Tuesday, September 7, 2010 - 12:03 PM
A Florida group's plan to burn copies of the Quran on Sept. 11 could hurt the international mission in Afghanistan and put allied troops at risk, the head of NATO said Tuesday.
"I strongly condemn that. I think it's a disrespectful action and in general I really urge people to respect other people's faith and behave respectfully. I think such actions are in strong contradiction with all the values we stand for and fight for," said NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen. "Of course, there is a risk that it may also have a negative impact on the security for our troops."
Rasmussen's comments came just one day after Afghanistan commander Gen. David Petraeus issued a statement criticizing the Dove World Outreach Center in Gainesville, Florida, which plans to burn copies of Islam's holy book for 10 reasons they explain on their website.
"It could endanger troops and it could endanger the overall effort in Afghanistan," Petraeus said.
Lt. Gen. William Caldwell, the head of the NATO training mission in Afghanistan, told CNN that the issue was already a hot topic of discussion among Afghans and said, "We very much feel that this can jeopardize the safety of our men and women that are serving over here in the country."
The Associated Press reported that hundreds of Muslims in Kabul have already rioted in protest of the planned Koran burning.
Rasmussen is in Washington to meet with President Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton at the White House Tuesday afternoon. Topping the agenda are metrics for assessing progress in Afghanistan, as well as preparations for the upcoming NATO summit in Lisbon in November.
In a wide-ranging discussion with reporters, Rasmussen expressed guarded optimism about the progress of the war in Afghanistan, where about 40,000 NATO troops are fighting alongside American soldiers and marines.
Rasmussen said he agreed with President Obama's decision to begin the transition of authority over security matters from allied forces to the Afghan government, including troop withdrawals, in July 2011. He said the pace of withdrawals were to be determined by conditions on the ground, and that the goal was to complete the transition by the end of 2014.
"I can tell you when it will begin, I can tell you when it would be completed, but I can't tell you exactly what will be the time differences between these two points," he said about the transition, predicting an announcement regarding the beginning of the transition at the Lisbon conference.
He acknowledged that there is an ongoing process to identify which provinces to transition to Afghan control first, and what metrics to use in judging progress on goals. He said it was premature, however, to say which provinces might be ready first or what specific metrics might be used.
"We will not leave until we have finished our job... A handover doesn't mean an exit," he said. NATO forces will have an ongoing role, which will include the presence of a base in Kabul that will allow them to continue to provide support at some level in perpetuity, he said.
On the ever-puzzling issue about what to do regarding Afghan government corruption, Rasmussen said that the international community must keep up political pressure on Afghan President Hamid Karzai but said that he believes Karzai is sincere about cooperating with the NATO-led coalition on this issue.
"He realizes that it is a prerequisite for gaining the trust of his own people that he and his government fight corruption determinedly," he said. "I really do believe he will do what it takes."
Rasmussen said the Lisbon conference will address a host of issues, including tactical nuclear weapons in Europe, NATO cooperation on missile defense, and cyber warfare. He also endorsed a NATO missile defense shield and extended an offer to Russia to participate. (Russia has shown little enthusiasm for missile-defense cooperation.)
On nuclear weapons, Rasmussen said that while he shared Obama's goal of a world free of nuclear weapons, for the time being nukes will remain in Europe as part of NATO's posture. He said the conference will not come out with specific numbers for the reductions of nuclear weapons based in Europe.
"We will not give up nuclear capabilities as a central part of our deterrence policy," he said.
EXPLORE:ARAB WORLD, EUROPE, MIDDLE EAST, SOUTH ASIA, AFGHANISTAN, DEMOCRACY, DIPLOMACY, HUMAN RIGHTS, OBAMA ADMINISTRATION, RACE/ETHNICITY, RELIGION, STATE DEPARTMENT, TERRORISM
I am not a Muslim. I am an American and I would hope that this proposed step back into the Dark Ages would be viewed by state and federal authorities as a terrorist act, in violation of US Code and the Patriot act (Muslims are specifically named in the P.A.), designed to intimidate and coerce Muslims who are US citizens and incite other acts of terrorism in the United States. Hopefully this group will be dealt with appropriately.
Muslims are full of shit. Muslim states burn bibles all the time. Hamas does it in Gaza, Islamists do it in Pakistan and Saudi Arabia.
Christians are persecuted all over.
Yet when is the last time anyone in NATO or the West ever said a SINGLE THING CRITICAL OF MUSLIM STATES?
Oh they bend over backwards to differentiate between Al-Qaeda and the peace-loving Muslim community...
Good post!!Thanks for the valuable information. It was very useful for me. Keep sharing such ideas in the future as well.keep blogging.
Application Control127
Thanks for an insightful post. These information are really helpful. Again thanks for sharing your knowledge with us.Keep up the good work.keep blogging.
Content Filtering078
When it comes to religion; you can only turn your cheek so many
Again our leaders ask Westerners to not insult Islam; why is that? I see Muslims burning American Flags and killing innocent Christians and no one in the West stands up and says enough is enough. Our leaders are blind or dumb to the actual dangers that are being posed by Islamic radicals supported by the majority of Muslims through Mosques through out the world. I think that it is time to reassess the nature of the threat and the nature of Islam as a religion and its views toward the rest of the world. People are feeling threatened by what they see as an existential threat to the very foundation of our existence. I ask one question of the commenter’s. Why is it that Islam is allowed to build Mosques through out the world and the other religions in the world cannot build churches or temples in many Islamic countries; like Saudi Arabia. That doesn’t sell the tolerance thing very well.
Americans: Set an example of peace and tolerance
If you disagree with "Burn the Koran day", sign the petition at:
www.pleasedontburnthekoran.com
Also post this link on your Facebook and Twitter accounts if you are so inclined
Fp why do you keep removing my comments?
Please answer me , this makes no sense you guys let the biggest racist poeple comment and do nothing yet my comments are a little harsh but not offensive, why are you removing them, this is again Liberal journalism at it's best
(8)
HIDE COMMENTS LOGIN OR REGISTER REPORT ABUSE