’ debates on solving the crisis make little progress, Klitschko warned the president Tuesday that without a resolution to the crisis the country risks falling off a cliff.

“The temperature of society is growing,” he said. “I told the president that we have to immediately take a decision, because the future of Ukraine depends on this decision.”