EMAIL SIGN UP!
Most Popular This Week
- 'The Gilded Age' Statistics Corporations Don't Want Workers, or Anyone, to See
- As Death Toll Rises Beyond 500, Garment Factory Disaster 'Worst in World History'
- Wisconsin Bill Would Treat Organic Milk, Sharp Cheddar, Brown Eggs as "Junk Food"
- Report: Toxic Chemicals Found in Thousands of Children's Products
- Climate Change's 'Evil Twin': Ocean Acidification
- Report: Toxic Chemicals Found in Thousands of Children's Products
- Move Over, Koch Brothers: A Bigger, Darker Rightwing Funder Is Out to Destroy Public Education
- 'The Gilded Age' Statistics Corporations Don't Want Workers, or Anyone, to See
- After Boston, Eyes-Wide Open Hope?
- Time for Big Green to Go Fossil Free
Popular content
Today's Top News
US Supply Routes to Afghanistan Suffer Two Huge Blows
MOSCOW - The U.S.-led campaign against the Taliban suffered two logistical blows Tuesday as the president of Kyrgyzstan announced that he'd shut a U.S. airbase in his country and insurgents in Pakistan blew up a bridge, disrupting the main U.S. supply route into Afghanistan.
In this April 14, 2007 file photo, a U.S. serviceman stands in front of S-135 aircraft during American-French joint exercises at the U.S. Manas Air Base, located near the Kyrgyz capital of Bishkek. Kyrgyzstan's president said that his country is ending U.S. use of a key airbase that supports military operations in Afghanistan, Russian news agencies quoted him as saying Tuesday Feb. 3 2009. (AP Photo/Misha Japaridze,file) The developments were the latest reminders of the vulnerability of the long and complex transportation system on which the 60,000 U.S.-led forces in Afghanistan depend for fuel, ammunition, construction materials and a great deal more.
The announcement by Kyrgyzstan President Kurmanbek Bakiyev that he will close the Manas Air Base also gave President Barack Obama a first taste of the challenge he faces from Russia, which is trying to restore its clout in countries that were part of the former Soviet Union.
Bakiyev made his announcement in Moscow, not in his own capital, shortly after the Russian government reportedly agreed to lend Kyrgyzstan $2 billion, write off $180 million in debt and add another $150 million in aid. The timing and place of the announcement indicated the Kremlin's involvement.
"It's a direct challenge to the new American administration. Russia is going out of its way to close an American base," said Pavel Felgenhauer, a Moscow-based military analyst.
Manas is the main transit point through which U.S. troops fly into and out of Afghanistan. As such, it is vital to plans to send 30,000 more American troops to stabilize Afghanistan. A U.S. Air Force Web site calls it "the premier air-mobility hub" for U.S. and allied operations in Afghanistan, with about 1,000 military personnel from America, Spain and France stationed there.
A senior U.S. military official said the U.S. military hopes Bakiyev's decision is not final but is the latest gambit in what has been a lengthy effort to squeeze more money out of Washington.
"There is a long list of things that he wants, some of which we can't do, like debt relief, relieving the debt he owes other governments," said the U.S. military official. "The bottom line, we hope, is that this is simply a card being played as part of the negotiating process. Obviously, we don't want to lose Manas."
Another U.S. official, who also spoke on condition of anonymity, said Bakiyev had been trying to play the U.S. off against Russia for months in order to secure more funds. The official could not be identified by name because he was unauthorized to speak to reporters.
The U.S. has been paying Kyrgyzstan about $63 million a year to use Manas. The money is part of some $150 million in annual direct and indirect U.S. aid.
Gen. David Petraeus, the head of the U.S. Central Command, which oversees U.S. military operations in the Middle East and South Asia, said senior Kyrgyz officials had assured him that there were no discussions between the country and Russia about closing the base in exchange for aid.
The senior U.S. military official said the base is also used to "bed down" U.S. tanker aircraft used for mid-aid refueling operations over Afghanistan.
Bakiyev explained in Moscow that the decision had been made because "we have repeatedly raised with the U.S. the matter of economic compensation for the existence of the base in Kyrgyzstan, but we have not been understood," Russian media reported.
Bakiyev said that after the base opened in 2001 the understanding was that "it was one or two years that were being talked about. Eight years have passed."
The Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in 1979 touched off 30 years of war, and Moscow is again turning into a player in Afghan politics. Two days before Obama's inauguration, the Afghan government said that Russia had accepted a request from President Hamid Karzai for military aid.
And last month, the Kremlin said it would open transportation lines through Russia to Afghanistan to help U.S. forces circumvent the violence-plagued route across the Pakistani border.
Although he didn't cite the base closing, Russian President Dmitry Medvedev made a point of saying in Moscow that Kyrgyzstan and Russia "are open to coordinated action" with the U.S.-led coalition in Afghanistan.
Analyst Felgenhauer said the message from the two actions was clear: The Kremlin is willing to help the American military in Afghanistan, but only on the condition that the U.S. recognizes its authority in central Asia.
Or, more simply put, "we will not allow their bases in our sphere of influence," said Felgenhauer, a critic of Kremlin policy.
In Pakistan, meanwhile, Islamic insurgents allied with the Taliban blew up a bridge in the Khyber Pass, disrupting one of two truck routes from the port of Karachi by which U.S.-led NATO forces in Afghanistan receive about 80 percent of their supplies.
(Landay reported from Washington.)
- Posted in
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...

14 Comments so far
Show AllThe ghost of Hermann Goering says not to worry - the Stalingrad pocket (I think he means the Afghan pocket) can be supplied by air.
Seriously, though, the impossibility of securing supply routes into Afghanistan for eternity is just another reason not to stay stuck in the quagmire.
However, reason is in short supply as well.
I have repeatedly pointed out that the supply of our troops in Afghanistan can at any moment become a logistical nightmare. Your comparison with Stalingrad is fair although the supply of the German Sixth Army was more difficult owing to massive Soviet anti-aircraft fire and bad winter weather. Moreover, there were about 250,000 encircled German troops at Stalingrad as against 60,000 of our in Afghanistan.
Nevertheless, it is the height of military folly to make our troops dependent on the "good will" of Mr. Putin on whom we have zero "leverage" and the non-existent vigilance of the Government of Pakistan. Not only is it absolutely necessary to refrain from sending even more troops to Afghanistan, the troops there must be pulled out a.s.a.p. Occupying all of Pakistan is not a choice.
Virtually every commanding officer of the German Luftwaffe warned that the provisioning of the Sixth Army by air was impossible. Where are our commanding officers who should have the foresight to realize that the supply of our troops in Afghanistan is just as impossible as of the German troops at Stalingrad. Folks, this is not a "Berlin Airlift"!
More propaganda. The USSR did NOT "invade" Afghanistan. It was ASKED to help quell the US proxy INVASION of Afghanistan that ignited its civil war. The BIG LIE from '79 continues to live on; and since the truth of the matter is known, McClatchy DELIBERATELY inserted it.
During the '80s, people were urged to root for the Afghans and the USSR was labled an Evil Empire. If the shoe fits, wear it, US Empire. I'm rooting for the Afghans and Pakistanis in their fight against the Evil Empire.
So you're rooting for the Afghans and Pakistani's. You would actually like to see the Taliban take over again and put women back in Burkas, take girls out of school and put their oppressive brand of the Muslim religon back into practice.
You are a pig.
You can't bring progressive social change for women etc. by invading, waging war or occupation. A significant number of Afghan nationalists will long identify the social changes you want to see as being forced by the foreign enemy. The war is driving Afghanis into a united front with some of what is left of the old Taliban. Their resistance is mainly funded by the opium crop.
The U.S. attacking and bombing into Pakistan will drive the war further into Pakistan and cause the disintegration of that state just like the U.S. bombing of, and meddling in Cambodia caused disaster for Cambodians as Pol Pot came to power as a result.
Karlof 12:55 ------- Could you explain the Proxy USA invasion a little more. The scenerio I learned was the Afghans installed a communist leader; and around that time there was a Soviet commando raid on the Shah's compound in Kabul. This first communist did not cooperate enough to the Soviets liking. He went to Moscow and was never seen again. Then the Soviets invaded, ( maybe the commando raid was for the second communist)and installed a puppet. What is your take?
FYI, some gory details on how Russians managed to get "invited" to Afghanistan.
Time Magazine is clearly the most respected source of historical knowledge available in the U.S.:
Adolf Hitler, 1939 Man of the Year
Obama the Conquerer shall bestride the peaks of Central Asia like a colossus. The mountainsides must tremble at his warcry. He will lead his faithful "troops" into Pakistan, Russia, China, and over all the Earth. Liberty! Fraternity! Christianity! Pax Americana. In 2016, he shall bequeath the grateful of the planet to the Empress Hillary and her faithful consort, Prince Willie.
It will be good to close Manas. Manas is about 40 miles out of Bishkek, but very rarely do US troops venture outside the fence. Kyrgyz locals benefit little from all that US money in their country.
Having said that, the Kyrgyz are suspicious of Russians, even though many Russians decided to stay when the wall came down.
Never criticize a man until you've walked a mile in their moccasins - Native American proverb.
Pan
More money must be spent to improve the highways and fix the potholes there, letting their infrastructur deteriorate will only lead to a greater expense later.
I think the US spends more money on building highways in Afghanistan than in the US. I'll look for the references.
Never criticize a man until you've walked a mile in their moccasins - Native American proverb.
Disrupting the Empire's supply line is one of the most effective ways of forcing it to reassess its priorities.
What did the Afghans ever do to us?