Afghanistan News September 22, 2005

September 22, 2005

Afghanistan: Ready To Recognise Israel, Says Karzai
adnkronosinternational (AKI, Italy)
Kabul, 21 Sept. (AKI) - The president of Afghanistan, Hamid Karzai, has made surprise signals of openness towards Israel. The Italian newspaper Il Giornale reports that he expressed his willingness to recognise Israel at the end of a news conference following the parliamentary and provincial elections, "taking cue from the recent diplomatic developments between Pakistan and Israel."

"Other Muslim states have relations with Israel," the Afghan president said. "We are open to contact and we appreciate the Israeli withdrawal from the Gaza Strip: as soon as the Palestinian State is recognised, we will have no problem in resuming relations with Israel."

Pakistan has already responded to the Gaza pullout by signalling a move towards normalising relations with Israel, which it does not currently recognise. Last week Pakistani president Pervez Musharraf and Israeli prime minister Ariel Sharon met and exchanged pleasantries in New York at the UN summit. Karzai's comments also follow calls from Qatar's foreign minister last week for his other fellow Arab countries to respond to the Gaza withdrawal by starting talks with Israel.

Karzai Calls for Reduction In Foreign Military Operations After Election
Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty
Kabul, 21 September 2005 (RFE/RL) -- Karzai made his call for changes in the U.S.-led coalition antiterror strategy on 20 September in Kabul.

"On the change of strategy, I believe the progress in Afghanistan towards stability and peace, and the participation of the Afghan people, has taken us many, many steps forward," Karzai said. "The nature of the war on terrorism in Afghanistan has changed now. Therefore, we do not think that there is a serious terrorist challenge emanating from Afghanistan. Rather, we believe that we should now concentrate on where terrorists are trained, on their bases, on the supply to them, on the money coming to them. That's what we need. A stronger political approach now."

Karzai Questions Effectiveness of US-Led Air Strikes

Karzai questioned the effectiveness of U.S.-led coalition air strikes to combat terrorism. He also says he wants coalition forces to get the approval of the Afghan government before searching the homes of Afghans for suspected militants.

"I don't think there is a big need for military activity in Afghanistan anymore," Karzai said. "The use of air power is something that may not be very effective now because we have moved forward. And similarly, going into the Afghan homes -- searching Afghan homes without the authorization of the Afghan government -- is something that should stop now. No coalition forces should go into Afghan homes without the authorization of the Afghan government. The Afghan government is now capable of doing that. The Afghan society is now better organized [and] can handle things like that better than it could a year or two years ago. That's what I mean by a change of strategy."

One of Karzai's top advisers, Dadfar Sepanta, told RFE/RL today that Karzai doesn't want an entirely new strategy against terrorism. Rather, Sepanta said, some parts of the current strategy should be changed.

"We support a strong military and political fight against terrorism and Al-Qaeda," Sepanta said. "In this regard, we are in full agreement with the United States. What the president [Karzai] said is that sometimes when the [antiterrorism] policy is applied in action, mistakes happen that cause dissatisfaction among Afghan people. This includes the searching of people's houses at night. Or, in some cases, air strikes against civilian areas that happen because of misunderstandings or inaccurate information that is given to the U.S. military."

Sepanta said some mistakes by U.S. troops engaged in combat operations during the past year have caused discontent among ordinary Afghans -- particularly those living in the south and east of the country.

"You know that in a traditional society like Afghanistan, when foreign men enter rooms at night where women are sleeping, it upsets people. We believe that those who work with us on a common cause -- that is, the fight against terrorism and restoring security -- the international community, the United States and Afghanistan, have common interest in this regard. It would be good if they would learn from our experiences and knowledge about Afghan society. They should not take measures that could cause dissatisfaction amongst people who are against terrorism. Or actions that make [the people] passive [toward terrorists]," Sepanta told RFE/RL.

During Karzai's May visit to Washington, he asked U.S. President George W. Bush to let the Afghan government have authority over house search operations in Afghanistan by coalition forces. Bush rejected the request.

In July, some 1,000 Afghan villagers staged an anti-U.S. demonstration outside the gates of Bagram Air Field north of Kabul to complain about what they said were the wrongful arrests of several Afghan civilians. Those arrests included a former local militia commander and a local Muslim cleric whom U.S. officials suspected of planning attacks against coalition forces.

Foreign Help Still Needed In Afghanistan

Karzai says U.S. forces are still welcome in Afghanistan and that an expansion of NATO's presence also would be welcomed by Kabul. He says Afghanistan still needs foreign help for reconstruction, institution building, and security operations -- despite the completion of the Bonn process, which set out a list of post-Taliban reforms.

But the Afghan president insists that NATO troops also should get Kabul's approval before they search the homes of ordinary Afghans.

"Institutionally, we are still a very weak country," Karzai said. "And one of the problems that we have -- especially with regard to improving the administration -- is to train in a rapid way as many Afghans as we can. For that reason, we will be dependent on the international community for many years to come. The completion of the Bonn process should not be seen by the international community [as a sign] that Afghanistan is now on its own feet. No. We are not. That applies also to the [Afghan National] Army [and] to the police. The international community will need to stay with us for many years to come."

Lieutenant General Karl Eikenberry, the commander of coalition forces in Afghanistan, told RFE/RL that he is ready to meet with Karzai if the Afghan president wants to discuss a new strategy. Eikenberry noted that under the terms of the strategic partnership that Karzai and Bush signed in May, the coalition operates in close coordination with Kabul.

But Eikenberry said he does not think the threat of terrorism has been removed from Afghanistan. He said he expects more fighting in the weeks ahead with Taliban militants trying to stage a return to power. "Afghanistan and the international community cannot afford the luxury of resting on the significant accomplishments of this week," he said. "Much work remains ahead in the fields of security, governance, justice, and reconstruction."

Eikenberry said the U.S.-led coalition forces will stay on the offensive against Taliban fighters and other militants at least until the end of the coming winter.

(RFE/RL Afghan Service correspondent Freshta Jalalzai contributed to this report from Kabul.)

Karzai renews terror rethink plea
Tuesday, 20 September 2005 BBC News
Afghan President Hamid Karzai has been explaining his call for America to rethink its offensive military strategy in Afghanistan.

He told journalists in the capital, Kabul, that "the nature of the war on terror in Afghanistan" had now changed.

"I don't think there is a big need for military activity in Afghanistan any more," he said.

And he said there should be an end to house searches by foreign forces unless authorised by his government.

Mr Karzai was responding to questions about an interview he gave last week to the BBC in which he said the US needed a new approach to fighting terror in the country.

"The use of air power is something that may not be very effective now."

House searches by US-led troops have been deeply unpopular with many Afghans.

"No coalition forces should go to Afghan homes without the authorization of the Afghan government," he said.

Offensive operations

President Karzai's renewed call for a change in approach comes after the country's landmark parliamentary elections on Sunday.

These were the last step towards the restoration of peace and democracy agreed in the Bonn agreement in 2001.

"Afghanistan now has a constitution, a president, a parliament and a nation fully participating in its destiny," President Karzai said.

"We do not think there is a serious terrorism challenge emanating in Afghanistan."

The US has about 18,000 troops fighting remnants of the Taleban and Al Qaeda in Afghanistan.

There are also more than 12,000 other foreign troops as part of the Nato-led International Security Assistance Forces (Isaf).

Isaf provides security in Kabul and a few other provinces but has refused to take a role in offensive military operations.

Troops say Afghanistan is not ready for U.S. drawdown
GIs on ground disagree with Afghan president’s assessment
By Steve Mraz and Kent Harris, Stars and Stripes Mideast edition, Thursday, September 22, 2005
MEHTAR LAM, Afghanistan — For troops at the forward operating bases in the hinterlands of Afghanistan, word that Afghan President Hamid Karzai questioned the need for major military operations was news to them.

Overwhelmingly, they said that Afghanistan is not ready for a scaled-down U.S. presence.

“While it sounds nice, it’s going to leave a smaller U.S. presence here,” said Army Reserve Sgt. Timothy Sersig, with the 492nd Civil Affairs Battalion out of Phoenix. “I don’t feel it’s safe enough to drawdown troops here if that’s what they’re talking about.”

Karzai also called for an end to U.S. airstrikes, but Sersig said air support provides relief to troops on the ground. In early August, Sersig was traveling in a convoy when a roadside bomb exploded near a Humvee. Jets arrived soon after and stayed in the area to offer air support if needed.

“Just to know that air support was there eased my mind along with a lot of other soldiers and Marines,” Sersig said.

If U.S. troops were to leave now, everything they have accomplished would have been in vain, said Sgt. Jonah Brenner, with the San Antonio-based 321st Civil Affairs Brigade, which is attached to the 492nd Civil Affairs Battalion.

“If the U.S. pulls out now before security is stabilized, it’s going to go back to the same way it was before,” said Brenner, 29. “They’ll do another strike against us, and we’ll be back here a few years later.”

Brenner’s current deployment to Afghanistan is his second since the October 2001 invasion. While Brenner said the country has progressed greatly since his first deployment, Afghanistan is just not ready for U.S. troops to leave.

“I’d love to go home, but we’re over here doing a greater good,” Brenner said.

Lt. Col. Jerry O’Hara, Combined Joint Task Force-76 spokesman, said Karzai’s demand that raids be cleared through the Afghan government was largely already happening. Most military operations now involve Afghan National Army or Afghan National Police forces along with American or NATO troops, he said.

The preference is Afghans taking the lead “with coalition forces taking a supporting role,” O’Hara said. “We agree there is a requirement for consultation and coordination. We see a need to inform the Afghan government in almost everything we do.”

Lt. Col. Tim McGuire, commander of the 1st Battalion, 508th Infantry Regiment and also commander of Task Force Fury in Paktika province, said Karzai’s wish for the Afghan government to be informed is already happening. And virtually every patrol involves ANA and/or ANP forces “and preferably both. That is what we do here in Task Force Fury.”

McGuire said it is “imperative that we work hand in hand” with Afghan authorities and said that’s already happening.

Sgt. Christopher Page of the 391st Engineer Battalion said he hadn’t heard Karzai’s comments, but said U.S. forces are still needed in country “in a support role. The ANA just isn’t where it needs to be yet.”

Others asked expressed some surprise at hearing the news. Communication with the outside world is limited at most forward operating bases. But they joined their commander in saying that much of what Karzai was suggesting was already happening.

Afghan vote turnout 53 percent with most ballots in
Thu Sep 22, 4:52 AM ET
KABUL (AFP) - Turnout in Afghanistan's first parliamentary election for a generation was 53 percent with almost all ballots collected, still lower than in last year's presidential vote, polling officials said.

Closing reports had been received from 95 percent of polling stations with only the most remote centres yet to call in, Peter Erben, head of the UN-Afghan Joint Electoral Management Body, told reporters on Thursday.

Erben said turnout was "53 percent at this point".

"When we are looking at 95 percent of closure reports it looks now that 6.6 million voters cast their votes. We have 12.4 million voters registered in our registry," he added.

The figure for Sunday's elction remains well below the turnout of 67 percent at the October 2004 presidential election won by Hamid Karzai.

Analysts said a range of factors including a complex electoral system, disappointment with a lack of progress since the last election and the fall of the Taliban in 2001, and the fear of attacks had caused the drop in numbers.

Ballot count halted in Takhar as polling agents stage protest
TALOQAN, September 22 (Pajhwok Afghan News): Following overwhelming complaints and demonstration from polling agents of several candidates, vote counting has been halted in Takhar and Badghis provinces.

The complainants in Takhar alleged the election officials were violating the electoral law by noting wrong figures on the counting list.

Pir Mohammad Khaksar, a candidate for the Afghan Wolesi Jirga, told Pajhwok Afghan News: "The officials are writing 19 in place of 9 by adding a single digit to the tally." By doing so, he grumbled, they wanted to get results of their own choice.

Another hopeful for the provincial council Mamoor Afghan feared large-scale rigging might put them aside and bring people who did not represent the masses. He based his apprehensions on the ground that the ballot boxes were opened when they or their representatives were not present.

But JEMB officials in the province rejected the allegations as baseless, saying they were ready to negotiate the issue with the aggrieved individuals to restart the counting process.

The counting was halted after agents of the candidates staged protest demonstrations and urged the high-ups to take notice of the alleged rigging.

An official of the regional office of the Joint Electoral Management Body (JEMB) Said Yasin Dahzad denied the charges, saying about 80 polling agents were there to observe the ballot count.

He said in order to avoid rush at the centre, they had decided to allow only 30 observers at a time to oversee the counting for two hours. But their complaints regarding rigging were baseless, he added.

In the northern Badghis province, count was suspended after the officials and candidates continued wrangling over the presence of more than one observer on the scene.

Officials argued presence of one observer at a time would avoid rush and ensure smooth process. But the aspirants insisted all the observers must be present to oversee the count.

Parliamentary candidate Habibzai, in Badghis province said: "The election office had told us that one observer of each candidate will be allowed to oversee the process but the denial by JEMB is violation of the law."

She lamented the counting was going on without any observer after the officials expelled their agents from the polling centres.

Abdul Karim, a polling agent of one on the contenders, told Pajhwok Afghan News they would not accept the counting results as it was held in their absence.

Abdul Mateen Sarfraz

Taliban vow to step up war after Afghan poll "drama"
By David Brunnstrom / September 21, 2005
KABUL (Reuters) - The Taliban rejected Afghanistan's elections as a U.S. drama and vowed on Wednesday to intensify their war, calling into question President Hamid Karzai's contention that the need for military force had diminished.

U.N. vote organizers say that about half the 12 million registered Afghans voted in Sunday's national assembly and provincial polls hailed by Kabul's allies as a step forward for democracy.

Taliban spokesman Abdul Latif Hakimi said only four million had voted, less than 15 percent of a population he put at 30 million.

"The Taliban are thankful to the Afghan people for rejecting the U.S. drama," he said, adding that the parliament would not represent Afghans and would be subordinate to the United States.

"Our jihad (holy war) will continue until the withdrawal of foreign infidel troops, and our attacks will be expedited. The Taliban will become more organized and strong."

The Taliban had vowed to derail the polls but failed despite a wave of violence in the months leading up to the vote in which more than 1,000 people died, most of them insurgents.

The Taliban launched dozens of harassing attacks last weekend in which 14 people died, but poll organizers said voting took place at all but a handful of 6,200 polling centres.

Hakimi's comments came after Karzai declared on Tuesday that a democratic Afghanistan was no longer a source of terrorism and he did not think there was a big need for military action.

Karzai argued that the focus should now be on tackling militants in their bases, where they get their training, and on shutting off resources and funding.

He stopped short of pointing the finger at neighboring Pakistan, which Afghan officials have accused of providing sanctuary to the Taliban. Islamabad denies the charge.

AIR STRIKE QUESTIONED
But in comments that appeared aimed at wooing support in the Taliban's and his own ethnic Pashtun heartland, he questioned the use of U.S. air strikes and invasive searches by U.S. forces.

Civilian deaths in U.S. strikes and what have been perceived as heavy-handed searches have long angered people in the conservative south where the Taliban draw most support.

Karzai has been trying without much success to coax Taliban fighters to defect and he will also have been looking ahead to building support in what is likely to be a disparate parliament.

While his comments appeared to put him at odds with the Americans, analysts said both he and the Americans saw the need for a shift in strategy, albeit with different emphasis.

On Tuesday, U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld appeared to agree on the efficacy of air strikes.

"Obviously, air strikes -- when you don't have a massed army on the ground or large puddles of enemies, then air strikes are less effective than when you do have that type of a situation," he told a Pentagon news conference.

Earlier on Tuesday, the commander of U.S.-led forces in Afghanistan, Lieutenant-General Karl Eikenberry, said his force would stay on the offensive this autumn and winter.

But he said the insurgency could not be defeated by military means alone and stressed the need for Karzai's government to focus on security, governance, justice and post-war reconstruction to build a society that Afghans would support.

Analysts said Karzai appeared to be looking to deflect criticism of his government's failure to improve conditions in Taliban heartlands, while the Americans were saying the government needed to do more to put its house in order.

"I think Mr Karzai was responding to a popular desire for greater accountability by coalition forces," said Sam Zarifi of Human Rights Watch.

"But realistically, to what extent you can say the need for direct military involvement has declined is unclear to me."

Joanna Nathan, of the International Crisis Group think-tank, said international and Afghan forces would have to fight the insurgency for many years.

"Many people believe their own propaganda too early and we have just just had the bloodiest summer since 2001," she said.

(With reporting by Sayed Ali Achakzai)

Spain announces troops withdrawal from Afghanistan
MADRID, Sept. 21 (Xinhuanet) -- Spanish Prime Minister Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero announced Wednesday that all the 500 Spanish troops on humanitarian mission in Afghanistan will be brought home by Oct. 12.

Addressing the parliament, Rodriguez Zapatero said the withdrawal began on Sept. 21 because the troops have accomplished their mission including protecting the Sept. 18 parliamentary elections from disruption in the Asian country.

Mourning the death of 17 Spanish soldiers killed in a helicopter crash in August in Afghanistan, Rodriguez Zapatero said they sacrificed their lives for the UN mission.

He also said the Spanish troops have accomplished 40 UN peacekeeping missions, with a total of 2,678 Spanish peacekeepers now in Afghanistan, the Balkans and Haitia.

Spain joined the UN peacekeeping operations in Afghanistan in May 2002.

Musharraf congratulates Karzai over successful vote
Wed Sep 21, 9:52 AM ET
ISLAMABAD (AFP) - Pakistan's President Pervez Musharraf has congratulated his Afghan counterpart Hamid Karzai for the successful conduct of Sunday's parliamentary election.

"It is with great pleasure that I convey to you my warmest felicitations on the successful conduct of the parliamentary and provincial council elections in Afghanistan on 18 September," Musharraf said in a message to Karzai releaed by the foreign ministry.

He described the polls as a "landmark" in Afghanistan's history and said the enthusiastic participation of people reflected their strong desire for democracy.

Early estimates showed a turnout of just over 50 percent in the polls, well below that of last year's presidential vote.

"The people of Pakistan share the joy of their Afghan brethren and wish them continued success," Musharraf said on Wednesday.

Musharraf said Pakistan was pleased to have helped maintain peace and security during the polls. It has deployed around 80,000 troops along the border to prevent infiltration by militants.

Afghan officials say the militants cross the border to launch attacks in Afghanistan and then return to hideouts in Pakistan.

"We are happy that like the presidential elections held in October 2004, the parliamentary polls passed off peacefully and those who wished to derail them did not succeed," Musharraf said.

Afghanistan's Taliban militia, ousted from power in late 2001, had vowed to disrupt the election.

Afghan Media Groups Unite To Improve Reporting
Daily Afghan Report - September 20, 2005 - Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty
Afghan news services and media-training organizations have joined together to form a union designed to improve the quality of reporting, Pajhwak Afghan News reported on 19 September. The group, which includes The Killid Group, Inter Press Service, and Pajhwak Afghan News, Sayara Media and Communication, and the Centre for International Journalism, plans to offer workshops that will help train journalists do specialized reporting on issues such as gender, the environment, education, and human rights. The program is funded by the European Commission. CP

Two soldiers killed in Paktia clash
KABUL, September 22 (Pajhwok Afghan News): Defence ministry Thursday said two Afghan National Army soldiers were killed and two wounded in a clash with suspected Taliban in the southeastern Paktia province.

The ministry's spokesman Zahir Azimi told Pajhwok Afghan News the clash occurred overnight in Shakin district near Pakistan border.

Azimi further said some armed men, believed to be the militants, attacked a police post in the border area. In the ensuing fight, two soldiers killed and two others sustained injuries.

He said the wounded soldiers had been evacuated to the US forces' hospital at Bagram, north of Kabul, where their condition was stated to be out of danger.

Reported by Aziz Zahid

German troop mandate in Afghanistan extended for one year
Source: Deutsche Presse Agentur (DPA)
Berlin (dpa) - The outgoing German cabinet Wednesday extended the mandate of German troops operating in Afghanistan by one year, but stuck by its policy of not becoming involved in curbing illegal drug production and trade, Defence Minister Peter Struck said.

Struck said he had a mandate to increase the number of German troops operating with the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) from the current 2,250 to 3,000.

Nevertheless, he had no intention of doing so at present, he said after the German cabinet met for the first time since Sunday's elections.

"It's not clear when we will be able to end the engagement in Afghanistan," Struck said.

He rejected demands from the Left Party, which secured close to 10 per cent in the elections, more than doubling its support, for Germany to withdraw its troops.

"I regard it as totally irresponsible for German troops to be removed from Afghanistan. This would open the gates to terrorism," Struck said, adding that such a move would isolate Germany internationally.

Struck underlined that German armed forces would not get involved in the fight against drug production and the drugs trade.

This was a task for the Afghans and the British, who are leading the battle to curb opium production, he said.

Struck refused to comment on the deployment of elite troops from Germany's crack KSK unit operating with the U.S.-led Operation Enduring Freedom against the Taliban and al-Qaeda in the south of Afghanistan.

The Bundestag, the lower house of the German parliament, is expected to approve the renewed mandate by a large majority when it meets in its pre-election form on September 28.

While the composition of Germany's new government remains uncertain, it is regarded as certain to continue current German policy in Afghanistan.

ISAF currently has around 12,000 troops operating mainly around Kabul, as well as in the relatively peaceful north and west.

The United States has some 18,000 troops in Afganistan and has put pressure on ISAF to expand its operations, so that the U.S. forces can be partially withdrawn. dpa rpm lm ds

Janus-faced counter-terrorism
By Amir Mir / Asia Times Online / September 21, 2005
While the government of President General Pervez Musharraf in Pakistan continues to claim it is making frantic efforts to uproot the al-Qaeda network from the troubled Waziristan region bordering Afghanistan, the Hamid Karzai government in Kabul has repeatedly questioned Islamabad's willingness to effectively eliminate the Taliban-backed insurgents operating from the Pakistan-Afghanistan border and attacking the US-led allied forces in Afghanistan.

There has been unrest in the Waziristan region and other tribal areas for almost three years, amid clashes and military actions between foreign fighters and the Pakistan army. Operations have

been carried out and it has subsequently been announced by the Pakistan government that these have been "successfully" wound up. Quite clearly, however, militant activity has not been eliminated; indeed there are reports of al-Qaeda and Taliban militants re-grouping in the area.

While Islamabad strongly denies Taliban and al-Qaeda infiltration into Afghanistan from the Pakistani side, the Karzai government insists that the infiltration is actually being orchestrated from the Pakistani border area. Not long ago, it was the South Waziristan Tribal Agency that used to hog the media limelight on account of the military operation there against local and foreign militants.

Now the focus of attention has shifted to the neighboring North Waziristan region. It was South Waziristan that first became the hub of Taliban and al-Qaeda rebels, but after the Pakistan's grand operation to hunt down militants in this area, the wanted men slipped away into the North Waziristan tribal region after losing their hideouts.

Pakistani military authorities claimed there were 500-600 foreign militants in the South Waziristan area when army operations first started in early 2004. Of them, some 400 have either been killed or captured, according to the army, while a remaining 200 still "stranded" in North Waziristan are now using the Pakistan-Afghanistan border strip as their base to launch midnight guerilla attacks against the US-led allied forces in Afghanistan, creating trouble for Karzai, and also embarrassing the most trusted US ally in its "war on terror" - Musharraf.

The Pakistan army has now shifted the focus of its anti-terrorist operations from Wana in South Waziristan to Miranshah in North Waziristan. Despite official claims to have largely contained insurgents in the two tribal agencies, the North Waziristan area continues to pose a serious challenge, and has become a stronger base for al-Qaeda and Taliban militants on the run, due to presence of a large number of religious seminaries in the area and because an estimated 70% of the local population supports the jihadis.

Since early 2005, the army has killed and arrested hundreds of foreign militants and their local facilitators in North Waziristan. The events in Waziristan continue to make international headlines due to the strong Western belief that defeating militants in these borderlands would inflict a deadly blow on al-Qaeda and its Taliban allies. American intelligence operatives stationed in Pakistan believe that Osama bin Laden and some of the top al-Qaeda figures are hiding somewhere in the mountain recesses of the region. For US-led coalition troops operating across the border in Afghanistan, effective Pakistani military operation in Waziristan holds the key to facilitating their job and saving lives in the battle against al-Qaeda and Taliban.

For the time being, the situation in the Waziristan region is deteriorating fast, despite official claims to the contrary by Pakistani authorities. Between August 15 and September 15, alone, over 100 persons have reportedly been killed in armed clashes in North Waziristan between militants and the army. The bodies of 25 persons, mostly Pakistanis, were recently recovered inside Pakistani territory in North Waziristan after they were reported to have been killed in a missile strike and bombing raids by American warplanes. This was blatant US transgression into Pakistani soil, but American, Afghan and Pakistani authorities have all justified the action by alleging that the victims had taken part in an attack on a US base in Afghanistan's Paktika province, and were trying to flee across the border to Pakistan.

The Afghan government has accused Islamabad from time to time of turning a blind eye to the infiltration from Pakistan's tribal areas into Afghanistan and the high command of the US-led allied forces even suspects some official complicity between the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) and the Taliban and al-Qaeda remnants, as attacks intensified in the runup to the September 18 parliamentary elections in Afghanistan.

As soon as the election schedule was announced, the Taliban started issuing threats to kill election workers, candidates and voters, ostensibly to sabotage the polling process. In a nation that has been plagued by armed conflicts, the elections for the Wolesi Jirga - the lower house of the Afghani parliament, with 249 seats, 68 of which are reserved for women - is of extraordinary political significance. For the first time in the history of Afghanistan, a legislative body is being created. Karzai, elected as president in October 2004 with US backing, has been governing Afghanistan via a de facto self-given authority since the creation of an interim administration in December of 2001.

Since early 2005, the Taliban and their al-Qaeda aides, backed by new volunteers from Pakistan, have been reuniting and expanding their area of operations in the southern and eastern parts of Afghanistan, which were their former stronghold. Despite the fall of the Taliban regime in Afghanistan in October 2001, the US-led allied forces have failed to uproot the Taliban and al-Qaeda fighters in Afghanistan who have regrouped and are reorganizing their resistance.

With ample funds from the opium trade, the Taliban-led resistance has the funds to finance its struggle against the allied forces. The Taliban are reported to be buying more sophisticated arms, and Russian and Chinese-made surface-to-air missiles in particular are flowing into Afghanistan in increasing numbers, giving an added dimension to the Taliban's fighting capabilities.

Don't fence me in ...

These trends have provided repeated opportunities to the Bush administration to push Pakistan to do more to curb the activities of militants operating along the 2,500 kilometer and porous border with Afghanistan.

It was in response to such persistent accusations that Musharraf suggested in New York on September 12 that the Pakistan-Afghanistan border be fenced to prevent cross-border infiltration. He was of the view that, besides addressing the Afghan government's concerns, the fencing would also help block the entry of Afghan refugees into Pakistan. The proposed fence would start from the point of convergence of the frontiers of Pakistan, Iran and Afghanistan and extend right up to Pakistan's border with the Chinese territory of Xinjiang, passing on the way the Wakham Corridor where the Hindu Kush and the Pamirs meet. The barrier would obviously be a miracle of engineering if it ever materialized.

The border fencing idea may sound good at first glance, but it is weighed down by enormous negatives. First, the cost: the Iran-Pakistan-India gas pipeline, which would be only about 1,120 kilometers long, is estimated to cost $7.2 billion; the fence would just be a humble fence, but its 2,500 kilometers wouldn't come too much cheaper because of the forbidding terrain involved. Secondly, this may not succeed in stopping the flow of determined militants or even the traditional two-way traffic of tribals from either side for trade, marriages and other interaction.

Thirdly, the biggest fly in the ointment can be sighted in a statement by an Afghan government official on September 1 that, before accepting any such idea, the Pakistan-Afghanistan border, which has been the cause of much friction in the past between the two neighbors, be demarcated. Since the British demarcated the Durand Line - as the border between British India and Afghanistan (which split the Pashtun tribes between the two countries) - it remains a bone of contention, with Kabul clinging to irredentist claims that the Pashtun belt on the Pakistani side belongs to Afghanistan. The border fencing proposal, consequently, is unlikely to fly.

The situation in Afghanistan has been deteriorating since the beginning of 2005. Nearly 150 US troops have been killed there since the US intervention commenced in October 2001, some 50 of them between January-August this year. About 17,000 American troops are in Afghanistan battling a Taliban-led insurgency focused on the south and east, and training the new Afghan army. Increasing numbers of better-trained, better-equipped and better-led Taliban cadres operating from sanctuaries in Pakistan have stepped up their hit-and-run raids into southern and eastern Afghanistan to demoralize the newly-raised Afghan army and police in the hope of inducing large-scale desertions.

The Taliban resistance has apparently chosen the Zabul, Spin Boldak and Hilmand areas to re-establish its lost control and revive their authority. These districts are located in mountainous terrain which best serves a guerilla campaign and also leads to safe routes across the Durand Line, which exists only on the map. Dozens of villages are actually located on the line itself, part in Afghanistan and part in Pakistan. The Pakistani tribal areas thus provide natural strategic depth to the Taliban and al-Qaeda fighters.

Though Pakistan denies these reports, the Washington Post splashed a detailed news report on August 21, along with the pictures of a captured 28-year old Pakistani by the name of Sher Ali, vowing to "go to do jihad again and again" when the opportunity came, and providing details about a terrorist camp in Mansehra. The interview by the newspaper correspondent, N C Aizenman, reportedly took place in Kabul. Sher Ali told the Washington Post that he attended a 20-day weapons training course at a secret mountain camp in North West Frontier province. Sher Ali was captured by Afghan police in July shortly after crossing into Kunar province.

Sher Ali's story offers a glimpse of what Afghan authorities charge is a shadowy Pakistani network that continues to fuel the insurgency with fresh recruits as fast as the American and the Afghan forces kill or capture their predecessors. The Afghan government's allegations gained further credibility with the August 7 statement of the opposition leader in Pakistan's National Assembly, Maulana Fazalur Rehman, often called the "father of the Taliban", who told newsmen at Lahore that the Pakistan government was deceiving the US and the West by helping militants freely enter Afghanistan from Waziristan: "The Government should give the identity of the infiltrators and its motives for helping them enter Afghanistan. They must also give the nation the identities of the men being moved from Waziristan to militant camps in Mansehra. The rulers are not only trying to deceive the US and the West, but also hoodwinking the entire nation."

Rehman further stated, "We ask the rulers to reveal the identity of the people being transported to Afghanistan from Waziristan via Kaali Sarak in private vehicles; tell who is supervising their trouble-free entry into Afghanistan and reasons for their infiltration. The government would have to decide whether it wanted to support jihadis or close down their camps. We will have to openly tell the world whether we want to support jihadis or crack down on them. We can't afford to be hypocritical any more."

These are the factors that make Karzai accuse Musharraf of treating the Taliban differently from al-Qaeda. Karzai has pointed out, further, that even though Pakistan has arrested and handed over to the US Federal Bureau of Investigation half a dozen senior al-Qaeda leaders, not a single senior Taliban commander has been captured and extradited to Afghanistan. And it remains an open secret in Pakistan that the top leadership of the Taliban military hierarchy lives and operates out of Pakistan's Quetta and Peshawar cities, even today.

The Afghan government's official newspaper, Anis, claimed recently that many key Taliban commanders are openly living in the Kachlogh and Pashtunabad regions of Balochistan's capital - Quetta, and have based their military presence in these areas. The daily stated that some of the Taliban commanders being ferried by the ISI are sheltered in the residential blocks belonging to the Pakistan army cantonment in Peshawar. Significantly, North West Frontier and Balochistan provinces are governed by the Muttahida Majlis-e-Amal, a fundamentalist alliance with close links to the Taliban.

With these details in mind, the Taliban resistance is expected to gain further strength until and unless the Pakistani establishment, which wants to keep the Taliban alive in the hope of using them to retrieve Islamabad's lost influence in Afghanistan, eventually decides otherwise.

Amir Mir, senior Pakistani journalist affiliated with the Karachi-based monthly, Newsline.

Ex-Taliban Diplomat Sentenced in Fraud
Wed Sep 21,10:23 PM ET
NEW YORK - A former envoy for Afghanistan's Taliban leadership who pleaded guilty to cheating on his taxes and lying on a bank loan application has been sentenced to two months behind bars.

Noorullah Zadran, once a top spokesman for the Taliban in the United States, pleaded guilty June 17 to federal charges in U.S. District Court in Manhattan.

Besides the two months' imprisonment, he was also fined $5,000 Tuesday and ordered to serve three years of supervised release, the Justice Department said Wednesday. He had faced up to eight months in prison.

Zadran admitted failing to report $1,541 in income on his 2000 federal tax return. He also said he wrote on a loan application that his wife was working when she was unemployed to get a lower interest rate.

Zadran was dispatched to New York in the late 1990s to lobby for United Nations recognition of the Taliban — a task complicated by the U.S. attack on the bases of Osama bin Laden in Afghanistan in 1998 and his government's subsequent refusal to hand over the terrorist.

In interviews at the time, Zadran described bin Laden as a "guest of our country" who had promised Taliban leaders "that no act of terror would be initiated from our soil."

Zadran is now a U.S. citizen.

Two more U.S. soldiers charged in Afghanistan prisoner abuse inquiry
Thursday, September 22, 2005 Canadian Press
FORT BLISS, Texas (AP) - Two more soldiers have been charged in an Afghanistan prisoner abuse investigation centred on two detainees who died in custody, the U.S. Army announced Wednesday.

Sgt. Alan Driver and Spc. Nathan Adam Jones, both reservists with the Cincinnati-based 377th Military Police Company, were the latest to be named in an investigation that has charged 14 soldiers with misconduct.

Driver faces charges of assault and maltreatment. Jones is accused of assault, maltreatment and making a false official statement.

Two Afghan detainees died after being taken into U.S. custody in December 2002. Both were being held inside a detention centre at Bagram Airfield.

A detainee known as Habibullah was the first prisoner to be found dead in his cell, just days after he was detained. A second detainee, known as Dilawar, arrived at Bagram the day after Habibullah died. Dilawar died about a week later.

Trial dates for Driver and Jones have not been set.

A U.S. Army officer and two more of his soldiers from the same Cincinnati-based reserve unit were also charged last week. They are also awaiting hearing dates.

One soldier has already been convicted, four have pleaded guilty and two have been acquitted of charges stemming from the investigation. Another has announced his intention to plead guilty.

The opposition face of Afghanistan
By Syed Saleem Shahzad Asia Times Online
KABUL - The national resistance to the decade-long occupation of Afghanistan by the former Soviet Union in the 1980s is a source of national pride for the country.

In the chaotic years after the Soviet withdrawal in 1989, the victorious mujahideen (holy warriors) fought a bloody civil war as they vied with one another to fill the political vacuum. This contributed directly to the rise of the Taliban and their seizure of Kabul in 1996.

When the Taliban fled in the face of the US-led invasion in late 2001, mujahideen leaders once again rose to prominence as interim (now elected) President Hamid Karzai struggled to establish his writ beyond the capital.

One of these is Yunus Qanooni, Karzai's chief rival in last year's presidential elections and a candidate in the weekend's parliamentary elections. Qanooni, a former education and interior minister under Karzai, has substantial support within the Panjsher Valley in the north of the country. Like slain Northern Alliance leader Ahmad Shah Masoud, Qanooni is an ethnic Tajik Panjshiri. He fought beside Masoud against both the Soviets and the Taliban. He also served as Masoud's personal spokesman, as well as one of his senior military and political advisers.

When Masoud was assassinated by al-Qaeda operatives days before September 11 in 2001, Qanooni effectively took control of the militias Masoud had commanded.

In the past four years he has smartly turned the former armed bands into effective political activists, and their presence was highly visible across Kabul in the elections.

Qanooni is not particularly popular with the US-led forces in Afghanistan as he now opposes Karzai, but he has positioned himself as an indispensable feature of Afghan politics, whether he holds office or not.

In a rare interview with the foreign media, Qanooni spoke to Asia Times Online.

Asia Times Online: What is the future of the mujahideen in the new parliamentary politics of Afghanistan?

Yunus Qanooni: The mujahideen's importance cannot be down-played. They were important and they will remain important. Nobody can reject them. That's why they are contesting the polls and they will form a dominant presence in the upcoming parliament. [The results of Afghanistan's first parliamentary elections in more than three decades will not be known until early October.]

ATol: The West is skeptical of the mujahideen, will it tolerate their heavy mandate in parliament, and their role in decision-making?

YQ: The West does not have a choice. They have to respect public opinion. The West is only concerned about peace and stability in Afghanistan. Only the mujahideen can ensure that.

ATol: Is the future of Afghanistan secular or Islamic?

YQ: Afghanistan is a Muslim country, with a 99% Muslim population. There is no place for secularism in Afghanistan. Our official religion is Islam and no system will be acceptable other than Islam. However, let me make clear here that the Taliban's concepts of Islam are not acceptable. Islam is a progressive and tolerant religion. Moderate and tolerant Islam is the future of Afghanistan and the international community should not be concerned on that because an Islamic welfare state of Afghanistan would not pose any threat to anybody, nor have any agenda against anybody.

ATol: People in Kabul seem to be concerned about the dearth of human resources in Afghanistan. Who will run the system?

YQ: I do not agree with this notion. We have qualified Afghans all over the world who can serve their nation and country. The same people also came to Afghanistan after the collapse of the Taliban, but due to the wrong handling of the incumbent Afghan government, they went back. At the same time, I would also like to mention that the government wrongly projects the literacy rate in the country. It is more than it projects. If the future government keeps upright policies, qualified people will return and definitely serve Afghanistan.

ATol: The Karzai government has announced a general amnesty for all Taliban. Is there any chance for people like Gulbuddin Hekmatyar? [ Hekmatyar heads the Hizb-i-Islami Afghanistan (HIA) . Hekmatyar is a legendary mujahideen figure who fought against the occupying Soviets in the 1980s and became premier in 1993. He remains active in the Taliban-led insurgency.]

YQ: I disagree with the Karzai government's dialogue policy with the Taliban. As a result of this wrong policy, violence and terrorism is encouraged in Afghanistan. I do not see any chance that the government will achieve any success with this policy. The Taliban have only exploited this chance and the number of their attacks has intensified. I tell you, the Taliban have a rigid ideology and they will not compromise on that until their ideology gets recognition in the government, and they will not give up their fight against the government.

As far as ordinary Taliban are concerned, we have no problem with them, but there should not be any compromise with their leadership. As far as Gulbuddin Hekmatyar is concerned, I do not see any chance of an amnesty for him as his policies are in contrast with the present government and the coalition forces.

ATol: But Hekmatyar's HIA is likely to call the shots in the parliament as 25% of the candidates came from this party, even though some leading figures claim that they have left it.

YQ: I disagree that the HIA will get any significant representation in parliament. Nonetheless, the real authority is public opinion. It's up to them whom they elect and whom they do not.

ATol: Warlordism is a problem in Afghanistan. Why it is not controllable?

YQ: This problem has not really been identified - who is a warlord and who is not? There is no absolute definition when one talks about warlordism in Afghanistan. When it suits, they are given government offices and they are not blamed as warlords, but when political differences emerge, they are blamed for warlordism. The same with terrorism in southern and southeastern Afghanistan. This does not mean that the Taliban are strong in those areas, it means that the government strategy is weak. There is a strong presence of the national army, police and coalition forces, and despite that, if violence is not controlled, it means that the government's strategy is flawed.

ATol: What share does Pakistan have in the insurgency in Afghanistan?

YQ: Pakistan supports the Taliban. However, it is neither in the national interest of Pakistan nor of Afghanistan. Both countries should take care of each other's interests and should have a policy of friendship.

ATol: Do you have any specific idea of how and where Pakistan supports the Taliban?

YQ: To me this is not important. The important thing is that the Taliban are working against the interests of Afghanistan and they are getting support from Pakistan.

ATol: Afghanistan has become a narco-state. Who is responsible? [See Opium gold unites US friends and foes, Asia Times Online, September 3]

YQ: The narco trade is an international problem. A full syndicate is involved in this trade. Therefore, a coherent joint international strategy is required. There should be a security belt all around Afghanistan on all borders of Pakistan, Uzbekistan, Iran and Tajikistan. Zones should be earmarked where Interpol's role should be ensured. The Afghan government is responsible for not taking this problem seriously. It has not devised any effective policy to combat this crime. When I was minister of interior for six months, I devised a policy for a security belt all around the borders so that narco trafficking could be stopped. Ironically, later on that policy was not implemented.

US-Pakistan: An elaborate pas de deux
By Ramtanu Maitra / Asia Times Online / September 21, 2005
Washington's policy toward Pakistan as its ally since September 11 in America's "war on terror" has become so erratic that it appears at times to verge on confusion. To many observers, the Bush administration improvises its Pakistan policy script as conditions in Pakistan progress, or regress.

Nonetheless, the broad outline set forth in the wake of September 11 and the invasion of Afghanistan by the United States in the winter of 2001 has held the wobbly bilateral relationship together. Briefly, the outline involves the following:

- Pakistan's cooperation remains the key in Washington's efforts to eliminate the Taliban militia in Afghanistan and maintaining an extremely shaky Hamid Karzai regime in Afghanistan

- The United States, after procuring Islamabad's continuing assistance to eliminate the Taliban from Afghanistan, must protect Pakistan from a socio-political takeover by a Taliban-like orthodox Islamic militia

- Washington would work toward bringing in a democratic system in Islamabad, albeit slowly and carefully, while acknowledging at every step the commitment of the present pro-Washington military leadership in Pakistan to the well-being of the United States

- Washington must protect Pakistan President General Pervez Musharraf physically from hostile forces within Pakistan and also make available to him some financial aid to help Pakistan's flagging economy.

Beyond this broad outline, directly related to the US-Pakistan alliance in the "war on terror", the Bush administration appreciates the usefulness of the Musharraf government in two other areas - its relations with Sunni Arabs and its proximity to the resource-rich and Islamic Central Asia.

Economic aid

The Bush administration's policy toward Pakistan is most obvious in economic areas. In June 2003, President George W Bush vowed to work with Congress on establishing a five-year, $3 billion aid package for Pakistan. Annual installments of $600 million each split evenly between military and economic aid began in fiscal year 2005. The Foreign Operations FY2005 Appropriations bill (PL 108-447) established a new base program of $300 million for military assistance for Pakistan; half of this FY2005 funding came from a May emergency supplemental appropriations bill (PL 109-13). PL 108-447 also allows for up to $200 million in FY2005.

Economic Support Funds (ESF) may be used for the modification of direct loans and guarantees for Pakistan (Congress made identical provisions in two previous foreign operations appropriations bills and Pakistan has used that $400 million in ESF to reduce its concessional debt to the US by $1.48 billion, leaving a balance of some $1.3 billion).

When additional funds for development assistance, law enforcement and other programs are included, the aid allocation for FY2005 is about $692 million. Congress also has appropriated funds to reimburse Pakistan for its support of US-led counterterrorism operations. PL 108-11 provided that $1.4 billion in additional defense spending may be used for payments to reimburse Pakistan and other cooperating nations for their support of US military operations. A November 2003 emergency supplemental appropriations act (PL 108-106) made available another $1.15 billion for continuing reimbursements. A May supplemental appropriation (PL 109-13) provided another $1.22 billion for such purposes.

A report of the House Armed Services Committee said the Secretary of Defense expected to disburse that entire amount to Pakistan in FY2005. Pentagon documents indicate that Pakistan received coalition support funding of $1.32 billion for the period January 2003 to September 2004, an amount roughly equal to one-third of Pakistan's total defense expenditures during that period.

What, however, really does not factor in the Bush administration's policy towards Pakistan is India. Despite what many analysts claim, the India factor in Washington-Islamabad bilateral relations since September 11 has remained constrained to preventing the two from going to war against each other. To begin with, it is arguable that the two countries were in fact willing to go to war in recent years, despite ominous posturing.

Non-proliferation, stability, Islamists

Brigadier Feroz Hassan Khan, formerly of the Pakistan army, wrote in a recent issue of the journal of the Center for Contemporary Conflict, Monterey, California, that American objectives vis-a-vis Pakistan today are non-proliferation, regional stability and the end of support to radical Islamists. Washington wishes to prevent a repeat of nuclear proliferation from Pakistan, incursions into Indian territory and the Taliban, all springing from "Pakistan's security drivers".

The former military official predicts that the US alliance with Pakistan against terrorism and the US strategic partnership with India will always have higher priority than India-Pakistan conflict resolution. As a result, an end to India-Pakistan military competition will remain a "distant goal". Some cynics may point out that selling arms to both India and Pakistan, and modernizing their militaries with American arms, is good for the US military establishment.

It is evident, however, that the Bush administration is having a lot of difficulties, even in following the wide tracks laid out in the broad outlines. On September 13, 2001 the US presented Pakistan with a list of demands in its fight against al-Qaeda. When Musharraf agreed to them, Pakistan was reenlisted as an ally, this time in the "global war on terrorism". Sanctions from Pakistan's nuclear test in 1998 and Musharraf's bloodless coup in 1999 vanished in the light of this new cooperation. A new military aid and equipment package was agreed to, and by 2003 Pakistan was designated a major non-North Atlantic Treaty Organization ally.

But from the very outset of the US invasion of Afghanistan, Pakistan was watched very carefully by a large number of officials in Washington. The reason was obvious. Pakistan was in the thick of things in building up the Taliban and helping them to oust the fractious opposition in Afghanistan, including the Tajik-Uzbek-led Northern Alliance, and seize power in Kabul in 1996. Moreover, Pakistan's hands-on involvement in Afghanistan in the 1980s became so overwhelming that it had direct fallout on Pakistani society, whether as a result of regional compulsions or so chosen by the Pakistani establishment.

Washington's objective in the winter of 2001 was to eliminate the Taliban, get hold of the Osama bin Laden-led al-Qaeda members who had established a presence in the country and establish a regime in Kabul that would be protected by the Tajik-Uzbek alliance in particular. Washington realized the process would turn Pakistan's friends into Pakistan's enemies. In addition, the Northern Alliance was a known beneficiary of Russia and India, and Islamabad considers both these nations as anti-Pakistan. It was a bitter pill to swallow for Pakistan.

It soon became obvious to Washington that Islamabad would not abide by all the demands the Bush administration had made. It would give up some - not all - of its human assets to the US slowly. As a result, Pakistan was blamed directly, or indirectly, for the continuing presence of the Taliban inside Pakistan, and main al-Qaeda leaders remaining fugitive somewhere either in Pakistan or on the border areas.

Included in that rhetoric were statements of the then-Afghan-American US ambassador to Afghanistan, Zalmay Khalizad, blaming Pakistan for protecting America's enemies. Khalizad, a member of the inner circle that surrounded Bush in the early days of his presidency, vehemently said that the Taliban supremo Mullah Omar and bin Laden were somewhere in Pakistan. His claim that the Taliban and al-Qaeda militants had infiltrated from Pakistan, in an organized manner, was termed as baseless and irresponsible by Pakistan.

Khalizad's charge was followed by statements by Afghan government officials, the officially controlled news media and Karzai himself. In other words, verbal volleys accusing each other were issued from both Kabul and Islamabad.

No doubt, Washington had instigated such verbal accusations against Islamabad, using Khalizad and the hand-picked Afghan president Karzai, a close friend of the then-US ambassador. Nonetheless, the Bush administration conveyed to the Musharraf government in the midst of such flaps that while the Americans appreciated Pakistan's efforts to get the Islamists, it was more important to maintain an alliance with Pakistan, despite all the difficulties. It was becoming evident that at the operational level in Afghanistan, and along the Afghanistan-Pakistan borders, such an alliance remained on paper.

It is no secret that the US-led coalition troops in Afghanistan do not trust the Pakistani troops with ground intelligence and the Pakistani troops' main objective at this point is to prevent US troops from running amok in the tribal areas along the borders inside Pakistan. The presence of US troops in operations with Pakistani soldiers raises the level of fierce tribal resistance, observers point out. Nonetheless, Islamabad has allowed Washington to set up four air bases inside Pakistan to help operations inside Afghanistan.

Cautious compromise

According to the Lahore-based Daily Times, there is little hope of differences on that score being resolved. In fact, a crisis in US-Pakistan relations is brewing just beneath the surface despite expressions of unity in the war against al-Qaeda.

The article points out that Musharraf and Bush are in a state of "cautious compromise", with Washington continuing to express confidence in the former's government and offering increased military assistance to his country. Islamabad believes that Pakistan's importance as a US ally is likely to dissolve if bin Laden is ever captured or killed.

Washington has been attempting to strengthen its ties with India and is even trying tentative negotiations with Iran, with the eventual goal of warmer relations. All these policy shifts, the article claims, are to undermine the Musharraf government.

Be that as it may, Pakistan maintains about 80,000 troops in the tribal and adjoining areas with Afghanistan. Islamabad claims the borders are completely sealed with latest reconnaissance devices and that the possibility of the Taliban entering Afghanistan in an organized manner is inconceivable, and blames the Afghan security apparatus for infiltrations.

In reality, however, more than Pakistan's role in helping to ferret out the Taliban and bin Laden, what make US-Pakistan policy interactions like the pas de deux (step of two) are the nuclear proliferation episode and the training of orthodox Islamists in Pakistan's thousands of madrassas (seminaries).

In pas de deux , the man quite often does not stand in a ballet position or appear to be dancing at all. He can do this because the audience will almost always watch the lady. The man acts as a "third leg" for the lady by stabilizing, lifting and turning her. In essence, more often than not, Washington resembles the man.

The static role of the US in the entire episode of Pakistan's nuclear proliferation (to which a rogue scientist has claimed to have been acting on his own) is an eye-opener of how confusing the US-Pakistan relationship has been for years.

The most interesting aspects of the almost three decades-long proliferation operation by the most important Pakistani engineer associated with its nuclear facilities (Abdul Qadeer Khan) is that the operation went unhindered for that length of time.

Islamabad also did very well to convince the Bush administration that Khan was not helped in his nefarious ventures by the Pakistani establishment at any point. Islamabad has also restrained Washington from questioning Khan by not making him available to the Bush administration for interrogation. Islamabad must be credited for this astonishing feat since the Bush administration has made nuclear non-proliferation as important as a crusade.

In June 2004, months after the Khan "secret" proliferation exploits had appeared all over the media, Bush designated Pakistan as a Major Non-NATO Ally (MNNA) . The designation, long enjoyed by Japan, South Korea, Australia and other allies, makes Pakistan eligible for expedited access to excess defense articles and other privileges and is perhaps related to Pakistan's planned purchase of American weapons.

On November 16, 2004, the Department of Defense notified Congress of possible military sales to Pakistan of six Orion P-3C maritime patrol aircraft, 2,000 TOW-2A missiles, 14 TOW Fly-to-Buy missiles, six Phalanx close-in weapon systems and an upgrade of six earlier models of the Phalanx shipboard anti-missile defense systems, along with associated equipment for all of the systems.

Media reports in early December 2004, following a visit to Washington and a meeting between Musharraf and Bush, indicate that the Pakistani leader did not get the answer he wanted on the aircraft. However, the subject of F-16s reportedly was on the agenda of Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice's March trip to New Delhi and Islamabad

As if to underscore the possibility that US arms sales to Pakistan could be destabilizing, Pakistan tested a Shaheen nuclear-capable short-range (700 kilometers) ballistic missile on December 8, 2004, the very day that US Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld arrived in New Delhi.

Again, as one watches the dance around the Khan episode and the Bush administration designating Pakistan with MNNA status, one is immediately reminded of the pas de deux , with Washington helping Pakistan to put up a dazzling show.

Madrassas

Another area in which US-Pakistan policy seems blurry, if not downright amorphous, is the noisy discussion about madrassas. The US claims with near contempt that these Islamic schools not only make young Pakistanis narrow-minded Islamists, but are the breeding ground of anti-US terrorists. There are reasons to believe that such statements are highly exaggerated. But, the US officials continue to press the Musharraf administration to "do something" about it.

But not everyone in Islamabad believes what Washington says about the madrassas. Recently, one of Musharraf's cabinet ministers said, "Our madrassas are the biggest NGOs [non-government organizations], they are not promoting terrorism, but work to safeguard Islam."

On July 14, just one week after the major terrorist bombings in London, Musharraf ordered a fresh crackdown on extremist and terrorist elements in Pakistan. On July 18, Pakistani officials confirmed that three of the four suspects in the London bombings had visited Pakistan during the past year and two may have spent time at a religious school near Lahore. More than 200 suspected Islamic extremists were arrested in nationwide sweeps over a period of several days, spurring modest-sized protests by Islamist parties.

The Bush administration points out that Musharraf demanded in 2002 that the thousands of madrassas operating within Pakistan must be registered. The demand was not well received in the cleric community, and as a result most madrassas remained unregistered.

It seems Washington really did not mind Musharraf's failed attempt to register the madrassas. But Washington jumped on the British bandwagon right after the London bombings to point fingers at the madrassas and claim once again that these are the terrorist-training centers.

Iran, Afghanistan discuss expansion of ties
United Nations, New York, Sept 21, IRNA
Iran and Afghanistan here Tuesday explored possible avenues to bolster bilateral relations as well as issues of mutual interest including fight against illicit drugs.

Iran's Foreign Minister, Manouchehr Mottaki, held a meeting with his Afghan counterpart Abdullah Abdullah on the fringes of the UN General Assembly meeting.

The Iranian minister called for facilitating implementation of joint projects and underlined the need for further promotion of commercial and economic relations between the two countries.

He called for holding joint meetings to reach practical ways to fight against smuggle of narcotic drugs.

"The Islamic Republic pays great cost to control and prevent transfer of narcotics to West," Mottaki stated.

Abdullah, for his part, expressed his satisfaction with successful parliamentary elections in Afghanistan, adding holding the elections would help establish stability in the country.

He said the issues of Taliban and al-Qaeda still remain in Afghanistan as internal security problems, stressing the Afghan government made great efforts to solve such problems.

He said Iran and Afghanistan enjoy close and amicable relations, thanks to great efforts made by officials of the two sides.

The Afghan minister assessed participation of Iran in his country's reconstruction as very important and appreciated efforts by the Iranians to host Afghan refugees.

Afghan children fly kites to end poverty
WorldVolunteerWeb.org (New York)
Kabul, 21 Sep 2005--In the run up to the United Nations World Summit in New York, Afghan children raised their voices demanding world leaders take real steps to reduce poverty.

Hundreds of white kites flew above Kabul on 13 September, to bring key development messages to world leaders. The future leaders of the country - Afghan children - took part in the event which is aligned to the Global Call to Action against Poverty (GCAP).

In Kabul, over 200 children from local NGO ASCIANA, highlighted the need for world leaders to continue to assist Afghanistan’s plight. To ensure they and their children have greater access to education, health facilities and are free of poverty. This was replicated in Jalalabad (in the east of the country) where 150 children took part in GCAP events, thanks to Swedish Committee Afghanistan.

The event was organised by a coalition of NGO’s and NGO coordinating bodies, and financially supported by Oxfam UK. Anja de Beer, Director of NGO coordinating body ACBAR, who helped to organize the event said “This is the first time Afghanistan has been linked to such an event, and it is proof that the country is keen to be a part of initiatives by the international community to end poverty.”

Hamid Jalil from local NGO Sanayee Development Foundation added “But at the same time it is important that the international community does not forget Afghanistan in the future. It is the responsibility of world leaders to ensure that Afghanistan is not burdened by too much debt, is receiving real aid and is not hampered by unfair trade rules.”

This kite flying day is linked to actions right around the world, as a part of the GCAP campaign. In early September people in 74 countries have organized ‘wake up’ events to pressure their leaders to put poverty at the top of the agenda when they leave for the UN World Summit in New York.

The local kite flying area in Kabul was a wonderful sight on Tuesday, with the children of Afghanistan adding their voice to a global campaign to end poverty.” Said Sultan Fazal of Christian Aid.

Bamian governor unable to vote
(Erada) Afghanistan's only female governor, Habiba Sorabi, was unable to vote in the September 18 elections despite two attempts. She went along to a polling station located in a school in Bamian town centre, but found she had forgotten to bring her voting card.. After going home to collect the document, she was again prevented from voting by electoral officials - it turned out she had been issued with the card in Kabul, so she was supposed to be voting there.

(Erada is an independent daily run by the Afghan Media Resource Centre.)

via Afghan Press Monitor (No 158, 20 Sep 05) - published by the Institute for War & Peace Reporting

Pentagon set to pay Uzbekistan for use of air base
By Will Dunham / Tue Sep 20, 3:35 PM ET
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The United States said on Tuesday it would pay Uzbekistan nearly $23 million for use of an air base in the Central Asian country which is a hub for U.S. operations in Afghanistan but from which it is being evicted.

Members of the U.S. Congress protested the payment.

Uzbekistan in July gave the United States 180 days to leave the Soviet-era Karshi-Khanabad Air Base, called K-2, following U.S. criticism of the Uzbek government's violent suppression of demonstrators in the town of Andizhan in May.

The payment that the Pentagon intends to make would cover use of the base from January 2003 through this past March, the Pentagon said. A previous payment of $15.7 million was made to cover use of the base from September 2001 through December 2002, the Pentagon said.

"Well, it certainly is the Defense Department's practice to pay our bills. Uzbekistan has been a good partner in the war on terror, particularly ... with respect to our ongoing operations in Afghanistan," Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman said.

The United States is continuing to use the base despite restrictions placed by the Uzbek government on nighttime flights and the size of aircraft at K-2, the Pentagon said.

Uzbekistan allowed U.S. forces to use the base shortly after the September 11, 2001, attacks on America orchestrated by the al Qaeda network, which had been harbored by the now-deposed Taliban rulers of Afghanistan.

Whitman said the facility has helped United States prosecute the war against the Taliban and al Qaeda and provide humanitarian relief in northern Afghanistan.

A letter sent by six senators, four Republicans and two Democrats, to Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld on Monday said the Pentagon had notified Congress of its intention to pay Uzbekistan.

'STRONGLY OBJECT'
"We strongly object to making a payment to Uzbekistan at this time, and urge that the payment be placed into an escrow account, to be disbursed only when Uzbekistan shows that it is again willing to work in partnership with the United States," the senators stated.

"We support the principle of America paying its bills, but we also support America standing up for itself in the world; for spending taxpayer dollars wisely; for avoiding the misimpression that we overlook massacres; and for avoiding cash transfers to the treasury of a dictator just months after he permanently evicts American soldiers from his country," the senators wrote.

Republican Sens. Mike DeWine of Ohio, Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, John McCain of Arizona and John Sununu of New Hampshire, and Democrats Joseph Biden of Delaware and Patrick Leahy of Vermont signed the letter.

The former Soviet republic, where President Islam Karimov has ruled since Soviet times, has been criticized by human rights groups for jailing dissident Muslims and using torture.

In the capital Tashkent, 15 Uzbeks pleaded guilty on Tuesday to plotting rebellion in relation to the May 13 events in Andizhan, but human rights groups said the government was staging the trial to cover up its role in a massacre in which troops killed hundreds of people.

Uzbekistan has disregarded international calls for an independent inquiry into the killings. It says those who died in Andizhan -- it puts the figure at 187 -- primarily were Islamist "terrorists" or civilians killed by them.

The Afghan Difference
New York Times - Sep 21 9:19 PM
Afghanistan and Iraq were both invaded by United States-led forces, which overthrew outlaw regimes. Both have new constitutions, guided by the same American diplomat. Both have foreign armies of significant size on their sovereign soil. But Iraq is careering toward civil war, while Afghanistan has just completed an encouragingly inclusive parliamentary election. Iraq cannot even begin to talk about defending itself without American troops. Afghanistan is already saying it's time for the United States to cease major military operations on its territory.

While no one should underestimate Afghanistan's serious problems, including a resurgent Taliban, a shattered infrastructure and rampant drug trafficking, no one can fail to see the many signs of progress there, while only the most die-hard Bush administration spinners pretend to see any significant and lasting gains in Iraq. It is important to try to understand why this is happening.

One reason, surely, is that Afghanistan, for all of its ethnic diversity and political turbulence, has a long continuous history as a single nation. International intervention can, with skill and luck, revive a battered and prostrate nation. But it cannot easily create one where the population has no real history of, or desire for, willing coexistence and cooperation.

Another is that the full backing and support from the United Nations for Afghanistan's transformation and recovery encouraged the provision of international financial support and expertise and, even more important, endowed the new government with crucial international legitimacy. That imposed a useful measure of self-restraint on neighboring countries like Pakistan and Russia, which had long meddled in Afghan affairs with highly destructive consequences.

Afghanistan has also benefited from the skilled and effective leadership provided by President Hamid Karzai, a surprisingly adept domestic politician and international diplomat. Mr. Karzai has not hesitated to criticize the United States and Pakistan when necessary. He has also struck an acceptable balance between two powerful forces. One is the political need to reach out to other ethnic groups and to former Taliban members who are willing to play by the new rules of peaceful politics. The other is the moral and strategic necessity of gradually marginalizing the most notorious warlords and pressuring all of them to disarm their unacceptable private militias.

The world has a chance to help Afghanistan build on this hopeful start. In particular, the international community needs to put more pressure on President Pervez Musharraf of Pakistan to end Taliban activities, especially recruiting, on Pakistani soil. And NATO countries must send the additional troops that are badly needed to ensure enough security throughout Afghanistan to rebuild roads, reservoirs and power plants, and to attract private investment.

The challenges facing Afghanistan are enormous, but with luck and continued international cooperation, this is one American-led intervention that could wind up actually making people's lives better.

Pakistan: UNHCR resumes Afghan repatriation programme
ISLAMABAD, 21 September (IRIN) - The office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) on Wednesday resumed its repatriation assistance programme for Afghan refugees returning from Pakistan after a week-long break due to the parliamentary and provincial elections in Afghanistan held on Sunday.

"All the repatriation centres across the country have reopened today. Around 2,000 Afghans comprising some 385 families have been processed at different locations," Babar Baloch, a UNHCR spokesman, said in the Pakistani capital, Islamabad.

Under the UNHCR voluntary repatriation assistance programme, close to 400,000 Afghans have returned so far this year from Pakistan, while the number amounts to more than 2.6 million since the start of the programme in 2002.

Meanwhile, the UN refugee agency has resumed processing Afghan refugees using its iris scanning system from the northwestern city of Peshawar in North West Frontier Province (NWFP). The centre remained closed for about two weeks after hundreds of Afghans waiting in long queues for registration attacked the agency's site office in the first week of September in protest against the slow pace of repatriation.

Iris verification - serving as a record and reducing fraud - is mandatory for every Afghan over the age of six wishing to receive UNHCR assistance for repatriation.

Meanwhile, UNHCR has increased travel assistance for returning Afghans by 10 percent.

"Afghans returning under UNHCR's voluntary repatriation assistance programme will now receive between US $3 to $37 per person, depending on the distance to their destination," said the UNHCR spokesman.

In addition, each returnee is entitled to get $12 to help them resettle in Afghanistan, he added.

UNHCR's voluntary repatriation assistance programme for Afghan refugees living in Pakistan operates under the tripartite agreement between the two governments of Afghanistan and Pakistan and UNHCR. The agreement has recently been extended to December 2006.