This article titled “US bomb warning to Pakistan ignored” was written by Declan Walsh in Islamabad and Jon Boone in Kabul, for The Guardian on Thursday 22nd September 2011 21.32 UTC

The American commander of Nato in Afghanistan personally asked Pakistan’s army chief to halt an insurgent truck bomb that was heading for his troops, during a meeting in Islamabad two days before a huge explosion that wounded 77 US soldiers at a base near Kabul.

In reply General Ashfaq Kayani offered to “make a phone call” to stop the assault on the US base in Wardak province. But his failure to use the American intelligence to prevent the attack has fuelled a blazing row between the US and Pakistan.

Furious American officials blame the Taliban-inspired group the Haqqanis – and, by extension, Pakistani intelligence – for the 10 September bombing and an even more audacious guerrilla assault on the Kabul US embassy three days later that killed 20 people and lasted more than 20 hours.

On Thursday the US military chief, Admiral Mike Mullen, described the Haqqanis as “a veritable arm of Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence [spy] agency”. He earlier accused the ISI of fighting a “proxy war” in Afghanistan through the group.

Pakistan’s defence minister, Ahmed Mukhtar, rejected the American accusations of Haqqani patronage as “baseless”. “No one can threaten Pakistan as we are an independent state,” he said.

The angry accusations lift the veil on sensitive conversations that have heretofore largely taken place behind closed doors. On 8 September, General John Allen, the Nato commander in Afghanistan, raised intelligence reports of the impending truck bomb at a meeting with Kayani during a visit to Islamabad.

Kayani promised Allen he would “make a phone call” to try to stop the attack, according to a western official with close knowledge of the meeting. “The offer raised eyebrows,” the official said.

But two days later, just after Allen’s return to Kabul, a truck rigged with explosives ploughed into the gates of the US base in Wardak, 50 miles south-west of Kabul, injuring 77 US soldiers and killing two Afghan civilians.

Afterwards the US ambassador to Kabul, Ryan Crocker, blamed the Haqqanis. “They enjoy safe havens in North Waziristan,” he said, referring to the Haqqani main base in the tribal belt.

Allen’s spokesman said Nato “routinely shares intelligence with the Pakistanis regarding insurgent activities” but he refused to confirm the details of the conversation with Kayani.

The Pakistani military spokesman, General Athar Abbas, said: “Let’s suppose it was the case. The main question is how did this truck travel to Wardak and explode without being checked by Nato? This is just a blame game.”

US allegations of ISI links to Haqqani attacks stretch back to July 2008, when the CIA deputy director, Stephen Kappes, flew to Islamabad with intercept evidence that linked the ISI to an attack on the Indian embassy in Kabul.

But American disquiet has never been so uncompromisingly expressed as in recent days. The issue dominated three hours of talks between the secretary of state, Hillary Clinton, and the Pakistani foreign minister, Hina Rabbani Khar.

On Tuesday Mullen said he had asked Kayani to “disconnect” the ISI from the Haqqanis. In Washington the CIA chief, David Petraeus, delivered a similar message in private to the ISI chief, General Shuja Pasha. Even the soft-spoken US ambassador to Islamabad, Cameron Munter, has joined the chorus of condemnation, delivering a hard-hitting message through an interview on Pakistani state radio.

“We’ve changed our message in private too,” one US official said. “Before, we used to make polite demands about the Haqqanis. Now we are saying ‘this has to stop’.”

The new mood is driven by a combination of climbing casualties and brazen attacks. The Haqqanis were also blamed for a recent assault on the InterContinental Hotel, while August was the deadliest month for US forces in Afghanistan, with 71 deaths.

Nato is now investigating whether the Haqqanis had a hand in Tuesday’s assassination of Burhanuddin Rabbani, President Hamid Karzai’s peace envoy to the Taliban. Rabbani was killed at his home by a suicide bomber wearing an explosives-packed turban. A bloodstained four-page letter he was carrying at the time of the attack, a copy of which has been obtained by the Guardian, insisted that “Pakistan is not our boss”.

American officials have vowed to act unilaterally if Pakistan fails to comply with their demands over the Haqqanis. But it remains unclear how far they are willing to go against Pakistan, a nuclear-armed country that still provides vital counter-terrorism support.

There was some hope of resuscitating fragile relations between the Pakistani and American intelligence services, which were buffeted by the US raid that killed Osama bin Laden on 2 May. Officials from both countries hailed a joint operation on 28 August to arrest Younis al-Mauritani, a senior al-Qaida operative, in the western city of Quetta. On 5 September the Pakistani military issued a press release that highlighted Pakistani-American co-operation; some viewed the raid as a possible turning point in relations.

But the flurry of Haqqani attacks over the past two weeks seems to have washed away whatever goodwill was generated by the arrest.

US officials say debate is raging inside US policy circles about what to do next. The defence secretary, Leon Panetta, is said to have privately advocated US military incursions into the Haqqani stronghold in Waziristan – a risky gambit other officials reject as dangerous folly, citing the historical record of failure of western armies in the tribal belt.

Other US officials say Washington could slash non-military aid such as the $7.5bn five-year Kerry-Lugar-Berman package, which was approved in 2009.

There is also debate about the exact nature of the ISI’s relationship with the Haqqanis. One western official said it was not a puppetmaster scenario. “It’s not like they have a chain of command, with the Pakistanis handing down XOs [executive orders],” he said. Neither are the Pakistanis necessarily providing logistical support, he added: “It’s murkier than that.”

But, the official added, the US believes Pakistan is “actively tolerating” the Haqqanis. And the ISI could, if it wanted to, seriously disrupt their activities.

He warned that Pakistan was heading towards international isolation. “If it keeps going like this, it could end up like Syria – before the Arab spring.”

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010

This article titled “Gaddafi wanted dead or alive, says rebel leader” was written by Lizzy Davies and Richard Norton Taylor, for The Guardian on Wednesday 24th August 2011 20.02 UTC

The Libyan rebels have stepped up attempts to find Muammar Gaddafi by announcing that any members of the fleeing leader’s entourage who killed or captured him would be given an amnesty, a pardon and possibly a £1m reward.

Mustafa Abdel Jalil, the chairman of the National Transitional Council (NTC), said anyone in the regime’s “inner circle” who obliged would be given an “amnesty or pardon for any crime he has committed”. A businessman in the eastern city of Benghazi, he added, had put up 2m Libyan dinars (£1m) for anyone who managed to capture Gaddafi.

The announcement marked a change in tone from Jalil, who on Monday called on Libyans to “not take justice into their own hands” and said he hoped the dictator would be captured alive. Guma El-Gamaty, the UK co-ordinator of the NTC, said he hoped the reward would prove a “huge incentive” to those close to Gaddafi, such as his bodyguards and aides, to switch sides.

US, British, and other Nato countries are using every intelligence resource and electronic tracking device at their disposal to find Gaddafi. UK defence officials said that, while the fighting was not over, it was a question of when – and not if – the 69-year-old leader would be discovered.

But the search has been fraught with difficulty. Early on Wednesday, Gaddafi issued a rambling message of defiance, broadcast on Syrian television, just hours after rebel forces stormed his compound in Tripoli, finding plenty of Gaddafi-era memorabilia but no Gaddafi. He had left the capital “discreetly”, he said, and his retreat had been “tactical”.

Many believe he is still in Libya. Mohammed Ganbawa, an opposition activist in Tripoli, said the rebels believed Gaddafi had moved around between the homes of his sons, a hospital and even the Rixos hotel. “There are so many rat holes in Tripoli. We are searching for him in the holes,” Colonel Ahmad Bani, a rebel military spokesman, told Associate Press.

Julian Lindley-French, a strategist and associate fellow at the London-based thinktank Chatham House, said Gaddafi had most likely sought refuge in either Sirte, his hometown, or Sabha, a city in the southern desert region which could prove his last stronghold and which has seen vicious fighting since the fall of Tripoli.

“There are real similarities here with Saddam [Hussein]: he will go where he feels that he’s not going to be betrayed and given [Gaddafi's] tendency to move back towards his own clan in the last year or so, my guess is that it has to be one of those two places,” said Lindley-French.

Wherever he is, Gaddafi is not the only one eluding capture. Even as the rebel army proclaimed it had taken 95% of Libya and had hoisted the rebel flag atop the Bab al-Aziziya compound, key loyalist figures were still at large. They are remnants of a regime that did away with traditional government structures and rooted itself instead in the Gaddafi family and its tribal allies, most of whom knew they would have “no future” in the new era, said Lindley-French.

“[Gaddafi] is now falling back on his clan and tribal affiliations. This is a guy who destroyed all vestiges of state structures during his 42 years in power and actually exaggerated the tribal structure of Libya to maintain his grace and favour approach to government, and for that reason the only people he can really trust are what I call the ‘irreconcilables’,” he said.

Those most central to the crumbling court of Gaddafi are his sons – in particular Saif al-Islam, the heir presumptive who is still at large after a dramatic reappearance in Tripoli on Monday night. The whereabouts of his two military commander brothers, Khamis and Muatassim Gaddafi, are unknown, while the telecommunications chief sibling, Mohammad, escaped from house arrest on Monday.

On Wednesday night, comments from a woman claiming to be their sister Aisha Gaddafi were broadcast on the loyalist al-Orouba TV channel. “I tell the Libyan people to stand hand-in-hand against Nato,” she said. “I tell the Libyan people not to fear the armed forces. The leader is in the right.”

Despite mass defections in Tripoli and around the world, the dictator was also still being supported by a handful of others outside his immediate family, most vocally by Moussa Ibrahim, the smooth-talking information minister. On Wednesday Ibrahim was not giving speeches from a podium in the Rixos hotel but down a crackling phone line to Syrian TV, insisting the regime could continue fighting for the capital “not only for months but for years”.

He added: “Tripoli is not all of Libya. We still have tens of cities under our control. All of them are liberated cities and are all still fighting. Our main mission now is to free Tripoli, then free the whole of the country.”

Abdullah al-Senussi, Gaddafi’s longtime right-hand man and brother-in-law, also appeared to have evaded capture, although he has not been seen in public since speaking to journalists at the Rixos on Sunday, when he stood up for the regime as vehemently as ever. Along with Gaddafi and Saif al-Islam, he is wanted by the international criminal court for crimes against humanity.

Other pro-regime figures have not been so good at hiding. Rebels said they have Hala Misrati, a presenter on state television who appeared on screen at the weekend brandishing a pistol and vowing to protect the station. Video footage was posted on the internet on Wednesday purporting to show him remonstrating with a captor and shouting at the camera. Its authenticity could not be confirmed.

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010

This article titled “Muammar Gaddafi is nowhere to be seen, but his era is over” was written by Lizzy Davies, Peter Walker, for The Guardian on Monday 22nd August 2011 19.43 UTC

For 42 long years, from the moment he came to power in a bloodless coup, Muammar Gaddafi did all he could to become ubiquitous. He made his Green Book of political philosophy required reading and ensured his portrait was hung in homes, plastered to buildings and engraved on the gold watches he gave as gifts.

On Monday, however, the “brother leader and guide of the revolution” was nowhere to be seen. Nor was he heard, unlike on Sunday when he issued a series of audio messages calling on supporters to fight back against rebels.

“We have no confirmation of Gaddafi’s whereabouts,” said David Cameron, who has returned early from holiday for the second time this summer, to deal with the rapid pace of change in Tripoli.

Mahmoud Nacua, Libya’s new diplomatic envoy to London, told the Guardian: “We don’t know exactly where he is, but the fighters will look to find him. Maybe it will be hours or days, I don’t know, but his era is over.”

As details emerged of the battle raging around his Bab al-Aziziya compound, the million-dollar question – where is the Gaddafi? – sparked a series of conflicting rumours and reports. A rebel spokesman in London was reported to have claimed that Gaddafi, who was last seen in public in May, could have fled to neighbouring Algeria, which opposed Nato intervention in Libya. However last night his son Saif al-Islam who rebels said had been captured, appeared in front of western journalists and claimed his father was still somewhere in the Libyan capital.

South Africa was forced to refute rumours it had sent planes to fly the 69-year-old to an undisclosed location. There was no mention of Venezuela, the country to which foreign secretary William Hague said in February the dictator had fled, and with whose leader, Hugo Chávez, Gaddafi is old friends. An arrest warrant from the international criminal court would limit his choice of destination.

Pentagon officials, however, said they believed he remained in Libya. “We do not have any information that he has left the country,” a spokesman said.

This idea is supported by Gaddafi’s previous statements. He declared last month in an audio broadcast: “I will never leave the land of my ancestors or the people who have sacrificed themselves for me.” On Sunday, as the rebels swept into the capital, he insisted: “I am in Tripoli … I am with you until the end.”

The possibility that Gaddafi remains in his huge Bab al-Aziziya compound was supported by an unnamed diplomat who, quoted by AFP, said the embattled leader was still in the city and could be in the rabbit warren of tunnels and rooms that has been the target of repeated Nato airstrikes. Others suggested that Gaddafi might have retreated to one of the two places closest to his heart: Sirte, the coastal town where he was born, or the desert town of Sabha, which has been one of his strongholds.

Whatever the truth, speculation abounded, with the ghosts of other fallen leaders never far away.

“I think it’s impossible that he’ll surrender,” said Abdel-Salam Jalloud, a former Libyan prime minister and presidential right-hand man who fled to Rome at the weekend. He added, in an interview on Italian TV: “He is not like Hitler, who had the courage to kill himself.” Jalloud said his former friend had “no means of leaving Tripoli” and would most likely end up dead.

While the man himself remained elusive, his previously all-powerful family – seven sons, a daughter and an adopted son – was rapidly fragmenting. According to a spokesman for the rebels’ National Transitional Council, Gaddafi last week asked neighbouring countries, including Algeria, Egypt, Morocco and Tunisia, to offer shelter to his family. This could not be confirmed, but what was certain was that his efforts were too little, too late for some of his sons.

One of the most startling turn of events was the saga of the arrest of Saif al-Islam, the second son and the man widely seen, until several months ago, as his likely successor. Rebels said they had detained Saif al-Islam on Sunday as they moved into Tripoli. This was later confirmed by the international criminal court, but in a suprising turnaround he appeared at the Rixos hotel last night and told western journalists the rebellion’s back had been broken.

With his doctorate from the London School of Economics, the 39-year-old had, until the uprising, been regarded by many in the west as the friendlier face of the regime. But his iron-fisted response to the rebellion revealed his true inclinations and, in June, the ICC issued a warrant for his arrest on charges of crimes against humanity.

While one NTC envoy said it was possible Saif could be tried in Libya, the UN chief, Ban Ki-moon, called on rebels to hand him and, if captured, his father to authorities in The Hague.

The future of Muhammad Muammar Gaddafi, the oldest son, was also unclear after rebels placed him under house arrest. Muhammad, who is believed to live in Tripoli with his children, wife and mother – Muammar Gaddafi’s first wife, who he divorced 40 years ago – was conducting a live telephone interview with al-Jazeera TV when rebel fighters entered the building. Before the eruption of gunfire, Muhammad had insisted on his own “honesty and integrity” and praised the rebels for their “cordial” approach. “They have not harmed me,” he said. Then, he added: “I’m being attacked right now. There is gunfire inside my house. They’re inside my house.”

Mustafa Abdel Jalil, the head of the NTC, said Mohammad, who heads Libya’s state-run telecommunications firm, had not been hurt. There were rumours last night that he had fled from custody.

Then on Monday afternoon came reports that Saadi Gaddafi, best known abroad for a brief and spectacularly unsuccessful stint as a footballer in Italy, had been arrested.

Of the rest of the Gaddafi clan there was little news. Video footage emerged purporting to show a rebel attack on a compound said to belong to Ayesha, Gaddafi’s youngest natural child, but this could not be confirmed. Ayesha’s whereabouts, like her father’s, were unknown.

Even less is known of Gaddafi’s other sons: Khamis, the youngest and commander of the Libyan army’s feared 32nd Brigade; Hannibal, notorious for a string of alleged assaults on servants and female companions at hotels around Europe; and Mutassim, another career military officer and a close adviser to his father. Saif al-Arab Gaddafi died in March during a Nato air strike. The clan is completed by Milad, the nephew adopted by Gaddafi as a son who has a low public profile.

The Libyan leader’s other adopted child, Hanna, was reportedly killed as an infant in 1986 when the US bombed Tripoli but some reports have speculated she remains is alive and is now a doctor.

What is certain is that the Gaddafi family’s power is at last on the wane.

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010

This article titled “Gaddafi regime ‘ready for talks’ on transition of power to rebels” was written by Ian Black, Middle East editor, for The Guardian on Tuesday 12th July 2011 18.40 UTC

Efforts to find a political solution to the Libyan crisis are intensifying as France, Britain and the US acknowledge that Nato military action alone is unlikely to force Muammar Gaddafi to step down.

The UN and western countries are urging formal talks between the Benghazi-based rebels and the Gaddafi regime amid new signs that Tripoli might agree to discuss a transition of power.

Alain Juppé, France’s foreign minister, provided the strongest indication yet of optimism about the outcome. “Emissaries are telling us Gaddafi is ready to go, let’s talk about it,” he said on Tuesday. “The question is no longer about whether Gaddafi goes but when and how.”

François Fillon, the French prime minister, told the national assembly that a “political solution is taking shape”.

Al-Baghdadi Ali al-Mahmoudi, Libya’s prime minister, told the French daily Le Figaro that the regime was ready to negotiate “unconditionally” as long as Nato action ended. Gaddafi would not be involved in talks, he said, and would “respect the will of the people”.

France’s defence minister, Gérard Longuet, suggested on Sunday that Gaddafi could remain in Tripoli “in another room in his palace” and Nato could stop its bombing campaign while talks began.

The push for a political solution is being spearheaded by the UN envoy, Abdel-Ilah al-Khatib, who met Mahmoudi in Tripoli at the weekend. Khatib told reporters: “I am urging the parties to increase their focus on working towards a political solution. We would like to see indirect discussions evolve into direct talks.”

A key issue was agreeing on a body to manage a transition. It would have to be “all-inclusive and involve representatives from all political and social groups as well as a wide range of factions, regions and tribes.” He added, however, that there was a significant gap between the two sides.

President Barack Obama is backing Moscow’s mediating efforts in Libya if they lead to Gaddafi stepping down.

Italy, hosting Nato’s air operations, added its voice to the chorus on Tuesday. Franco Frattini, the foreign minister, told Algeria’s al Khabar newspaper: “We are convinced that the Libyan crisis requires a political solution characterised by an end to fighting; Gaddafi, who lacks all legitimacy, leaving the stage; and the launching of an inclusive democratic process involving all parts of Libyan society.”

Western governments admit they are worried about the lack of a decisive blow by Nato, the mounting cost of the campaign and the weakness of the rebel forces, but say they are encouraged by a widening agreement about the desired political outcome.

“There is a consensus on how to end the crisis, which is that Gaddafi has to leave power,” Juppé told France Info radio. “That [consensus] was absolutely not a given two or three months ago.” Initiatives by the African Union and South Africa have faded away.

“There are indications that people around Gaddafi would envisage a solution that includes him being out of power rather than in,” said one diplomat. “We are hearing that from various people but it’s not yet set in stone. There is an emerging international consensus around a political track and momentum is building up, but there is no breakthrough.”

Libya experts suspect that ideas about Gaddafi stepping down may be being floated without official authorisation to test western reactions.

The approach of Ramadan, the Muslim month of fasting at the beginning of August, is also adding to pressure to find a way out of the impasse.

Later this week the Libya international contact group meeting in Istanbul is expected to channel more cash to the Transitional National Council and step up efforts for a political settlement.

Nato governments insist there can be no backtracking from the arrest warrant issued for Gaddafi by the international criminal court but continue to hope that he might yet flee to a country such as Zimbabwe, Belarus or Sudan – even though he has always insisted he will stay in Libya.

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010

This article titled “Libya: Nato admits civilian deaths in Tripoli air raid” was written by Nick Hopkins and agencies, for The Guardian on Monday 20th June 2011 00.21 UTC

Nato has admitted it was responsible for an air strike that killed civilians in Tripoli over the weekend.

“A military missile site was the intended target of air strikes in Tripoli last night,” a statement said. “However, it appears that one weapon did not strike the intended target; there may have been a weapons system failure which may have caused a number of civilian casualties.”

Earlier the Libyan government had said that a Nato missile had struck a house in a residential area of the Libyan capital, killing at least nine civilians, including two children.

The attack is the biggest mistake by coalition forces during the four-month campaign, at a time when Nato has been trying to increase the tempo of operations against the Libyan leader.

“Nato regrets the loss of innocent civilian lives and takes great care in conducting strikes against a regime determined to use violence against its own citizens,” said Lieutenant-General Charles Bouchard, commander of Operation Unified Protector. “Although we are still determining the specifics of this event, indications are that a weapons system failure may have caused this incident,” he added.

The Guardian understands that investigators are focusing on French aircraft that were flying over Tripoli to target a potential missile site. RAF planes were not thought involved. Nato was debriefing the pilots who flew sorties, as well as reviewing data from their aircraft. Before the admission of responsibility, a Nato official, speaking on condition of anonymity, had said there was confusion over the exact location of the explosion, and pointed out that the district in question was an anti-Gaddafi stronghold.

Reporters based in Tripoli were taken by government officials to the scene and then to a hospital, where they were shown the bodies of four people said to have been killed in the strike, including two infants.

Associated Press said journalists were escorted back to the site during the day, where children’s toys, teacups and dust-covered mattresses could be seen amid the rubble. Foreign journalists in Tripoli are not allowed to travel and report freely and are almost always shadowed by government minders.

Libya’s foreign minister Abdelati Obeidi said the Nato strike was a “pathetic attempt … to break the spirit of the people of Tripoli and allow small numbers of terrorists to cause instability and disorder in the peaceful city”.

Obeidi also called for a “global jihad” in response to the Nato action. “The deliberate bombing … is a direct call for all free peoples of the world and for all Muslims to initiate a global jihad against the oppressive, criminal west and never to allow such criminal organisations as Nato to decide the future of other independent and sovereign nations,” he said. However, Abdel Hafiz Ghoga, vice chairman of the rebel National Transitional Council, said in response: “We hold the Gaddafi regime responsible for having placed its military [installations] near civilian areas. So these losses [of civilians] are to be expected.”

Gaddafi’s forces used Grad rockets and mortars to bombard the rebel front lines in Dafniya, 15 miles west of Misrata. A medical official in Misrata hospital said that 10 rebels were killed and 54 wounded in clashes in Dafniya.

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010

Published via the Guardian News Feed plugin for WordPress.

The content previously published here has been withdrawn. We apologise for any inconvenience.

This article titled “Taliban behind surge in attacks on western troops and advisers” was written by Jason Burke in Kabul, for The Guardian on Tuesday 31st May 2011 19.35 UTC

Commanders of international troops in Afghanistan are becoming increasingly concerned at the growing number of attacks by members of local security forces on western forces or advisers.

The Taliban ordered insurgents to step up infiltration of the Afghan national army and police earlier this year, Nato officials believe, leading to an alarming rise in the number of “blue on green” attacks.

Increasing the numbers of local security forces is a key part of the coalition strategy to allow international combat troops to leave the country before the 2014 deadline set at the Lisbon conference last year.

Recent months have seen dozens of incidents – many unreported – of Afghan soldiers or policemen turning their weapons on western troops or facilitating attacks by insurgents.

The latest saw an Australian mentor killed by an Afghan soldier in Oruzgan province on Monday. Lance Corporal Andrew Gordon Jones, 25, was shot three times by a soldier, who then fled. A Taliban spokesman said the killer was a hero. “Every soldier who joins us is rewarded with medals and great honour,” he said.

The Taliban regularly claim responsibility for attacks in which they had no immediate role. Intelligence officers said most are by “disgruntled guys”.

One spark for violence may be widespread anger in Afghanistan at continuing civilian casualties caused by international troops. The most recent incident saw 14 civilians killed by an airstrike in the southern province of Helmand at the weekend. Reports suggest insurgents fled into a home after attacking US troops.

President Hamid Karzai said he would take “unilateral action” if the airstrikes did not stop, adding that Afghans would react as they have to previous occupying forces if attacks continued. Afghans are proud of their history of repelling invaders, including the Soviet Union in the 1980s and the British in the 19th century. Karzai has repeatedly made similar threats.

Data collected by the UN shows most civilian casualties in Afghanistan are from Taliban attacks, particularly suicide bombs and remote-controlled blasts.

Western officials fear a “rising trend” of attacks by Afghan soldiers and police on western forces, though they stress that the numbers involved are a small minority of Afghan security forces.

In the past 18 months Nato has recorded around 20 incidents in which Afghan soldiers or policemen have attacked international forces, killing more than 50.

Two Nato trainers were killed by a police officer in Helmand earlier this month. In April, a veteran Afghan air force major shot and killed eight US troops and an American contractor in Kabul. Other recent incidents include the shooting of two Americans during police training in the northern Faryab province and the killing of three Germans in the north of the country by an Afghan soldier.

In November last year six US troops were killed when an Afghan border police officer shot them. Three British soldiers were killed by a soldier last July. In November 2009 five British soldiers were shot dead by a “rogue” Afghan policeman in an attack at a police checkpoint.

Hanif Atmar, the former interior minister, said most incidents were the result of “cultural misunderstandings” between foreigners and the police or troops they were trying to train. “There is an Afghan way of doing things that sometimes they don’t respect and that leads to angry outbursts and then shootings,” he said.

In addition, there are frequent but much less often reported incidents of members of the Afghan security forces involved in attacks on fellow Afghans.

Two recent incidents – the killings of the police chief of Kandahar province on 15 April and of the police chief of northern Afghanistan last weekend – involved individuals wearing police uniforms. It is unclear whether they were serving officers or imposters, although Afghan officials said a senior police bodyguard was involved in the attack in Kandahar.

The Afghan army has almost doubled in size in three years to more than 164,000. The Afghan national police has grown from fewer than 95,000 in late 2009 to 126,000 today.

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010

Published via the Guardian News Feed plugin for WordPress.

This article titled “Apache helicopters to be sent into Libya by Britain” was written by Richard Norton-Taylor, for The Guardian on Monday 23rd May 2011 17.16 UTC

Britain and France are to deploy attack helicopters against Libya in an attempt to break the military stalemate, particularly in the important coastal city of Misrata, security sources have told the Guardian.

In a significant escalation of the conflict, the Apaches – based on HMS Ocean – will join French helicopters in risky operations which reflect deepening frustration among British and French defence chiefs about their continuing inability to protect civilians in Libya.

Apaches, which are being used in counter-insurgency operations in Afghanistan, can manoeuvre and attack small targets in relatively built-up areas. Heavily armed Apaches and French Tiger helicopters are equipped with night vision equipment and electronic guidance systems. Forces loyal to the Libyan leader, Muammar Gaddafi, have shed their uniforms, are using civilian vehicles and hiding armour near civilian buildings, including hospitals and schools.

The decision to deploy the helicopters is a clear recognition that high-level bombing from 15,000 feet cannot protect civilians who continue to be attacked by rocket and mortar shells. It brings the Nato offensive much closer to the ground at a time when Britain and other Nato countries are insisting they have no intention of sending in troops.

However, the helicopters could be vulnerable to handheld rocket-propelled grenades and even rifle fire.

Hospital officials said two people were killed and several wounded during Monday’s fighting in Misrata. Later, heavy explosions outside the city were heard, lasting about an hour.

Reuters quoted a rebel spokesman as saying that forces loyal to Gaddafi also shelled the rebel-held town of Zintan and moved troops close to the mountainous region bordering Tunisia, intensifying operations on the war’s western front.

On Monday Nato warplanes bombed Tripoli in what appeared to be the heaviest night of bombing since the start of the air campaign against Gaddafi’s forces and his sprawling compound. More than 20 airstrikes in less than half an hour set off thunderous booms that rattled windows around the city.

Britain and France clearly hope that the use of attack helicopters, and the fact of revealing the intention to use them, will deter pro-Gaddafi forces and assuage Libyan rebels who have been demanding more effective military action from Nato countries. The sight of Nato forces actually on the ground would be strongly opposed by most countries in the alliance, including the US and also those Arab countries in favour of the air campaign against Gaddafi’s forces.

The foreign secretary, William Hague, attending an EU ministerial meeting in Brussels, said: “We are very much behind the intensification of the military campaign and … so is France.” He added: “We certainly agree with France, and indeed with all our partners, including all our partners at the EU meeting here today, that it is necessary to intensify the military, economic and diplomatic pressure on the Gaddafi regime.”

Alain Juppé, France’s foreign minister, confirmed that Paris has dispatched a dozen helicopters to add greater strike force to the campaign against Gaddafi in Libya. He said that the 12 Tiger and Gazelle helicopters sent from Toulon on 17 May would enable “us to better adapt our ground attack capacity with more precise means of striking”.

He added: “Our strategy is to step up the military pressure in the weeks ahead while pushing at the same time for a political solution.” According to French sources, the battleship Tonnerre, carrying the helicopters, left Toulon last week. The vessel combines the roles of helicopter carrier, hospital ship, and troops transporter.

Juppé said the helicopters would not be used to deploy ground forces in Libya and that the decision to send them was fully in line with the UN security council resolution mandating attacks in Libya.

The French newspaper Le Figaro said the helicopters would be assisted by target identification from French special forces who have been on the ground in Libya since the start of the allied operation there. The Ministry of Defence does not comment on special forces’ operations.

Jim Murphy, the shadow defence secretary, said: “This is a significant development. It is right that the alliance is intensifying military pressure on Gaddafi’s forces, but the British government needs to be clearer about a political strategy for Libya and whether the military commitment to Libya is an open-ended one.”

The first international stabilisation response team has arrived in Libya, the international development secretary Andrew Mitchell has confirmed . He said Britain would continue to provide medical and emergency food supplies, adding that “the international community also needs to start thinking strategically about what is needed now to help lay the foundations for a stable, secure Libya”.

• This article was updated on 23 May 2011, to add greater detail.

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010

Published via the Guardian News Feed plugin for WordPress.

This article titled “Nato air strikes hit Gaddafi compound in Tripoli again” was written by Martin Chulov Tripoli, for The Guardian on Thursday 12th May 2011 18.51 UTC

Muammar Gaddafi’s compound in Tripoli has been hit by Nato rockets again, a few hours after the veteran autocrat appeared in public for the first time in almost two weeks.

Gaddafi was shown on state television in a traditional brown robe addressing tribal leaders, whom he empowered to speak on behalf of a nation he has ruled with absolute power for almost 42 years.

The labyrinthine complex in the heart of the capital was struck at around 3am with five bombs and rockets that appeared to target military installations and bunkers.

A giant crater could be seen in the lawn in the middle of the complex, with one of the rockets having hit what appeared to be a bunker . Officials said six people were killed in the attack, including two Libyan reporters who had been interviewing supporters camped out at the scene.

“These locations were known to be command and control facilities engaged in co-ordinating attacks against civilian populations in Libya,” said a Nato official speaking from Brussels.

Libyan spokesman Moussa Ibrahim said the underground facility was not a bunker, but a sewage network. But following the strike, chanting Gaddafi supporters guarded a stairwell leading to the ruined site, having been told to let no reporters near it. Heat rose from a second smaller crater, where shattered reinforced concrete exposed a cavernous hole beneath.

The US defence secretary, Robert Gates, revealed that the US had so far spent 0m (£460m) on the international effort to oust Gaddafi .

The US and Nato attacks are taking a toll on Tripoli, where queues for fuel and basic services clutter most roadways.

However, support for Gaddafi still appears to be solid. Rebel elements in the capital have not mustered any large offensive and the loyalist army appears to be in control despite nightly attacks from Nato jets.

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010

Published via the Guardian News Feed plugin for WordPress.

This article titled “Gaddafi compound hit in Nato attack” was written by Harriet Sherwood in Tripoli, for The Guardian on Monday 25th April 2011 16.28 UTC

The Libyan government has accused Nato of trying to assassinate Muammar Gaddafi after two air strikes in three days hit sites in or near the compound where he is believed to direct military strategy.

At least two large missiles or bombs struck a multistorey office building in Bab al-Azizia, the sprawling complex in the centre of Tripoli, shortly after midnight yesterday. The Libyan government claimed three people were killed in the attack, although some officials there shortly after the strike said there had been no injuries.

“We regard it as an attempt to assassinate the leader and unifying figure of this country,” government spokesman Moussa Ibrahim said, standing before the skeleton of the bombed building. “It was not a civilised act. This is an act of terrorism, an act worthy of mafia gangs, not governments.”

The targeted building housed document archives and a library regularly used by Gaddafi, according to officials. Its roof caved under the impact of the strike; the ground over a wide area was covered in shattered masonry, broken glass and metal, and pools of water that had formed between piles of rubble. Three hours after the blast, thick dust was still in the air when foreign journalists were taken to the site.

Figures close to the regime believe that Nato is targeting Gaddafi and his inner circle in violation of the UN security council resolution authorising military intervention to protect civilians. The Libyan leader has rarely been seen in public since the crisis began around 10 weeks ago.

Ibrahim refused to comment on Gaddafi’s whereabouts, other than to say he was “in a safe place”, working from Tripoli and leading the battle for peace and democracy in Libya. The leader was in good health and high spirits, he added.

Hours before the strikes, US senator Lindsey Graham called for Nato to “cut the head of the snake off”. Gaddafi “needs to wake up every day wondering ‘will this be my last?’” the Republican member of the armed services committee told CNN.

The strike came as Liam Fox, the defence secretary, heads to the US for talks on the military campaign with his counterpart Robert Gates. The discussions are expected to focus on the best way of stepping up Nato attacks on Gaddafi’s forces, after the US decided to bring its Predator drones into operation.

Nato headquarters in Brussels confirmed the attack on the Gaddafi compound, describing the buildings as a legitimate target under the terms of the UN mandate empowering it to hit regime facilities that threaten the safety of Libyan civilians.

“We can confirm that the alliance carried out a precision air strike in central Tripoli,” said Nato. The target was “a communications headquarters used to co-ordinate attacks against the civilian population … We have no evidence of any civilian casualties.”

The official said the attack was part of a strategy of varying the targets selected for striking in Libya as part of the campaign to “degrade the regime forces”.

Italy, which has been playing a reduced role in operations, decided on Monday that its air force will be allowed to bomb selected military targets in Libya. A statement from Silvio Berlusconi’s office said he had informed Barack Obama in a telephone conversation of the decision and that he would call other European leaders to tell them personally as well.

Saif al-Islam Gaddafi, the Libyan leader’s son, said the air strikes on Gaddafi’s seat of power would make Libya stronger. “It’s impossible that it will make us afraid or give up or raise the white flag,” the Jana state news agency quoted him as saying. “In history, no country has achieved victory with spies and traitors and collaborators … Nato, you are the losers.”

At Gaddafi’s compound, supporters who gather nightly to act as human shields against the air strikes climbed on the shattered building shortly after the blasts, as chunks of masonry fell. They waved loyalist green flags and chanted pro-Gaddafi and anti-Nato slogans.

The foreign media was refused free access to the site, where shelves of files could be seen hanging in the carcass of the building. “Any government has secret archives and documents. We are still looking after our documents,” said Ibrahim.

Another building, a ceremonial reception area where Gaddafi hosted a delegation from the African Union two weeks ago, including South African president Jacob Zuma, was damaged. Journalists were barred from inspecting a third damaged building.

A compound housing Libyan state television was hit in a separate strike near Tripoli’s old city, according to an official. Broadcasts went off air temporarily as a result, he said.

The strike on Bab al-Azizia is the second time Nato has struck inside the compound since its military campaign started. A missile hit a command-and-control building in the early days of the strikes, causing extensive damage.

In the early hours of Saturday, two missiles hit a site a few hundred metres from the compound. Nato appeared to have targeted an underground bunker, which was visible from the craters caused by the missiles.

The strike on Gaddafi’s compound followed two days of heavy assault on the besieged city of Misrata by government forces. Despite the Libyan government’s claims that troops had pulled back from the city, forces on the ground stepped up shelling and rocket fire after gains made on the ground by rebels. Two schools are reported to have been destroyed by shelling.

“Now Gaddafi’s troops are on the outskirts of Misrata, using rocket launchers,” a resident named Abdel Salam told the Associated Press.

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010

Published via the Guardian News Feed plugin for WordPress.