Serving you since 1998
February 2007 :   1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

February 21, 2007 


Pakistani FM says West also to blame for Afghan violence
Tue Feb 20, 9:50 AM ET
NEW DELHI (AFP) - Pakistan's foreign minister said the West shares responsibility for suspected Al Qaeda and Taliban fighters re-grouping along its border with   Afghanistan, because it started the problem.

He said Western pressure to evict the former Soviet Union from Afghanistan after a 1979 invasion led directly to the recruitment of Muslim fighters from around the world to move to its lawless tribal belt on the border.

"Pakistan and many other key countries cooperated in the exercise of getting the Soviet Union out," Foreign Minister Khurshid Kasuri told reporters in New Delhi ahead of a meeting Wednesday with his Indian counterpart.

"In the process, not just Pakistan, (but) the United States, Europe and many other countries invited young men of the Muslim world to come to the tribal areas and fight the Soviet invaders.

"When that was set in motion, the Soviets were of course thrown out. Pakistan alone was not responsible for this entire action. It's very easy to find convenient scapegoats. It's an international responsibility."

The comments came after a US official said Monday that compounds training 10 or 20 people -- Taliban or Al Qaeda fighters -- at a time for possible attacks on the West had been detected over the past year in a semi-autonomous tribal area along the mountainous border with Afghanistan.

Kasuri arrived in New Delhi a day after blasts that killed 68 on a cross-border train to push ahead peace talks, despite the carnage.

He visited a hospital in the capital to meet survivors -- including several Pakistanis -- of what officials described as a fireball that ripped through two carriages of the "Friendship Express."

Unofficial talks were expected in the evening between Indian foreign ministry officials and members of the 17-man Pakistani team, before Wednesday's official meeting of the India-Pakistan Joint Commission.

Pakistan has been repeatedly accused by India of arming and training militants to launch attacks in   Kashmir where a separatist insurgency has claimed more than 44,000 lives since 1989.

Islamabad denies the charge as it did the US officials' allegations Monday, the latest in a series to trouble Washington's relations with its key ally in the "war on terror."

In September, Pakistan signed a peace deal with militants in North Waziristan, prompting suspicions from Kabul and the commanders of international forces battling the Taliban in Afghanistan.

Pakistan has strongly defended the agreement, saying it has helped curtail infiltration across the porous frontier into Afghanistan. The insurgency in Afghanistan killed 4,000 people last year.

Kasuri also reiterated that stance Tuesday in New Delhi.

"We know what is behind it. The government has taken a tough and resolute decision. There are problems with the legacy of the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan," he said. "Let's not trivialise matters."
Back to Top
One Spanish soldier killed, two wounded in attack in Afghanistan
The Associated Press February 21, 2007
MADRID, Spain: An attack on a Spanish military convoy in Afghanistan killed a female soldier and wounded two other troops on Wednesday, the Defense Ministry said.

The attack near the town of Shindand appears to have been carried out with a powerful mine, the ministry said.

The soldiers were traveling in one of five armored vehicles supporting Italian forces that are training in Afghanistan, the ministry said.

The two male soldiers hurt in the blast were expected to survive, it added.

Spain has about 600 peacekeeping troops in Afghanistan. At a meeting of NATO defense ministers last week in Seville, Spain was among countries that rejected a request from the alliance to send more.

Today in Europe
 Britain to pull out some of Iraq force EU offers 30% cut in greenhouse gas  British military is wary of sending Prince Harry to Iraq In July, a Peruvian soldier serving with Spanish forces in Afghanistan was killed in an attack on a Spanish convoy in western Afghanistan. Four other soldiers were wounded.
Back to Top
NATO: Taliban set to ramp up attacks
By ALISA TANG, Associated Press Writer Wed Feb 21, 5:38 AM ET
KABUL, Afghanistan -   NATO-led forces will face "hard fighting" this spring in   Afghanistan's volatile south and west, where the Taliban is gearing up for increased suicide and roadside bomb attacks, an alliance spokesman said Wednesday.

The insurgents will focus their efforts on reducing Afghans' support for their government, said Col. Tom Collins, spokesman for NATO's International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan.

"The enemy is making preparations to ramp up their activities in the spring," Collins told reporters, noting that such an increase in attacks has been a trend in recent years as the harsh winter weather breaks and snows melt on mountain passes used by militants.

"We know that there are concentrations of Taliban forces in some areas of the south," he said, listing Uruzgan, Kandahar and Helmand and the southwestern provinces of Farah and Ghor.

Military operations would take place where the Taliban were impeding efforts for reconstruction and development, Collins said. He expected militants to launch attacks, mainly suicide and roadside bombs.

"We do expect some hard fighting in selected areas," Collins said.

Insurgency attacks occur almost daily in the lawless southern provinces, once a former stronghold of the Taliban where the government wields little power. Last year saw the bloodiest upsurge in violence since the hardline regime was ousted in late 2001 for hosting al-Qaida.

This month, the Afghan government has lost control of two district centers at Musa Qala in Helmand province and briefly at Bakwa in Farah province. Afghan police and soldiers, backed by NATO, retook Bakwa without resistance on Tuesday, but Musa Qala remains under militant control.
Back to Top
Pakistan envoy denies al-Qaeda regrouping in areas bordering Afghanistan
By ANI Wednesday February 21, 01:20 PM
Washington, Feb 21 (ANI): Pakistan's Ambassador to the US, Mahmud Ali Durrani has reportedly rejected an American media report claiming that al-Qaeda was regrouping in a remote region of the country bordering Afghanistan.

Though, Durrani said that there may be some terrorist elements in the remote area along the border, "but they're not training in large numbers, they are not regrouping."

"I think this is a total and gross exaggeration that the core group is there and they are building," The News quoted him as saying in a CNN TV programme.

Terming the media report as 'incorrect', Durrani also brushed aside the suggestion that the Taliban leader Osama bin Laden was hiding in Quetta. "Why would al-Qaeda and Taliban leaders come into any Pakistani area. They are not in Pakistan. In fact, nobody knows where they are. If we knew where they were, they would have gone by now. This is total speculation," he said. (ANI)
Back to Top
Denmark considers adding 200 troops to Afghan mission
The Associated Press February 21, 2007
COPENHAGEN, Denmark: Denmark is considering boosting its contingent in Afghanistan by 200 troops to 600, Prime Minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen said Wednesday.

Earlier, the government presented plans to withdraw troops from Iraq. Fogh Rasmussen said no firm decision had been taken on the Danish troops serving under NATO command in Afghanistan, "but we cannot exclude that we will go from the present 400 to 600."
Back to Top
Italy's Prodi Loses Vote in Senate on Afghanistan Mission
By Steve Scherer
Feb. 21 (Bloomberg) -- Italian Prime Minister Romano Prodi's ruling nine-party bloc fell 2 votes short on a motion to support the government's foreign policy, and on keeping its military contingent in Afghanistan.

While the vote was non-binding, it was a signal that Prodi's one-vote majority in the Senate wouldn't hold up in a vote to refund the Afghanistan mission scheduled for next month. Opposition leaders immediately asked for Prodi to resign.

``Prodi's government has just fallen,'' said Vito Schifani, the leader of Silvio Berlusconi's Forza Italia party in Rome's Senate.

Foreign Minister Massimo D'Alema urged his allies in the nine-party ruling coalition to support keeping the country's military contingent in Afghanistan as a way to promote peace in a speech to the Senate before the vote on whether to support or reject D'Alema's foreign policy.

The renewal of funding for Italy's 1,800 soldiers in Kabul and Heart must be passed through both houses of parliament by the end of March.

``It's normal for the prime minister to meet with his Cabinet to make a decision after a vote like this,'' said Antonio Boccia, a Senator who is part of the ruling bloc after the vote.

Opposition From Allies

As many as nine Senators who are part of the ruling coalition want Italy to end its Afghan mission and have threatened to oppose renewing funding in a vote scheduled for March. D'Alema said yesterday that divisions over Afghanistan could lead to the collapse of the government. Today he tried to emphasize Italy's commitment to aid Afghani civilians and to seek a political solution to continued fighting there.

At a meeting Feb. 8 of NATO defense ministers in Seville, Spain, the U.S. appealed to its European allies to commit more troops to Afghanistan, calling for a fairer sharing of the military burdens in the battle against the Taliban.

Prodi has said that he will not commit additional troops, while pledging to maintain Italy's current commitment.

The North Atlantic Treaty Organization's Afghan force now has 35,460 troops from 37 countries, led by the U.S. with 14,000 and Britain with 5,200. American, British, Canadian and Dutch troops are doing most of the fighting in Taliban strongholds in southern Afghanistan, while nations such as Germany, France and Italy restrict their forces mainly to the calmer north and west.
Back to Top
Pakistan Rejects Claims Al-Qaeda Has New Camps in Tribal Region
By Paul Tighe
Feb. 21 (Bloomberg) -- Pakistan rejected a New York Times report that al-Qaeda established new bases in the tribal region bordering Afghanistan, saying Pakistani security forces are taking all measures to counter the threat of terrorism.

``We strongly reject aspersions against authorities in Pakistan and their commitment to combat the menace of extremism and terrorism,'' the official Associated Press of Pakistan cited Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Tasnim Aslam as saying yesterday in Islamabad. Pakistan is committed ``not to allow its territory to be used for militancy and violence against Afghanistan.''

Senior al-Qaeda leaders have set up training bases in tribal areas as the terrorist network gains strength, the Times reported Feb. 19, citing unidentified U.S. government officials.

Pakistan has rejected criticism from the U.S., the NATO-led security force in Afghanistan and the Afghan government that it isn't doing enough to tackle terrorism and secure the 2,430- kilometer (1,510-mile) border. Pakistan has deployed more than 80,000 soldiers and maintains about 1,000 military posts on the frontier, Aslam said.

Afghanistan must also take steps to defeat the insurgency by fighters of the Taliban regime that was ousted in the U.S.-led war on terrorism in 2001, Aslam said. The phenomenon of Talibanization is a common threat to Pakistan and Afghanistan, she added.

Good Cooperation

The U.S. considers it has good cooperation with Pakistan's government in the fight against terrorism, Tom Casey, U.S. State Department acting spokesman, said at a briefing yesterday in Washington, according to a transcript. The U.S. remains concerned about cross-border activities, he added.

``It's very clear to all of us that we and the government of Pakistan and the government of Afghanistan all need to do more, since the problem is out there and it is continuing,'' Casey said. ``Certainly, the hunt for Osama bin Laden and other senior leaders of al-Qaeda continues.''

The U.S. should hand over any evidence it has about the location of camps in the tribal region, Agence France-Press cited Major General Shaukat Sultan, Pakistan's military spokesman, as saying yesterday.

``Show us the intelligence,'' Sultan said, according to AFP. ``Share it with us, what is the problem. Why don't you give us real time intelligence?''

Pakistan's plan to fence the entire border with Afghanistan to prevent terrorists crossing will have to be modified because the mountainous terrain is too difficult and the international community has offered no financial assistance, President Pervez Musharraf said Feb. 19. The government will fence only a 35- kilometer section and won't use landmines, he said.

Al-Qaeda Suspects

Musharraf joined the U.S.-led war on terrorism in 2001, when he ended Pakistan's support for the Taliban regime that sheltered bin laden. Pakistan has arrested more than 600 terrorist suspects since then, including alleged al-Qaeda commanders Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and Ramzi Mohamed Abdullah Binalshibh, both accused of helping plan the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks in the U.S.

Islamic parties in Pakistan, the world's second largest Muslim country, oppose Musharraf's relationship with the Bush administration. He has survived at least four assassination attempts by extremists since 2001.

Attacks along the Afghan border doubled last year from 2005 as Taliban and al-Qaeda insurgents operate from havens within Pakistan where they train and rearm, the U.S. Defense Department has said. The North Atlantic Treaty Organization blames the loss of control over the border partly on a decision last year by Musharraf to give tribal leaders in the region greater autonomy.

Army Curbed

The Brussels-based International Crisis Group, an organization that tries to resolve conflicts, said in a report last year the September 2006 accord in North Waziristan boosted Taliban fighters in the region because it curbed operations by the army.

Pakistan won't scrap the North Waziristan accord because the agreement doesn't bar the military from making security sweeps in the area, Musharraf said Feb. 2.

``We continue to keep the implementation of the North Waziristan agreement under review,'' Aslam said, according to APP. The government will ``plug all shortcomings and take firm action where needed to ensure full compliance.''
Back to Top
Afghan gov't determined to eradicate poppy: official
People's Daily - Feb 20 6:45 PM
The Afghan government is determined to continue war against drug till its elimination from society, Deputy Interior Minister on Counter-Narcotics Mohammad Daud said Tuesday.

"As part of vigorous war against illicit drug, so far this year we have destroyed 3,600 hectares of poppy-cultivated fields in the poppy-growing provinces of Helmand, Badakhshan, Kandahar and Nangarhar," Daud told newsmen here.

The campaign would continue till the elimination of the menace from the society, he said, adding that police have also confiscated more than seven tons of narcotics including 4.3 tons of opium since the beginning of this year.

The process of destroying poppy-cultivated lands will continue in each part of the country where the contraband is grown, he stressed.

Afghanistan with an output of 6,100 tons of opium poppy in 2006 became the single largest supplier of the raw material used in manufacturing heroin in the world.
Source: Xinhua
Back to Top
France defends its military contribution in Afghanistan
Mike Blanchfield CanWest News Service Wednesday, February 21, 2007
OTTAWA - France says it is not abandoning its Canadian ally in volatile southern Afghanistan and has chided Canada's Senate for publicly suggesting that.

The French embassy in Ottawa this week sent a letter to Liberal Senator Colin Kenny after the upper chamber's national security and defence committee, which he chairs, criticized France and Germany in a report for not sending troops to southern Afghanistan, where Canadian soldiers are battling the Taliban insurgency.

While Canadian politicians and military officials have complained in recent months some of their NATO allies are not pulling their weight in southern Afghanistan, they have refrained from singling out specific countries.

But French officials decided they could not stay silent after Kenny's committee crossed that line.

"The general message that we want to send is that France has not turned a blind eye to Canada's call for help," said a senior French diplomat.

The Senate report urged Canada to send more personnel to train Afghan army and police officers, and it questioned how some countries could contribute to this function because it could expose them to combat.

"Since NATO countries like Germany and France don't want to engage in battle, how will this training get done?" the report says. "Some of our allies are doing a lot of saluting, but not much marching. So what does this say about the future of NATO?"

In their rebuttal to Kenny, the French point out they are playing an important role in training the Afghan army, with 51 instructors committed to April to training efforts in the volatile southern and eastern regions, and further commitments beyond that to train special forces.

The letter also points out France's 1,100 ground troops are charged with securing the "fragile" capital of Kabul, which has also come under attack from suicide bombers and faces threats from Taliban infiltrators.

The letter notes Paris has foot the bill for some very expensive military hardware to support Canada's efforts, including air support and helicopters.

"Fighting in Afghanistan is not only about having more men on the ground but also air support which we can provide, but you know it represents a high cost," said the diplomat.

Canada has not deployed fighter jets to the Afghan mission, but has said it would buy large tactical lift helicopters later.

The French aircraft carrier Charles de Gaulle, with 2,000 troops, is being deployed to the Indian Ocean, to support the NATO mission in Afghanistan. French air support has already dropped at least one 250 kg bomb in support of Canada's efforts to fight the Taliban, and France has dispatched two EC 725 Caracal transport helicopters.

"We are so heavily committed elsewhere that we can hardly do more neither in Afghanistan, nor anywhere else by the way, although we would like to, of course," said the French official.

France has 16,000 troops deployed on foreign soil, making it the second largest contributor to United Nations peacekeeping and third overall contributor to NATO. This includes 1,650 troops in Lebanon, 3,700 to the West African country of Cote D'Ivoire, 1,100 in Chad to prevent violence from spilling over from neighbouring Darfur, as well as 2,200 in Kosovo.

By comparison, Canada has slightly less than 3,000 troops deployed on foreign soil, with 2,500 of them in Afghanistan. Sudan is the recipient of the next largest contingent of Canadian troops with 44 military personnel attached to UN missions in the country's troubled south and western Darfur region.

"Of course, we end the letter by paying tribute to the courage of the Canadian forces in this country," the diplomat said.

Since 2002, 44 Canadian soldiers and one diplomat have been killed in Afghanistan. France has suffered 10 military fatalities in Afghanistan since then, but its embassy pointed out the country has lost 200 soldiers in the Balkans and Lebanon as well as "dozens" in Africa in recent decades.

Last week, Defence Minister Gordon O'Connor backed away from the tough talk that has been directed at some NATO countries, saying the alliance now has the resources it needs to do the job in the south and eastern sections of Afghanistan.
Ottawa Citizen
Back to Top
U.S. Senators Urge NATO Compensation Fund For Afghans
February 21, 2007 (RFE/RL) -- Two high-ranking U.S. senators have urged NATO to create a trust fund for Afghan civilians harmed by NATO-led combat operations.

In a letter sent to NATO Secretary-General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer on February 15, senators Joseph Biden (Democrat, Delaware) and Patrick Leahy (Democrat, Vermont) said NATO allies could contribute to a single NATO fund in a way similar to a $4.5 million NATO trust fund established for Iraq.

Biden chairs the U.S. Senate's Foreign Relations Committee, while Leahy heads the Foreign Operations Subcommittee of the Senate's Committee on Appropriations.

Biden and Leahy say a single NATO trust fund would not require an expanded NATO mandate because the money would be distributed through the International Organization for Migration.

Since 2002, the U.S. has appropriated more than $12 million to help Afghan civilians harmed by U.S. operations. The funds are used for medical, rehabilitation, economic, and reconstruction aid.

But NATO, as a whole, does not have equivalent programs.

Biden and Leahy say this risks creating resentment among Afghans when members of their families are hurt or killed by NATO-led combat operations.
Back to Top
Afghanistan a true test for NATO
Washington Times By Helle Dale February 21, 2007
While the attention of Washington is focused on Iraq, the other military front in the struggle against militant Islam is warming up. Afghanistan has until now shown better promise of success than Iraq. Yet there are clear signs that this spring will be an intensely challenging time for the Afghan government and for the NATO coalition forces operating to support it. We are being warned that a Taliban spring offensive is in the works, and how NATO responds will be crucial, both for the future of Afghanistan and for NATO as well.

The demise of the NATO alliance has been pronounced any number of times since the end of the Cold War (and before for that matter), and the search for reasons for its continued relevance has been on ever since the disappearance of the Soviet Union. As Europe and the United States have found growing areas of disagreement, particularly in public opinion, the cohesive tissue represented by NATO has become at once both more important and harder to protect.

Furthermore, in the context of growing EU ambitions to have its own foreign policy and its military chain of command and missions, as distinct from those of NATO, it is an alliance that is under strain. Here, Afghanistan takes on crucial importance. It really is a test case for NATO's future out of area operations, a fact that no NATO member would dispute.

It is, therefore, a matter of considerable puzzlement and concern that NATO allies that have contributed to the roughly 35,000 strong NATO stabilization in Afghanistan have also taken steps to undermine the mission. (The United Sates has 13,000 troops, of which 9,000 are not operating under NATO command.) This is not very much compared the 162,000 troops in Iraq and certainly not in comparison with the size of
Afghanistan. In addition the Taliban, al Qaeda and their various allies have sanctuaries in Waziristan across the Pakistani border. Their activities have doubled in 2006 as compared to the year before.

The brunt of the fighting in the dangerous areas of Afghanistan is borne in addition to the Americans by the British, the Canadians, the Danes, the Dutch and the Poles. Though many other NATO countries have contributed, this in no way looks today like an alliance built on the "three musketeers principle," a fact that is of considerable frustration to those who have stepped up to the plate.

As President Bush stated last week in a speech at the American Enterprise Institute, "For NATO to succeed, member nations must provide commanders on the ground with the troops and the equipment they need to do their jobs... As well allies must lift restrictions on the forces they do provide so NATO commanders have the flexibility they need to defeat the enemy wherever the enemy may take a stand. The alliance was founded on this principle: An attack on one is an attack on all. That principle holds true whether the attack is on the home soil of a NATO nation, or on allied forces deployed on a NATO mission abroad. By standing together in Afghanistan, NATO forces protect our own people, and they must have the flexibility to be able to do their job."

A similarly strong message was delivered by Sen. John McCain in Munich the week before, as he challenged NATO members to lift the caveats on their troop deployments that are preventing them from acting effectively and cohesively. He also agitated for more troops, at least matching the projected U.S. troop increase of 3,000. Both speakers noted that we need this to provide stability to increase the size of the Afghan military standing currently at 30,000, less than half of what is needed.

Mr. McCain was explicit about the meaning of Afghanistan for the future of NATO, and his analysis is spot on. "Failure in Afghanistan risks reversion to its pre-9/11 role as a sanctuary for al Qaeda terrorists with global reach, a defeat that would embolden Islamic extremists, and the rise of an unencumbered narcostate... If NATO does not prevail in Afghanistan, it is difficult to imagine the alliance undertaking another "hard security" operation -- in or out of area and its credibility would suffer a grievous blow."

In the world of the 21st century with its less predictable international environment and its asymmetrical threats, preserving alliances is as important as ever, for the United States and Europe alike.
Back to Top
Why Bush turns deaf ear to Karzai’s pleas for showdown with Musharraf
By Khalid Hasan - Daily Times 20 February 2007
* Political analyst slams US misperception that hardline extremist Islamic force would replace Musharraf
* Says extremist forces flourishing under protective umbrella of military intelligence agencies
* Calls for Congress to tie further US economic-military aid to improved anti-Taliban measures
* Urges banning of all Pentagon subsidies to Pakistan’s armed forces

WASHINGTON: Some American political observers are growing increasingly impatient with Washington’s apparent refusal to act on the pleas of Afghan President Hamid Karzai and stage a showdown with President General Pervez Musharraf over what Kabul believes is Islamabad’s support for the Taliban.

Writing in Boston Globe on Monday, Selig Harrison - who is generally critical of Pakistan and its policies - argues that since the administration of US President George W Bush has routinely ignored Karzai’s requests, it now remains “up to Congress to force administration action by conditioning further US economic and military aid to the Musharraf regime on definitive measures by Pakistan to shut down Taliban bases in its territory”.

He points out that “buried” in the recent omnibus Homeland Security legislation passed by the House of Representatives is a clause banning further economic and military aid to Islamabad unless President Bush certifies that “the Pakistani government is making all possible efforts to prevent the Taliban from operating in areas under its sovereign control”.

However, he also points out that the bill leaves a “glaring loophole”, which he identifies as the president’s power to waive the ban if he certifies that “it is important to the national security interest of the United States to do so”.

Harrison goes on to lament the bill’s failure to cover disguised Pentagon subsidies to the Pakistan armed forces. The Senate, he suggests, should therefore remove or qualify the presidential waiver and include the Pentagon subsidies in the ban.

According to Harrison, the cost of Musharraf’s post-9/11 cooperation with the US has reached a “staggering” US $27.5 billion

Offering a breakdown of figures, he says: “Economic and military aid has totalled $4.5 billion. In addition, the United States is providing $5 billion in credit guarantees for the purchase of 62 nuclear capable F-16 fighter planes and has orchestrated the postponement of debt repayments to aid donor countries totalling another $13.5 billion. The subsidies to the armed forces - $4.5 billion so far and set to reach $7.5 billion in 2008 - are papered over in Pentagon statistics and have received little congressional scrutiny.

What Pakistan gets, nominally as reimbursement for the cost of its counter terrorism operations, is lumped together with other counter terrorism funding. The payments continue to flow whether or not Pakistani forces come out of their barracks in Afghan border areas during a given month.”

However, Harrison does concede that it is unclear whether Pakistan government agencies are themselves aiding the Taliban or whether they simply look the other way when “Musharraf-backed” Islamic extremist groups do so.

But, quoting US Defence Secretary Robert Gates, he goes on to point out that “there are more attacks coming across the border”. Thus, Harrison suggests that the best way for Pakistan to allay suspicions concerning the Taliban would be to give foreign journalists “unimpeded access” to its border areas.

Instead, as the situation currently stands, Harrison says that Islamabad bars from these areas journalists without a government permit, adding that requests for such documentation are routinely denied.

He goes on to offer an explanation for Washington’s unwillingness to confront Musharraf: the fear that a showdown would lead to the emergence of a hard line Islamic extremist in his place.

This anxiety, Harrison reasons, is based on the increasingly discredited premise that the Pakistani leader is a bulwark against Islamic radicals, when the fact is that the Islamic parties are flourishing under the protective umbrella of military intelligence agencies.

The only way for their growth to be slowed, he argues, is if secular political forces were allowed to assert themselves through free elections.

“If Musharraf wants to run for President, he should step down as army chief of staff, and exiled prime ministers Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif should be permitted to oppose him. A return to civilian rule in Pakistan offers the best hope for neutralising the disquieting growth of Islamic extremism in Pakistan and Afghanistan alike.”
Back to Top
Analysis: How much longer in Afghanistan?
By ARNAUD DE BORCHGRAVE
WASHINGTON, Feb. 20 (UPI) -- The way Pakistan's President Pervez Musharraf reads the geopolitical tea leaves in the Middle East and South Asia is not to our liking, but hardly surprising. Political science 101 shows a U.S. Congress, controlled by the Democrats, not prepared to see the Iraq conflict through to victory -- i.e., a free democratic country able to sustain and defend itself without the U.S. military.

In fact, Musharraf, like the rest of the world, noted that Democratic frontrunner for the White House Hillary Clinton, who voted for the Iraqi war, is now calling for the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq to begin in 90 days. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid calls Iraq "the worst foreign policy mistake in American history" as senators prepare legislation that would revoke authorization for the war.

Musharraf can also see that two-thirds of U.S. voters are against the war. The corollary is what happens in Afghanistan if the United States does not prevail in Iraq. He began hedging his bets with a controversial deal signed last Sept. 5 with tribal leaders in North Waziristan, a Federally Administered Tribal Area (FATA) on the Afghan border. Tribal elders, who are Muslim fundamentalists and pro-Taliban, guaranteed Taliban guerrillas would be held in check and not allowed to cross into Afghanistan.

Skeptical NATO and U.S. commanders in Afghanistan decided to give Musharraf the benefit of the doubt. Today, there is no doubt. Both North and South Waziristan are under virtual Taliban control and attacks into Afghanistan have trebled. Even more worrisome, Pakistan's all-powerful Inter-Services Intelligence agency, ISI, received a wink and a nod from Musharraf to assist "moderate" Taliban elements in their campaign to wrest control from President Hamid Karzai in Kabul.

On Feb. 19, the New York Times, in a front page article about al-Qaida's revival in Pakistan, reported U.S. intelligence has spotted small al-Qaida training camps in North Waziristan. That this tribal area was entirely in Taliban and al-Qaida hands was originally reported in this space in October 2005 following this reporter's unauthorized trip there.

Mohammad Aurakzai, the Musharraf-appointed governor of Pakistan's Northwest Frontier province, described the Taliban as waging "a war of liberation" against foreign troops occupying Afghanistan. Local populations, he added, are "increasingly supporting Taliban."

ISI was the Taliban's principal support when it launched an offensive in 1992 to seize control of a country torn by multiple warring factions ever since defeated Soviet troops withdrew from Afghanistan in 1989. The Taliban declared victory in 1996, and imposed a medieval theocracy on almost 30 million people while embracing Osama bin Laden who then set up a score of al-Qaida training camps. Following 9/11, U.S. forces collapsed the whole Taliban-al-Qaida edifice, which ended with the battle of Tora Bora, and bin Laden's escape into Pakistan.

Musharraf cordially loathes Karzai. When President Bush, hoping for reconciliation, had them both to dinner at the White House last Sept. 28, they avoided each other's gaze and declined to shake hands. It's been downhill since then, each side hurling insults at the other. Karzai's writ doesn't extend much beyond Kabul. His government is riddled with corruption and Afghanistan is fast becoming a narco-state (producing last year a record 6,700 tons of opium poppy, enough to make about 670 tons of pure heroin), fertile ground for Taliban successes. And Karzai's warm relationship with India , "our most cherished partner" , further exacerbates relations with Pakistan.

Musharraf is constantly criticized in his own media for throwing in his lot with the U.S. after 9/11. He had little choice in the matter. President Bush gave him none. But in the wake of the U.S. fiasco in Iraq, politico-religious extremists are steadily gaining ground in what is a military-ruled "guided democracy."

The banned militant sectarian Sunni terrorist group Lashkar-e-Jhangvi, involved in most terrorist attacks in Pakistan since 9/11, is forming new cells at the district and provincial levels throughout the country. Its leaders fought in Afghanistan and the cadres and recruits came from madrassas (Koranic schools) throughout the country.

In a major speech last week, Bush rang a loud Afghan alarm bell coupled with a ringing endorsement of Musharraf. He also called on NATO member states to supply more troops and to cease and desist putting restrictions on their roles and missions in the field. Italy, France and Spain declined additional forces. NATO's bean counters estimate the daily cost of keeping one soldier in Afghanistan at $4,000. There are now 35,000 troops in Afghanistan under NATO command, including 13,000 Americans. Another 9,000 U.S. troops operate independently of NATO on counter-terrorism and Afghan army training missions. And following a brief visit to Kabul, Defense Secretary Bob Gates diverted the 173rd Airborne Brigade slated for Iraq to Afghanistan and ordered a brigade of the 10th Mountain Division to stay another four months.

Meanwhile, public and political support for a close U.S.-Pakistan partnership is rapidly evaporating in a Muslim country with the world's second largest Muslim population -- and a nuclear arsenal. Pakistani extremists are making their views known with suicide bombings in major cities, including Islamabad, and rocket and mortar attacks on mosques. By Musharraf's own reckoning, there are about 1.6 million people willing to push extremist agendas through acts of violence -- or one percent of the population.

Pakistan's 1,400-mile border with Afghanistan is more porous than the U.S.-Mexican frontier. The Pakistani army flew reporters to North Waziristan to meet with tribal elders last week, but they didn't show up.

In his testimony before the House Foreign Affairs Committee, Anthony H. Cordesman said, "No one can return from visiting the front in Afghanistan without realizing there is a very real risk that the U.S. and NATO could lose their war with al-Qaida, the Taliban and the other Islamist movements fighting the Afghan government. We are still winning tactically, but we may well be losing strategically."

Cordesman, the Center for Strategic and International Studies' strategic thinker, added, "Winning will take more resources, more forces, more patience and at least five to 10 more years of persistent effort."

In the light of the Congressional debates over Iraq, and the reticence of America's NATO allies to provide more troops for Afghanistan, Musharraf and his ISI analysts have concluded the West's will to win won't last the required five-to-10 years. Hence, the Pakistani leader's belief, denials notwithstanding, that a "moderate" Taliban regime in Kabul is a safer strategic bet.
Back to Top
‘US should press Afghanistan for Durand Line recognition’
* Terrorism expert says Pakistan unwilling or incapable of containing Taliban
By Khalid Hasan – Daily Times 20 February 2007
WASHINGTON: The United States should pressure Afghanistan to recognise the Durand Line as the international frontier with Pakistan as its non-recognition aggravates tensions with Pakistan and helps the militants move back and forth across the border, according to a leading expert on terrorism.

Peter Bergen, CNN’s terrorism expert, testifying before the House Committee on Foreign Relations, said that 2007 will likely be a “make or break year” for Afghanistan, for the international efforts there, and, conversely, for the efforts of the Taliban and their Al Qaeda allies to turn the country back into a failed state. What happens will have a large impact on US national security interests as a failed Afghan state will help empower jihadist terrorists who are planning to attack the US and its allies.

Pointing out that the coalition forces are now battling the Taliban on a scale not witnessed since 2001 when the war against the Taliban began, Bergen maintains that bolstered by a compliant Pakistani government, hefty cash inflows from the drug trade, and a population disillusioned by battered infrastructure and lacklustre reconstruction efforts, the Taliban are back.

Bergen is of the view that the rise of the Taliban is to be ultimately linked to the mistakes made by the US in the first years of occupation. These early errors helped pave the way for the resurgence of the Taliban.

The Pakistani government, argues Bergen, has proven unwilling or incapable (or both) of clamping down on the religious militia, despite the fact that the headquarters of the Taliban and its key allies are allegedly located in Pakistan. Pakistan’s upcoming 2007 presidential election means the Pakistani government is doing even less than in the past because the Musharraf government is aware how unpopular military action against the Taliban is in their border regions with Afghanistan. The Taliban, however, consider the Musharraf government an “infidel”. The recent suicide attacks show that the Taliban have the Pakistani government in their crosshairs. Bergen notes that the Pakistani government denies that it is providing a safe haven for the Taliban leadership.
The Musharraf government does not completely control its own territory or security agencies, and that ISI, the Pakistani military intelligence agency, at some levels continues to tolerate and/or maintain links with Taliban leaders. Also, many members of the Taliban grew up in refugee camps in Pakistan and so are very familiar with the country. In addition, an alliance of Pakistani religious political parties broadly sympathetic to the Taliban controls both the NWFP and, to some degree, Balochistan. In the last few years, the Taiban have increasingly identified themselves as part of the global jihadist movement.

Bergan points out that Iran has played “something of a useful role” in Afghanistan since the fall of the Taliban. Iran could have acted as a spoiler in post-Taliban Afghanistan; instead it has been something of a stabilising influence in western Afghanistan.

The CNN expert predicts that the spring of 2007 will be a bloody one. The present NATO strength is insufficient by around 5,500 soldiers. NATO member states must increase their troop strength and reduce the number of “national caveats” that hamper the effectiveness of their forces on the ground.

He said that it was also time for the US to institute a long-term mini-Marshall plan for Afghanistan. In early 2006 the Afghan government published the Afghanistan National Development Strategy, which estimated that $4 billion a year in aid for the next five years was needed to reconstruct the country. For this reason the US should contribute at least half that sum every year for many years to come. Given the fact that the 9/11 attacks emerged from Afghanistan and cost the American economy at least $500 billion, aid for Afghanistan so that it does not to return to a failed state is a good investment.
Back to Top
Poland sends special troops to Afghanistan
WARSAW, Feb. 19 (Xinhua) -- Soldiers from Poland's Operational Mobile Reaction Group (GROM) will leave for Afghanistan soon to support other Polish units there, reported the Polish news agency PAP on Monday.

The troops on Monday received an official farewell from Defence Minister Aleksander Szczyglo and military Chief of Staff General Franciszek Gagor.

Established on July 13, 1990, GROM is a special unit of the Polish army, which can also serve in counter-terrorist operations. Currently, there are over 100 Polish soldiers in Afghanistan, and the Polish government last year vowed to send 1,000 more in the first half of 2007.

But the plan has been strongly opposed by Poles. The latest opinion poll conducted by the Polish National Public Opinion Center showed that nearly 80 percent of Poles are against the deployment of Polish troops in Afghanistan.
Back to Top
Turkmenistan Writes Off $4M Afghan Debt
Wednesday February 21, 10:01 am ET 
Turkmenistan Writes Off Nearly $4 Million in Debts Owed to It by Afghanistan for Electricity
ASHGABAT, Turkmenistan (AP) -- Turkmenistan has written off almost US$4 million (euro3 million) in debts owed to it by neighboring Afghanistan for electricity, President Gurbanguli Berdymukhamedov said in remarks televised Wednesday.

Berdymukhamedov, who last week succeeded the late autocratic ruler Saparmurat Niyazov, said the debt accumulated since 2002 was eliminated as a "goodwill gesture" to help Afghanistan's recovery.

Since the U.S.-led offensive that ousted the Taliban militia from power, Turkmenistan has supplied electricity to Afghanistan's northern regions via Soviet-built power transmission lines at a discounted price.

Turkmenistan, whose immense oil and gas reserves allow cheap generation of electricity, also plans to build more transmission lines to the Afghan capital Kabul and farther to Pakistan and India.

Berdymukhamedov has vowed to continue the long-standing policy of neutrality conceived by Niyazov, who died in December after two decades of absolute power.
Back to Top
Islamabad-Washington nexus on Afghan crisis
Tehran Times Opinion Column, Feb. 20, By Behnam Elmi
TEHRAN, Feb. 19 (MNA) -- To successfully deal with the Afghanistan crisis and to ensure a long-term military presence in the country, the United States is trying to shore up its points of vulnerability in connection with Pakistan.

U.S. and European officials have been focusing on Afghanistan over the past few days. During a recent visit to Islamabad for a meeting with Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf, U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates stressed the United States’ long-term commitment to fight the Taleban in Afghanistan.

On the other hand, the NATO chairman predicted that the violence and unrest would be over by the end of 2009 and the stage would be set for lasting peace.

Afghanistan has become the center of attention because the NATO mission in the country has run into a crisis. Taking command of the International Security
U.S. and European officials have been focusing on Afghanistan over the past few days. During a recent visit to Islamabad for a meeting with Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf, U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates stressed the United States’ long-term commitment to fight the Taleban in Afghanistan.

On the other hand, the NATO chairman predicted that the violence and unrest would be over by the end of 2009 and the stage would be set for lasting peace.

Afghanistan has become the center of attention because the NATO mission in the country has run into a crisis. Taking command of the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) and expanding its mission to the entire country, NATO began a new war against the Taleban, but some of the original objectives have still not been accomplished. The resurgence of the Taleban is proof of this.

Currently there are 40,000 foreign troops in Afghanistan, half of them U.S. forces and the rest provided by other NATO countries. However, given the large scope of the goals of this mission, troop strength seems insufficient, probably due to the fact that the U.S. military is overstretched in Iraq, which has led to the debacle in Afghanistan.

Of course, the countries involved in the Afghanistan crisis have adopted various approaches to resolve the issue, such as increasing troops and funding, but without an appropriate modification of the current strategy, these moves will most likely not make much difference.

There are a few factors which are necessary for the success of U.S. and NATO forces in Afghanistan. The coalition forces’ failure to pay proper attention to these factors has led to their inability to reach their goals.

After the Taleban was toppled, the world made promises to the Afghan people about the reconstruction of their country, but these promises were not kept. The reconstruction process seems rather symbolic these days and the few major construction projects implemented so far have not brought any noticeable improvement to the people’s everyday lives.

Meanwhile, the violent and disrespectful behavior of U.S. and NATO forces and their mistakes in targeting during air raids have created animosity toward foreign forces and caused some Afghans to seek shelter with the Taleban.

In addition, the process of establishing the government and laying the foundation for democracy has not been satisfactory. Widespread corruption, chaos, and the fact that warlords accused of war crimes and drug mafia kingpins have attained government posts have increased the people’s dissatisfaction with the government.

The Taleban has bases outside of Afghanistan, especially in Pakistan. They are inaccessible to the coalition forces, and thus the Taleban enjoy unhindered access to training bases and logistical and political support.

These are the vulnerable points of the Western forces in Afghanistan. Perhaps, understanding these points, Gates visited Pakistan to cut one of the most important lines of support for the Taleban. His visit was neither for criticism nor for delivering warnings. Rather, it was meant to show appreciation to Pakistan for its cooperation with U.S. and NATO forces and to encourage Islamabad to continue this process.

It is evident from Gates’ use of the phrase “long-term commitment to oppose the Taleban” that the U.S. government is dreaming of a long-term presence in Afghanistan, and to make this a reality it needs the cooperation of regional powers like Pakistan.

It seems that NATO intends to stay in Afghanistan to accomplish its mission, in line with its new cold war policy of control and management of international crises.

However, as long as the West is not really committed to the reconstruction of Afghanistan and does not consider cooperation with Afghan armed groups, the current problems will remain unresolved.
Back to Top
Blaming Europe: NATO doesn't deserve the rap on Afghanistan
Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, Editorial - 02/19/2007
President Bush clearly signalled in a speech on Thursday, first, that there is a strong risk that the Taliban will retake Afghanistan this spring and, second, that he intends to try to scapegoat NATO and the Europeans for not having provided enough troops to prevent that from occurring.

The war in Afghanistan -- or, better, the struggle to put Afghanistan in the democratic, economically developing nation category -- arose from the fact that the Taliban government there had hosted al-Qaida as it prepared its Sept. 11, 2001, attack on the United States. The first steps were relatively successful. U.S. forces worked closely with the Afghan Northern Alliance, already the enemies of the Taliban, to drive the Taliban out of office and out of Afghanistan's capital, Kabul.

The second step was more difficult, introducing democracy in a political climate that does not lend itself easily to it. But a good man was found, Hamid Karzai, eventually elected president. More or less democratic elections were held and more or less democratic institutions set up. The aid that was supposed to underpin the Karzai government was slow in coming and plagued with the culture of corruption that reigns in Afghanistan -- and always has reigned in Afghanistan.

The most important event in the planned reconstruction and development of Afghanistan happened in Washington and was, in the end, fatal to the process. The Bush administration basically lost interest in the country and fell all over itself to take America to war with Iraq. Afghanistan's economy lapsed back into its pre-Taliban condition, including almost total dependence on opium production for cash. Its new government's authority did not prevail across the country.

The Europeans provided some troops for the effort to try to keep Taliban and al-Qaida out. They currently have some 22,000 troops in Afghanistan; the United States has 22,000. However, having been initially drawn into the Iraq war's "coalition of the willing" by the same scam the Bush administration worked on the American people, the Europeans fast tired of providing troops at U.S. behest. Their reasoning ran, if the United States can devote 140,000 troops to the Iraq war, which the Europeans do not support, why should the Europeans provide troops for Afghanistan only to free up U.S. forces for use in Iraq? At this very minute, as Mr. Bush calls on the Europeans to increase their forces in Afghanistan, he is increasing U.S. forces in Iraq by 21,500.

The president now believes that the water is rising on the Karzai government in Kabul. The United States has solicited the Europeans many times to increase their forces in Afghanistan, with little success. That sets them up in Mr. Bush's eyes to take the rap for the impending collapse in Afghanistan. It is not unlike his current effort to blame the mess in Iraq on Iran.
Back to Top
Afghan crash victims identified
Wed Feb 21, 12:01 AM ET
FORT CAMPBELL, Ky. - Five soldiers from Fort Campbell were among eight killed in a helicopter crash over the weekend in   Afghanistan, the   Department of Defense said Tuesday.

The military said the CH-47 Chinook was carrying 22 U.S. service members when it crashed Sunday in the Shahjoi district of Zabul province. Fourteen people on board survived.

The Fort Campbell soldiers were assigned to the 2nd Battalion, 160th Special Operations Aviation Regiment (Airborne), the   Pentagon said.

The crash remained under investigation, though military officials have said the twin-rotor helicopter was not shot down. It was the deadliest incident in Afghanistan this year.

The Fort Campbell soldiers have been identified as Chief Warrant Officer John A. Quinlan, 36, the pilot, of New Jersey; Chief Warrant Officer Hershel D. McCants Jr., 33, of Arizona; Sgt. Adam A. Wilkinson, 23, of Fort Carson, Colo.; Spc. Travis R. Vaughn, 26, of Reinbeck, Iowa; and Spc. Brandon D. Gordon, 21, of Naples, Fla.

Also killed were Pfcs. Ryan C. Garbs, 20, of Edwardsville, Ill., and Kristofer D.S. Thomas, 18, of Roseville, Calif., the Defense Department said. They were assigned to the 3rd Battalion, 75th Ranger Regiment, Fort Benning, Ga.

The Defense Department earlier identified Tech. Sgt. Scott E. Duffman, 32, of Albuquerque, N.M. He was assigned to the 24th Special Tactics Squadron, Pope Air Force Base, N.C.
Back to Top
UK seeks more NATO hardware for Afghanistan
LONDON, Feb 20 (Reuters) - Britain accused its NATO allies on Tuesday of failing to send enough troops and hardware to fight Taliban guerrillas in southern Afghanistan.

"This is a real test of the resolve and of the credibility of NATO and I'm not sure that every NATO member understands the significance of that," Kim Howells, the Foreign Office minister responsible for Afghanistan told parliament.

"If they did then I'm sure they'd be far more ready to put more troops and more assets down into the south where the real battle is going on at the moment," he said.

He added: "I know of countries that have helicopters that might as well be parked up in leading European airports for the amount of good they are doing in some parts of Afghanistan."

NATO has a force of more than 30,000 troops in Afghanistan and many countries have contributed, but the brunt of most fighting has been borne by U.S., British, Canadian and Dutch forces deployed in the restive south.

Washington and London have complained that other NATO allies -- while voting in favour of the mission -- have sent too few troops and aircraft, and placed restrictions on their forces preventing them from being sent to the battle zone in the south.

Britain is due to increase its force in the south of Afghanistan by 800 over the next few months, adding a third battalion of infantry and bringing its total number of troops above 6,000, nearly all deployed in the south.
Back to Top
Amnesty slams Canada over Afghan detainees
PAUL KORING Globe and Mail Update
Canada's practice of turning detainees over to Afghan security forces, widely accused of torture and abuse, violates international law and the Charter of Rights, Amnesty International and the British Columbia Civil Liberties Association say.

The two groups will Wednesday file an application in Federal Court in Ottawa seeking judicial review of the military's controversial policy. Named as respondents in the action are Defence Minister Gordon O'Connor, General Rick Hillier, Canada's Chief of the Defence Staff, and Attorney-General Robert Nicholson.

The legal action will be announced today by Alex Neve, Amnesty International Canada's Secretary-General, and Shirley Heafey, a B.C. Civil Liberties Association board member.

“There's a very strong chance of it winding up in the Supreme Court,” said Paul Champ, who is acting on behalf of Amnesty and the BCCLA.

 The case will raise significant constitutional issues, including whether Canadian soldiers fighting abroad are legally bound by the Geneva Conventions even if generals insist that “enemy combatants” aren't entitled to Geneva rights, and whether Charter guarantees of due process extend to captives apprehended on battlefields halfway around the world.

“They are turning those people over to states that are likely to torture,” Mr. Champ said yesterday.

Under a deal Gen. Hillier and Afghanistan's Defence Minister signed in December, 2005, all terrorism suspects and Taliban fighters that Canadian Forces capture in Afghanistan are turned over to the Afghan police or military. Canada informs the International Committee of the Red Cross about the handover, but unlike other NATO countries in Afghanistan, notably Britain and the Netherlands, makes no effort to check on the condition of detainees.

“The current Canada-Afghanistan Detainee Agreement does not provide adequate safeguards to ensure that detainees will not be tortured by Afghan forces,” Amnesty and the BCCLA said yesterday.

Canada's treatment of captives is already under scrutiny. Last month, allegations of detainee abuse arose after the discovery that several Afghans suffered an odd pattern of injuries in the custody of Canadian soldiers in April.

A criminal investigation, a board of inquiry ordered by Gen. Hillier, and a probe by the independent Military Police Complaints Commission were all launched this month.

Now, the human-rights groups want Canada's courts to review the legality of turning detainees over to a country with a notorious record of torture and abuse, and a nascent government whose remit often extends only tentatively beyond the capital Kabul.

Handing detainees over to Afghan security forces violates “the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, the National Defence Act and Canada's international obligations amongst others under the Geneva Conventions and the Convention Against Torture and Other Forms of Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment,” Amnesty and the BCCLA said.

Gen. Hillier has called the policy part of helping Afghanistan rebuild itself as a nation.

What happens to detainees once they are in Afghan hands remains largely unknown. But the murky network of Afghan jails — where some prisoners disappear, others are released after payment of bribes and only a few seem to be charged and tried — has been harshly criticized.

The most recent assessment of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Louise Arbour, said there were “reports of prolonged detention without trial, extortion, torture, and systematic due process violations.”

The U.S. State Department annual report was similarly harsh.

“Afghanistan's human-rights record remained poor. There continued to be instances in which security and factional forces committed extrajudicial killings and torture,” it said.

Afghanistan's Independent Human Rights Commission, in its own report last year, concluded, “The incidence of torture on detained or imprisoned persons was still occurring throughout the past year,” albeit at a declining rate.

The filing today will start a 30-day clock running.

By then, Amnesty and the BCCLA must file evidence buttressing their claim.

Then the government has 30 days to file its evidence.
Back to Top
14 arrested in Kabul alcohol raid
Associated Press February 20, 2007
KABUL, Afghanistan - Afghan authorities raided dozens of guesthouses suspected of illegally serving alcohol and arrested 14 people, including five foreigners, in a crackdown on vice in this Islamic country, an official said Tuesday.

The Afghan attorney general and police confiscated about 750 bottles of alcohol from 27 guesthouses during the Monday night crackdown in central Kabul, said Ahmad Sameer Samimi, chief of staff of the attorney general's office.

Samimi said the 14 people were arrested for selling and drinking alcohol - banned under the Afghan constitution but available in shops reserved for foreign troops and civilians as well as licensed restaurants.

"These kinds of raids will continue in Kabul, by the order of the attorney general," Samimi told The Associated Press.

He declined to disclose the nationalities of the foreigners but said that some of them were owners of the guesthouses and some were drinking alcohol with Afghans.

Dozens of bars, restaurants and guesthouses have sprung up around Kabul since the fall of the Taliban in 2001, charging Western prices for alcoholic drinks to the burgeoning expatriate community and wealthy Afghans.

Several appear to double as brothels, prompting concern among ordinary Afghans and outbursts from religious conservatives that the post-Taliban influx of foreigners is undermining the country's strict Islamic mores.

Afghan officials have deported scores of women, most of them Chinese, from suspected brothels in recent years.
Back to Top
Pak embassy refutes Afghan envoy's assertions  
Wednesday, 21 February 2007  Associated Press of Pakistan
WASHINGTON, Feb 20 (APP): An embassy spokesman has reiterated that Pakistan supports a stable and prosperous Afghanistan and strongly refuted assertions of Afghanistan's envoy alleging support for extremism in Pakistan and added that the blame game would not help.

In a letter published in The Wall Street Journal, the embassy spokesman also recounted Pakistan's crucial efforts in fighting off terrorists in the region and pointed out the need for addressing problems inside of Afghanistan.

"Passing blame for the ills of Afghanistan to
Pakistan will certainly not help," Press Minister Akram Shaheedi wrote in a detailed rejoinder to both Afghan ambassador Said T Jawad's recent commentary in the paper and an editorial of the Journal.

He wrote that if indeed the envoy and the Afghan government are sincere, it will be more fruitful for them to talk to the Pakistani government through institutional links rather than resort to the blame game.

The spokesman added that Jawad's assertion of "institutional support for extremism" is absolutely baseless when seen in the context of a recent spree of suicide bombings in Pakistan, including at Islamabad airport by terrorists, which killed army troops, police officers and civilians.

"How can Pakistan support those who kill its citizens?"

Pakistan, he said, subscribes to the view of
the Afghan ambassador in Washington that strengthening the traditional leadership in the tribal areas and isolating the terrorists will bring peace, security and prosperity to both countries.

"Talibanization is their common enemy and
therefore should be fought tooth and nail, jointly, by both countries."

The embassy spokesman underscored the need for addressing problems confronting Afghanistan internally.

"There is no doubt that the nexus between drugs and terrorism is a major contributor in escalating and sustaining insurgency in Afghanistan. A substantial amount of illicit drugs found in the world have their origin in Afghanistan," he said and questioned as to why have the coalition forces not been able to eliminate poppy cultivation in Afghanistan.

"There is no such thing as writ of the government in the vast territory of Afghanistan and the Afghan government is confined to Kabul."

Akram Shaheedi agreed that the increased strength of US-ISAF (international security assistance force) troops will not only result in qualitative improvement in the security situation in the country but also reaffirm their resolve to take the Taliban bull by the horns during the spring offensive.

"Pakistan has all along been advocating that
Afghanistan deserves more US attention and troops to defeat the Taliban. Also, massive reconstruction is required to bring about improvement in the quality of life of the Afghan people, who are still in a state of disillusionment and despondency."

The press minister rejected the notion that last year's North Waziristan agreement has provided "Taliban sanctuary in Waziristan and more than doubled the number of raids into Afghanistan." 

Substantiating, the press minister recalled that the NATO and ISAF have maintained that the incidence of violence have decreased in the adjoining areas of Afghanistan during the past months. 

In this respect, Shaheedi recounted that Gen David Richards, former NATO commander, during a tripartite commission meeting last month, said that "military efforts of Pakistan to contain insurgents on its territory had resulted in fewer attacks on the coalition forces fighting the Taliban in Afghanistan."

There is no "abdicating of responsibility to control the border," he remarked and added that not a single soldier has been withdrawn from the tribal areas as a result of the "truce."

Writing about Pakistan's efforts, he said, the country "deployed 80,000 troops to nab the Taliban and al-Qaeda insurgents who fled into tribal areas when US forces bombed Afghanistan." Pakistan has established 938 checkpoints as compared with 100 on the other side of the border manned by the ISAF, NATO, Afghani forces. Pakistan has suffered more than 700 casualties, more than double those of the coalition forces.

"Pakistan supports a stable, prosperous and vibrant Afghanistan because of guaranteed dividends for Pakistan's security and prosperity. A stable Afghanistan would allow us access to Central Asian republics. Pakistan also sees itself as a hub of economic, communications and trade activity linking Central Asia, South Asia and West Asia. This dream can come true only when there is peace and stability in Afghanistan."
Back to Top
EU to give 100m euros for police training
KABUL, Feb 19 (Pajhwok Afghan News): The European Union will grant 100 million euros to the Ministry of Interior for training of the Afghan National Police (ANP).

Interior Ministry spokesman Zmaray Bashari said the EU, which has taken the job of training ANP from Germany, would release the amount by end 2009.

Haroon Azizi, an official of the European Commission in Kabul, confirmed the pledge by the EU. He said it was yet to be decided to release the amount to the ministry as a whole or in instalments.

The Bonn agreement recommends 62,000 police force for Afghanistan. At present, some 60,000 policemen are now on job. The Interior Ministry has recently decided to add 20,000 more to the previously planned police force, which will increase the number to 80,000.

Regarding the crisis in Musa Qala district, Bashari said the Afghan police and Afghan National Army (ANA) were planning to recapture the district. He said the ANA and ANP were now waiting for a nod from the government.
Najib Khelwatgar
Back to Top
Congressional delegation to visit Afghanistan
NEW YORK, Feb 19 (Pajhwok Afghan News): A Congressional delegation of half-a-dozen US lawmakers left for Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iraq to have a first-hand experience of ground realities in the US war against terror.

Members of delegation included Marcy Kaptur, Steve Rothman, Christopher Carney, Norman Dicks and Patrick Murphy (all Democrats) and Republican Rodney Frelinghuysen.

During their Kabul visit, the US lawmakers are expected to meet President Hamid Karzai and other officials, media reports suggested.

Congressmen are also scheduled to visit Pakistan to meet President General Pervez Musharraf, besides visiting Kuwait and Germany. Details of the trip were not released for security reasons.

The local media said that Congresswoman Marcy Kaptur wants to learn and report to the House Appropriation Sub-Committee on Defense and the other Congressional leaders as they would be considering the Bush's war budget request for an additional $93.4 billion from March to September.

Like other fellow Democrats, Kaptur has been very critical of Bush's war on Iraq.
Lalit K. Jha
Back to Top

 Back to News Archirves of 2007
 
Disclaimer: This news site is mostly a compilation of publicly accessible articles on the Web in the form of a link or saved news item. The news articles and commentaries/editorials are protected under international copyright laws. All credit goes to the original respective source(s).