This article is from the source 'nytimes' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/02/world/asia/afghans-yield-in-dispute-with-us-over-cargo-shipments.html

The article has changed 4 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 2 Version 3
Afghans Yield in Dispute With U.S. Over Stiff Fines for Cargo Shipments Afghans Yield in Dispute With U.S. Over Stiff Fines for Cargo Shipments
(about 5 hours later)
KABUL, Afghanistan — Faced with the possible loss of hundreds of millions of dollars in American aid, Afghanistan abruptly backed off a threat to impose steep fines on the NATO-led coalition over missing paperwork for cargo shipments, the coalition said on Thursday. KABUL, Afghanistan — Faced with the possible loss of hundreds of millions of dollars in American aid, Afghanistan abruptly backed off a threat to impose steep fines on the NATO-led coalition over missing paperwork for cargo shipments, Afghan and coalition officials said on Thursday.
On the surface, the long-running dispute was largely a bureaucratic quarrel. But the fines could have driven up the cost of the coalition’s withdrawal, and the spat’s emergence into the spotlight last month demonstrated the increased willingness of Afghan officials to publicly decry what they portrayed as American arrogance. On the surface, the long-running dispute was largely a bureaucratic quarrel. But the fines could have driven up the cost of the coalition’s withdrawal, and the spat’s emergence into the spotlight last month demonstrated the increased willingness of Afghan officials to publicly complain of what they call American arrogance.
Afghan officials had contended that the coalition, which is allowed to import supplies duty free, had never filed paperwork to claim the exemption on most of the material it had brought to Afghanistan. They estimated 70,000 containers had been imported over the past decade, and said each was subject to a $1,000 fine now that the coalition was taking its material out. The total fine would have amounted to $70 million. Afghan officials had contended that the coalition, which is allowed to import supplies duty free, had never filed paperwork to claim the exemption on most of the material it had brought to Afghanistan. They estimated that 70,000 containers had been imported over the past decade and said each was subject to a $1,000 fine now that the coalition was taking its material out. The total fine could have amounted to $70 million.
Neither side would say on Thursday how they resolved the dispute. The coalition announced the deal in a relatively brief statement, saying Afghanistan’s finance minister, Omar Zakhilwal, had recommended the fines be waived, and the government of President Hamid Karzai agreed. There was no immediate comment from Afghan officials. The compromise announced on Thursday would see the Afghan government waive the fines in exchange for a coalition pledge to abide by the rules in the future, according to Finance Minister Omar Zakhilwal.
Gen. Joseph F. Dunford Jr., the commander of coalition forces, made a point in the statement of personally thanking Mr. Zakhilwal and Mr. Karzai for their “leadership and direct engagement” on the issue. The coalition also agreed to closely monitor its suppliers for any diversion of duty-free goods onto the local market, Mr. Zakhilwal said in an e-mail. Afghan officials contend the diversion of supplies for the coalition, especially soft drinks and other consumer items, is widespread and costs Afghanistan significant tax and customs revenue. Coalition officials have said the problem is relatively minor.
The conciliatory language appeared to be an effort to mitigate what looked like a humiliating climb-down by Afghan officials. Mr. Zakhilwal, in particular, had cast the issue in terms of national pride, saying the fines were as much about respect for the laws of Afghanistan as money. He did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Thursday. The coalition said little on Thursday beyond announcing that a deal had been struck. In a statement, Gen. Joseph F. Dunford Jr., the commander of coalition forces, thanked Mr. Zakhilwal and President Hamid Karzai for their “leadership and direct engagement” on the issue.
Mr. Zakhilwal’s comments last month had come after Afghanistan briefly closed its border crossings to NATO shipments. The borders were reopened on the condition that the matter be resolved within a month, he had said at the time. The conciliatory language appeared to be an effort to ease what looked like a humiliating retreat by Afghan officials. Mr. Zakhilwal, in particular, had cast the issue in terms of national pride, saying the fines were as much about respect for the laws of Afghanistan as money. He did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Mr. Zakhilwal’s comments last month came after Afghanistan briefly closed its border crossings to NATO shipments. The borders were reopened on the condition that the matter be resolved within a month, he had said at the time.
American officials were incensed by the move, which they saw as an effort to wring more money out of the United States and its allies, who have spent more than $100 billion rebuilding Afghanistan since 2001.American officials were incensed by the move, which they saw as an effort to wring more money out of the United States and its allies, who have spent more than $100 billion rebuilding Afghanistan since 2001.
Within days, the Senate had passed a measure that would have cut aid to Afghanistan $5 for every $1 of fines or a total of $350 million. Within days, the Senate had passed a measure that would have cut aid to Afghanistan $5 for every $1 of fines, a total of $350 million.
The coalition, meanwhile, simply began flying material out of the county when the border was closed, even though the cost of air shipments exceeded that of paying the fine and moving the cargo by land.The coalition, meanwhile, simply began flying material out of the county when the border was closed, even though the cost of air shipments exceeded that of paying the fine and moving the cargo by land.
Hours before the deal on the customs fines was announced, a coalition airstrike killed five Afghan police officers, a reminder of other divisive issues that have marred the relationship between Washington and Kabul.
The airstrike came after midnight when Afghan and American troops hunting for an insurgent field commander in eastern Afghanistan come under heavy fire from Taliban fighters. The troops called for air support, and the five policemen appear to have been killed in an errant strike by coalition aircraft, Afghan and coalition officials said.
Afghan officials said they believed some Taliban were killed in the airstrike as well.
Mr. Karzai has at times lashed out at the coalition over civilian deaths in airstrikes. The coalition has in recent years steadily tightened the rules under which its forces can conduct airstrikes, and the United Nations said in a report this week that the number of Afghans killed in such actions continued to drop in the first six months of the year.
Over all, however, civilian casualties were up by 23 percent, with the Taliban responsible for the vast majority of the deaths, the United Nations said.

Azam Ahmed contributed reporting.