 |
||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Serving you since 1998 | ||||||||||||
|
|
Bomb at Indian Embassy kills 41 in Afghanistan
By Samar Zwak Mon Jul 7, 3:40 PM ET
KABUL (Reuters) - A suicide car bomb hit the Indian Embassy in Kabul on Monday, killing 41 people and wounding 139, in an attack Afghan authorities said was coordinated with foreign agents in the region, a likely reference to Pakistan.
Afghan Bombing Fuels Regional Furor
By JYOTI THOTTAM / NEW DELHI time.com
An Indian IL-76 transport plane flew to Kabul Monday, to retrieve the bodies of four diplomats killed in a suicide bombing at India's embassy in the Afghan capital. The dead, which numbered 41, included a brigadier general, R.D. Mehta
Major insurgent attacks in Afghanistan since 2001
By The Associated Press Mon Jul 7, 3:22 PM ET
Some of the deadliest insurgent attacks in Afghanistan since the U.S.-led offensive began on Oct. 7, 2001:
India sends delegation to Afghanistan to assess situation
NEW DELHI, July 7 (Xinhua) -- An Indian delegation is leaving for Kabul, Afghanistan to assess the emergency situation in the country following a terror attack on the Indian embassy Monday in which four Indians are amongst the at least 44 killed.
India: Afghanistan's influential ally
By Soutik Biswas BBC News, Delhi Monday, 7 July 2008
The attack on the Indian embassy in Kabul is a setback for a country which has been one of Afghanistan's closest allies in recent years.
Afghan parliament condemns US air strikes
by Waheedullah Massoud July 7, 2008
KABUL (AFP) - The Afghan parliament condemned Monday civilian casualties in US-led air strikes after Afghan officials said more than 40 people were killed in two recent raids, including one that struck a wedding.
Pakistani intelligence's role in Afghanistan
Associated Press / July 7, 2008
Afghanistan often accuses Pakistani intelligence of supporting the Taliban insurgency. Pakistan's government denies it. Here is a look at why suspicions endure of a Pakistani hand in the violence — further straining relations between two key allies
Afghanistan: Taliban enjoys more support despite violence
Kabul, 7 July (AKI) - A surge in conflict between militants and foreign forces in Afghanistan in the first half of the year points to a strong resurgence of the Taliban, according to two of the country's political leaders.
Turmoil puts Afghanistan at epicenter of White House campaign
by Stephen Collinson Mon Jul 7, 1:51 PM ET
WASHINGTON (AFP) - Fresh carnage in Kabul and a rising death toll among US troops are thrusting once-forgotten Afghanistan into the thick of the intensifying White House showdown between John McCain and Barack Obama.
Funeral for first female British soldier killed in Afghanistan
Mon Jul 7, 11:31 AM ET
WETHERAL (AFP) - Corporal Sarah Bryant, the first female British soldier to be killed in Afghanistan, was laid to rest Monday in the church where she married two years ago.
Bollywood's Afghan romance cut short?
8 Jul 2008, 0238 hrs IST, Bharati Dubey,TNN Times of India, India
MUMBAI: The Taliban may have all along grudged Indian political presence on Afghan soil but the hatred gave way to a red-carpet welcome when Amitabh Bachchan spent 18 days there shooting for Khuda Gawah in 1991.
U.N. envoy denounces hidden abuse of Afghan boys
Mon Jul 7, 2008 3:01pm EDT By Claudia Parsons
UNITED NATIONS (Reuters) - Afghanistan must do more to end an age-old practice of young boys being kept as sex slaves by wealthy and powerful patrons, the U.N. special representative for children and armed conflict said on Monday.
Afghanistan's Struggling Security Services
Greg Bruno The Washingto Post Council on Foreign Relations Monday, July 7, 2008; 2:51 PM
Afghan President Hamid Karzai threatened to invade Pakistan last month if militants continue to cross the border into his country, and Islamabad responded with indignation. "Under no circumstances will foreign troops be allowed to operate inside
Afghan president orders probe into civilian deaths
By Jon Hemming
KABUL, July 6 (Reuters) - Afghan President Hamid Karzai has ordered an investigation into a U.S.-led coalition air strike that local officials say killed 15 civilians, but the U.S. military says killed only armed Taliban militants.
True or False: We Need a Wartime President
Washington Post, United States by Fareed Zakaria July 6, 2008
George W. Bush is fond of describing himself as a "war president." And he has made many decisions involving soldiers and battle. But does this make the description an appropriate one? For many people the answer is obvious.
Afghan children the victims amid 'deteriorating security situation' – UN envoy
Source: United Nations News Service 07 Jul 2008
A surge in recruitment of child soldiers, the maiming and killing of children, child detention and a serious humanitarian situation are all posing major threats to children in Afghanistan, according to the United Nations envoy on children
65 steps to the Afghan desert grave that began decades of war
The Times Anthony Loyd July 7, 2008
Thirty years had separated the moment since Pacha Mir last stood at the secret grave in a desert wasteland on the eastern side of Kabul and his return 12 days ago.
As Afghanistan boils, McCain keeps focus on Iraq
For voters, a resurgent Taliban may challenge McCain's view that Iraq is the center of the war on terror.
Christian Science Monitor, MA By Ariel Sabar Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor July 7, 2008
WASHINGTON -John McCain has called Iraq the "central front" of the war on terror, a crucible of America's ability to defeat violent Islamic extremists the world over.
Alarm in Kandahar as a local protector is killed
The Globe and Mail - International GRAEME SMITH July 6, 2008
KANDAHAR, AFGHANISTAN -Neighbours woke to the sound of gunfire, then a car horn blaring continuously.
Kabul: A city where war is never far away
International Herald Tribune - Asia-Pacific By Tyler Hicks July 6, 2008
My first trip to Kabul was in 2001. I arrived as Northern Alliance soldiers were fighting Taliban gunmen in and around the Afghan capital. Those who resisted were killed, and those captured were more likely to be executed than taken prisoner.
Canada agrees to build so-called 'Great Wall of Kandahar' to protect university
The Canadian Press, Afghanistan 06/07/2008
KANDAHAR, Afghanistan -They've dubbed this project the Great Wall of Kandahar.
Taliban set up Sharia courts in Bajaur Agency
Dawn (Pakistan) By Anwarullah Khan July 6, 2008
KHAR-The Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan has established Sharia courts in the Bajaur Agency and a large number of people are using them to get disputes resolved, instead of waiting for action by the tribal administration.
Back to Top
Bomb at Indian Embassy kills 41 in Afghanistan
By Samar Zwak Mon Jul 7, 3:40 PM ET
KABUL (Reuters) - A suicide car bomb hit the Indian Embassy in Kabul on Monday, killing 41 people and wounding 139, in an attack Afghan authorities said was coordinated with foreign agents in the region, a likely reference to Pakistan.
Afghanistan has accused Pakistani agents of being behind a number of attacks in recent weeks and Afghan President Hamid Karzai threatened last month to send troops across the border to attack militants there if Pakistan did not take action.
Afghan analysts argue Pakistan is loath to see the emergence of a strong Afghanistan that is friendly to India and is secretly backing the Taliban as a "strategic asset," enabling Pakistani forces to concentrate on defending the Indian border.
Pakistan denies the Afghan accusations and strongly condemned Monday's attack in which the bomber rammed his car into the embassy just as two diplomatic vehicles were entering.
"I saw wounded and dead people everywhere on the road," said Danish Karokhil, the head of the independent Pajhwok news agency, whose offices are nearby.
India's military and press attaches and two Indian guards were among the 41 killed, but a line of people waiting for visas and shoppers at a nearby market were the main victims of the blast, the deadliest in Kabul since U.S.-led and Afghan forces toppled the Taliban from power in 2001.
A Taliban spokesman denied responsibility for the attack, although another militant spokesman said earlier the hard-line Islamist militia had been behind the bombing. The Taliban often disown attacks that kill large numbers of civilians.
The explosion destroyed the two embassy vehicles, blew the embassy gates off, all but demolished the embassy walls and badly damaged buildings inside the compound. Windows were shattered hundreds of meters (yards) away.
Forty-one people were killed and 139 wounded, a senior police official said.
"The Interior Ministry believes this attack was carried out in coordination and consultation with an active intelligence service in the region," the Afghan Interior Ministry said.
'COWARDLY ATTACK'
The militants have vowed to step up their campaign of suicide bombings this year, graphically demonstrating that despite the increase in foreign troops in Afghanistan and more trained Afghan forces on patrol, the Taliban are far from being a spent force.
Insurgents have killed 350 Afghan civilians and wounded nearly 800 so far this year, the NATO force in Afghanistan said.
"With this cowardly attack, the enemies of peace in Afghanistan wanted to hurt ongoing friendly relations of Afghanistan with the rest of the world, especially India," Karzai said in a statement. "Such attacks will not hamper Afghanistan's relations with other nations."
India has close ties with the Afghan government and is funding a number of large infrastructure projects.
Indian Prime Minister Dr. Manmohan Singh said in a statement he was horrified by the attack.
"The loss of these precious Indian and Afghan lives in the service of their country must be condemned in the strongest terms possible," he said. "Those responsible, directly or indirectly, for this terrorist attack and for making this possible are no better than the worst criminals."
India's rival Pakistan was the main backer of the Taliban when it ruled Afghanistan from 1996 to 2001, but Islamabad officially dropped support for the austere Islamist movement as a result of intense U.S. pressure in the wake of the September 11, 2001 attacks, ordered by al Qaeda leaders hosted by the Taliban.
The U.N. Security Council issued a statement condemning the attack and expressing concern about the threats to security from the Taliban, al Qaeda, illegal armed groups, criminals and drugs traffickers.
The statement urged all states to help Afghan authorities bring to justice the perpetrators, organizers and financiers of the attack, while noting that measures taken to combat terrorism should comply with international law.
U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon also condemned the bombing. "The secretary-general reiterates that no political agenda or grievance can justify such reprehensible means," said a spokeswoman for Ban.
(Additional reporting by Hamid Shalizi; Writing by Jon Hemming; Editing by Catherine Evans and Peter Cooney)
Back to Top
Back to Top
Afghan Bombing Fuels Regional Furor
By JYOTI THOTTAM / NEW DELHI time.com
An Indian IL-76 transport plane flew to Kabul Monday, to retrieve the bodies of four diplomats killed in a suicide bombing at India's embassy in the Afghan capital. The dead, which numbered 41, included a brigadier general, R.D. Mehta, who had started his post just five months ago and a foreign service officer, V.V. Rao, whose two-year tour of duty in Kabul was about to end. The bombing is likely to have regional ramifications, both for India's relations with its neighborhood, but also those of every other country supporting Afghanistan's president Hamid Karzai.
Although the Indian government has given no official indication of who might be behind the attack, President Karzai called the bombing the work of the "enemies of Afghanistan-India friendship". And Afghanistan's interior ministry issued a similar statement, saying that "terrorists have carried out this attack in coordination and consultation with some of the active intelligence circles in the region." Typically, such statements - a similar one was issued after a failed assassination attempt on Karzai in April - are taken as thinly-veiled allegations of involvement by Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) organization.
Many foreign policy hawks in India believe Pakistani intelligence operatives might be targeting India's interests not just within its borders or in the disputed region of Kashmir, but also in Afghanistan. "There's been a clear escalation of terrorist attacks," says Brahma Chellaney, professor of strategic studies at the New Delhi-based Center for Policy Research. "Not just on Indian territory but elsewhere in the region as well."
Other foreign policy analysts suggest that the Kabul embassy attack was not simply a strike at an Indian installation, but also an attempt - by the Taliban, the ISI or anyone else - to undermine President Karzai and anyone who supports him. "[The perpetrators] want to disrupt the current Karzai effort that's being supported by the West," says Uday Bhaskar, deputy director of the Institute for Defense Studies and Analysis. "India is now part of that."
India and Pakistan have been vying for influence in Kabul for decades, and India - which for years backed the opposition Northern Alliance against the Pakistan-backed Taliban regime - came out on top after the U.S.-led invasion scattered the Taliban and installed President Karzai in power. India has pledged about $850 million in reconstruction aid to Afghanistan - the largest amount from any country without a military presence in the country, according to Chellaney - and the Indian embassy in Kabul attracts a daily crowd of Afghanis applying for visas.
Karzai's government, and the NATO mission that supports it, however, are looking increasingly beleaguered in the face of a resurgent Taliban - last month, for the first time, more Coalition troops were killed in Afghanistan than in Iraq. Like the U.S. and the U.K., Bhaskar says, India has to become "more engaged with the reality of the problem" in Afghanistan - the embassy bombing shows that even nations without soldiers in Afghanistan can suffer casualties in its war. Says G. Parthsarathy, former Indian ambassador in Pakistan, "Very clearly, we are on the hitlist."
- With reporting by Madhur Singh / New Delhi and Ali Safi / Kabul View this article on Time.com
Back to Top
Back to Top
Major insurgent attacks in Afghanistan since 2001
By The Associated Press Mon Jul 7, 3:22 PM ET
Some of the deadliest insurgent attacks in Afghanistan since the U.S.-led offensive began on Oct. 7, 2001:
July 7, 2008 — A suicide car bomb detonates at the gates of the Indian Embassy in Kabul, killing 41 people and wounding 147.
Feb. 18, 2008 — A suicide car bomber trying to hit a Canadian military convoy kills 38 Afghans at a market in Spin Boldak, Kandahar province.
Feb. 17, 2008 — A suicide bomber penetrates a crowd watching a dogfighting competition in the Taliban's former stronghold of Kandahar, killing more than 100 people.
Nov. 6, 2007 — Six lawmakers are killed by a suicide bomber in northern Baghlan province during a visit to a sugar factory. Sixty-one students also die in the bombing and the subsequent shooting by guards.
Sept. 29, 2007 — A suicide bomber in an Afghan army uniform blows himself up on military bus in Kabul, killing 28 soldiers and two civilians.
Sept. 10, 2007 — A suicide bomber on a motorized rickshaw attacks a market in Gereshk in Helmand province, killing 28 people, including 13 police.
June 17, 2007 — A bomb rips through a bus carrying police instructors in Kabul, killing 35 people.
May 20, 2007 — A suicide bomber detonates himself in a market in the eastern city of Gardez, killing 14.
Feb. 27, 2007 — A suicide bomber detonates his explosives outside the main U.S. base at Bagram Air Field, killing 23 people, during a visit by Vice President Dick Cheney.
Sept. 30, 2006 — A suicide bomber outside the gates of the Interior Ministry in Kabul kills 12 people.
Sept. 26, 2006 — A suicide bomber kills 18 outside the compound of Helmand's provincial governor in the town of Lashkar Gah.
Sept. 8, 2006 — A car bomber rams a U.S. convoy in Kabul, killing 16, including two American soldiers.
Aug. 28, 2006 — A suicide bomber targets an ex-police chief in Lashkar Gah, killing 21 civilians.
Aug. 3, 2006 — 21 civilians are killed in a suicide car bombing near Canadian military vehicles in a market in Kandahar province.
Jan. 16, 2006 — A man with explosives strapped to his body drives a motorbike into a crowd watching a wrestling match in Kandahar province and kills 21 people.
Jan. 5, 2006 — A militant blows himself up in a town in central Uruzgan province during a supposedly secret visit by the U.S. ambassador, killing 10 Afghans.
June 1, 2005 — A suspected al-Qaida fighter detonates explosives strapped to his body in a mosque in Kandahar city, killing 20 worshippers.
Aug. 13, 2003 — An explosion tears apart a bus in southern Afghanistan, killing at least 15 civilians.
Sept. 5, 2002 — A car bomb in Kabul kills 30 people and wounds 167.
Back to Top
Back to Top
India sends delegation to Afghanistan to assess situation
NEW DELHI, July 7 (Xinhua) -- An Indian delegation is leaving for Kabul, Afghanistan to assess the emergency situation in the country following a terror attack on the Indian embassy Monday in which four Indians are amongst the at least 44 killed.
Indian Minister for External Affairs Pranab Mukherjee, who condemned the "dastardly attack" on the Indian mission in the Afghan capital, said the delegation will be flying out immediately.
The four killed Indians in the attack included Defence Attache Brigadier R.D. Mehta and Press Counsellor V. Venkat Rao in the Indian embassy in the Afghan capital.
An Indian Air Force IL-76 aircraft will soon leave for Kabul to bring back the bodies of the Indians.
Back to Top
Back to Top
India: Afghanistan's influential ally
By Soutik Biswas BBC News, Delhi Monday, 7 July 2008
The attack on the Indian embassy in Kabul is a setback for a country which has been one of Afghanistan's closest allies in recent years.
After the fall of the Taleban in 2001 India moved quickly to regain its strategic depth in Afghanistan.
It opened two new consulates in Herat and Mazhar-e-Sharif and reopened two others in Kandahar and Jalalabad which had been shut since 1979.
India also became one of Kabul's leading donors - it has pledged to spend $750m on helping rebuild the country's shattered infrastructure.
Funds have been committed for education, health, power and telecommunications. There has also been money in the form of food aid and help to strengthen governance.
India is erecting power transmission lines in the north, building more than 200km (125 miles) of road, digging tube wells in six provinces, running sanitation projects in Kabul, and working on lighting up 100 villages using solar energy.
It has given at least three Airbus planes to Afghanistan's ailing national airline. Several thousand Indians are engaged in development work.
'High profile'
Bilateral trade has grown rapidly, reaching $225m in 2006-2007.
"India's reconstruction strategy was designed to win over every sector of Afghan society, give India a high profile with Afghans, gain the maximum political advantage and, of course, undercut Pakistani influence," says analyst Ahmed Rashid, who has written extensively on the region.
Pakistan has had misgivings about increasing Indian influence in Afghanistan since the Taleban were ousted.
President Pervez Musharraf has openly accused Afghan President Hamid Karzai of kow-towing to India. Islamabad has also said that the Indian consulates in Kandahar and Jalalabad are funnelling arms and money to insurgents in Pakistan's troubled Balochistan region.
All this once provoked President Hamid Karzai, who went to university in India, to say: "If Pakistan is worried about the role of India, let me assure [you], I have been very specific in telling the Indians that they cannot use Afghan soil for acts of aggression against another country."
Analysts say Pakistan believes its influence is declining in post-war Afghanistan.
"India's success in Afghanistan stirred up a hornet's nest in Islamabad which came to believe that India was 'taking over Afghanistan'," says Ahmed Rashid in his new book Descent Into Chaos.
Also, local Taleban have attacked and kidnapped Indians in the country.
Changing fortunes
There have been explosions and grenade attacks on the Indian consulates in Herat and Jalalabad.
In January, two Indian and 11 Afghan security personnel were killed and several injured in an attack on the road that India is building, which will link the western cities of Zaranj and Herat with Kandahar in the south.
In November 2005, a driver with India's state-run Border Roads Organisation was abducted and killed by the Taleban while working on the road.
There have been other attacks on Indians too.
In 2003, an Indian national working for a construction company was killed by unknown attackers in Kabul's Taimani district.
In 2006, an Indian telecommunications engineer was abducted and killed in the southern province in Zabul.
India's fortunes in Afghanistan have swung back and forth for much of the past two decades
A staunch ally of the Soviet Union during the Cold War, India supported the invasion of Afghanistan in 1979.
This decision made India vastly unpopular among Afghans.
A decade later, it continued to back the Communist-regime of President Najibullah, while Pakistan threw its entire support behind the ethnic Pashtun mujahideen warlords, particularly the Islamist Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, who were fighting the Soviet Union.
So when the Taleban swept to power and put an end to a bloody civil conflict among warlords, India was left without any influence in the country.
It ended up backing the Northern Alliance, which controlled territory north of the Shomali plains near Kabul.
Pakistan, on the other hand, backed and recognised the pariah Taleban regime and gained further strategic depth in the region.
Afghanistan's interior ministry says it believes the attack on the Indian embassy was carried out "in co-ordination and consultation with an active intelligence service in the region".
It is clearly alluding to Pakistani agents, who have been blamed for a number of attacks in Afghanistan.
We may never know precisely who carried out the attack.
But the bombing points to the "Great Game" still being played out between neighbours seeking to gain influence in Afghanistan.
Back to Top
Back to Top
Afghan parliament condemns US air strikes
by Waheedullah Massoud July 7, 2008
KABUL (AFP) - The Afghan parliament condemned Monday civilian casualties in US-led air strikes after Afghan officials said more than 40 people were killed in two recent raids, including one that struck a wedding.
The UN representative to Afghanistan, Kai Eide, expressed "grave concern" about the allegations -- rejected by the coalition -- and called for investigations to clarify what happened.
Various parliamentary committees held a special meeting on the strikes, which happened on Friday and Sunday in remote and mountains areas on the eastern border with Pakistan.
"The Afghan people cannot tolerate American forces' bombing of civilians any more," deputy speaker of the Lower House, Mirwais Yasini, told reporters after Monday's meeting.
"We are are stuck between a rock and a hard place, between Taliban attacks and foreign forces air strikes," he said.
Civilians are regularly caught up in violence linked to an extremist insurgency launched after the hardline Islamic Taliban regime was removed from power in late 2001 in a US-led invasion.
The United Nations said last month that nearly 700 Afghan civilians had lost their lives in such violence this year, nearly two-thirds in militant attacks and about 255 in military operations.
Parliament could be forced to make "serious decisions" about the 70,000 NATO and US troops helping Afghanistan to fight the militant uprising, said Yasini, without giving details.
Civilian casualties could also spur ordinary people into violent protest, he said.
"We are sure if the bombing of civilians does not stop, it will provoke violence and the foreign forces will be responsible."
Nangarhar province government spokesman Ahmad Zia Abdulzai told AFP that 27 civilians -- most of them women and children -- were killed in air strikes that hit a wedding party Sunday. The dead included the bride, he said.
But the US-led coalition rejected the allegations but said it was investigating. "We have no information beyond what we have been saying, that they were combatants," Captain Christian Patterson told AFP.
Nuristan deputy governor Abdul Halim said 15 civilians, including two doctors and two midwives, were killed in attacks in his province on Friday.
The coalition has said the strikes hit two vehicles of militants who had been seen attacking a NATO base.
In neither case could the tolls be independently verified.
The UN's Eide said he had spoken to President Hamid Karzai and the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force about the matter. The UN was also investigating, he told reporters.
"It is really important, when you have different versions of events, that we manage to establish the facts as precisely as possible," Eide said.
"But I must emphasise these kinds of incidents and reports are of very grave concern."
Civilian casualties by international forces is a sensitive issue in Afghanistan as the foreign troops seek the backing of locals to defeat insurgents in a battle observers say cannot be won through military means alone.
Karzai has made repeated calls on his military allies to better coordinate their action with local forces while rights groups have called for less reliance on air power to fight militants.
The international forces say they take the utmost care to avoid civilians, going through thorough identification procedures before firing at targets.
Back to Top
Back to Top
Pakistani intelligence's role in Afghanistan
Associated Press / July 7, 2008
Afghanistan often accuses Pakistani intelligence of supporting the Taliban insurgency. Pakistan's government denies it. Here is a look at why suspicions endure of a Pakistani hand in the violence — further straining relations between two key allies in the U.S.-led war on terror.
HISTORY: Pakistani intelligence helped create the Taliban militia, many of whose leaders and recruits studied at religious schools in Pakistan. Despite international condemnation of the Taliban regime's fundamentalist rule in Afghanistan from 1996-2001, Pakistan was one of the few countries that gave it diplomatic recognition, underscoring the importance to Pakistan of having a strong ally in power in its neighbor.
WAR ON TERROR: Pakistan formally abandoned its support for the Taliban after the regime refused to expel al-Qaida leaders following the 9/11 attacks on New York and Washington. Pakistan backed the United States and sent its own troops into its border regions to tackle al-Qaida remnants who fled Afghanistan. However, Taliban leaders were also suspected to have found shelter in Pakistan and of maintaining links with Pakistani spy agencies.
SAFE HAVENS: Afghanistan says the Taliban has used its havens in Pakistan's lawless tribal regions to regroup and stage increasingly deadly attacks inside Afghanistan. It claims Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence was behind a recent assassination attempt on President Hamid Karzai. While Pakistan denies it has any policy to support the Taliban — whose sympathizers pose an increasing security threat in Pakistan itself — the operations of the spy agency are not subject to public scrutiny. Western officials question Pakistan's resolve in sealing the border and suggest some elements in ISI could be actively supporting the militants.
Back to Top
Back to Top
Afghanistan: Taliban enjoys more support despite violence
Kabul, 7 July (AKI) - A surge in conflict between militants and foreign forces in Afghanistan in the first half of the year points to a strong resurgence of the Taliban, according to two of the country's political leaders.
And the Taliban is receiving support, in the form of arms and finance, from Iran, Pakistan and Russia.
Two leaders spoke to Adnkronos International on Monday after the worst bomb attack in the Afghan capital since the fall of the Taliban in 2001.
Forty-one people died and another 141 were injured when a suicide bomber targeted the Indian embassy in Kabul. No one has taken responsibility for the attack.
"Today the Taliban are very different from how they were 10 years ago," Fawzia Koofi, Afghan parliamentarian and deputy-speaker of the lower house or Wolesi Jirga told Adnkronos International (AKI) in an interview.
"Several countries that want to be strategic partners in the fight against terrorism, in some way support the Taliban on a financial and political level."
According to Koofi, they are the countries that believe that the American and western presence in Afghanistan goes against their interests and believe that "support for the Taliban is a way of fighting against the US presence in Afghanistan".
Koofi said the Taliban were financing their activities with opium and it was difficult to control because of the porous borders between Afghanistan and Pakistan, Iran and Tajikistan which leave the country vulnerable to drug trafficking.
"The province of Helmand that the Taliban controls for the most part, produces around 70 percent of the opium that is produced in Afghanistan," Koofi told AKI.
"The Taliban have succeeded in establishing trafficking networks throughout the country, also in the northern provinces and in the north east, and through these networks, drugs are distributed to central Asian countries."
Malalai Joya, the outspoken female politician suspended from Parliament in 2007, told AKI that the difficult situation in Afghanistan was because many people no longer supported the government.
"The Taliban have money and power," she told AKI. "Arms and money are arriving from Iran, Russia and from Pakistan."
Joya was accused of offending her colleagues and suspended from Parliament until 2009.
"The United States and their NATO allies do not want the Taliban to lose power," said Joya, recalling that Afghanistan is one of the world's leading opium producers.
"Many countries, the United States, but also European countries, are involved in this dirty drug traffic and they do not want to stop the opium trade," she said.
Back to Top
Back to Top
Turmoil puts Afghanistan at epicenter of White House campaign
by Stephen Collinson Mon Jul 7, 1:51 PM ET
WASHINGTON (AFP) - Fresh carnage in Kabul and a rising death toll among US troops are thrusting once-forgotten Afghanistan into the thick of the intensifying White House showdown between John McCain and Barack Obama.
Democratic presumptive nominee Obama is promising to redeploy large numbers of US combat troops from Iraq to Afghanistan if he is elected president in November, in an effort to quell resurgent militant activity.
Republican candidate John McCain however maintains that Iraq is the central front of the "war on terror" adding that a US withdrawal would embolden terrorists and US enemies, and that the two wars cannot be seen in isolation.
Afghanistan moved to center stage in the campaign last week, before Monday's suicide car bombing at the Indian embassy in Kabul, which killed at least 41 people in the deadliest attack since the fall of the Taliban in 2001.
The Afghan conflict garnered new attention in the United States after more foreign troops died battling Al-Qaeda and Taliban militants in the last two months than were killed in Iraq.
The security situation in Iraq meanwhile appears to be improving, following a US troop "surge" anti-insurgent strategy launched last year.
Obama, who based his primary campaign win over Hillary Clinton on his early opposition to the invasion of Iraq, argues that the huge US troop presence there is drawing resources from the anti-terror effort in Afghanistan.
The Illinois Senator will lay out his plan for both conflicts in visits to Iraq and Afghanistan expected later this month, details of which have yet to be released for security reasons.
"It's time to refocus our attention on the war we have to win in Afghanistan," Obama said in his first joint appearance with former Democratic foe Hillary Clinton last month.
"It is time to go after the Al-Qaeda leadership where it actually exists. It is time to bring this war in Iraq to a close."
Obama's foreign policy advisor Susan Rice last week accused McCain of fully supporting Bush administration policy on Iraq, which she said had dangerously distracted attention from the anti-terror fight in Afghanistan.
"Every day, there's a new report that underscores the reality that Afghanistan is sliding toward chaos," Rice told reporters on a conference call.
Obama aides pounced on a remark last week by Admiral Michael Mullen, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, that he needed more anti-insurgency troops in Afghanistan, but could not get them because they were needed in Iraq.
Obama has vowed to get most combat troops out of Iraq at the rate of one or two brigades a month, a process which he says should be complete within 16 months.
But McCain says such a plan would put imperil gains made under the surge strategy, and has called on Obama to climb down, arguing his rival's solution is too simplistic.
"To somehow think it is an either or situation, either Afghanistan or Iraq is a fundamental misreading of the situation in the Middle East," McCain told reporters last week.
"What happens in Iraq, matters in Afghanistan," McCain said.
"If we had failed in Iraq if we had pursued the policies vociferously advocated by Senator Obama, we would have risked a wider war.
"We need to succeed in Iraq, and I am confident we can succeed in Afghanistan, but it's not just a matter of more troops."
Democrats have long argued that the Bush administration took its eye off the search for Al-Qaeda kingpin Osama bin Laden, and the battle with stubborn Afghan militants, by invading Iraq in 2003.
Political synergy between the two wars has been thrown into focus by the death toll among international troops, which is rising in Afghanistan, but decreasing in Iraq.
June was deadliest month for foreign troops in Afghanistan since the 2001 fall of the Taliban, with 49 soldiers from the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) and the separate US-led coalition killed.
Thirty-one soldiers including 29 Americans were killed in Iraq in June despite the fact that there are more than twice as many troops there as in Afghanistan.
Back to Top
Back to Top
Funeral for first female British soldier killed in Afghanistan
Mon Jul 7, 11:31 AM ET
WETHERAL (AFP) - Corporal Sarah Bryant, the first female British soldier to be killed in Afghanistan, was laid to rest Monday in the church where she married two years ago.
Bryant, 26, was one of four soldiers killed on June 17 when a roadside bomb tore through their vehicle during an operation near Lashkar Gah in the troubled southern Helmand province.
Her funeral was held at the 17th-century church in the village of Wetheral in north-west England.
Her coffin, draped in Britain's Union flag, had her beret, belt, campaign medals and a single red rose on top.
Lieutenant Colonel Jim Suggit, Bryant's commanding officer, told mourners that grief was a price paid for love.
Finally, his voice breaking with emotion, he said: "We remember the sparkle you brought us and ever will. Meet you at the final RV (rendez-vous). God bless."
A bugler played the Last Post and seven soldiers from the Intelligence Corps fired three volleys over Bryant' coffin, before it was finally laid to rest.
Bryant, of the Intelligence Corps, had previously served in Iraq. It is believed her role in Afghanistan was to make contact with local community leaders.
The British death toll in Afghanistan stands at 109 since operations in Afghanistan began in late 2001 to oust the Taliban, the country's hardline Islamist former rulers.
Back to Top
Back to Top
Bollywood's Afghan romance cut short?
8 Jul 2008, 0238 hrs IST, Bharati Dubey,TNN Times of India, India
MUMBAI: The Taliban may have all along grudged Indian political presence on Afghan soil but the hatred gave way to a red-carpet welcome when Amitabh Bachchan spent 18 days there shooting for Khuda Gawah in 1991.
The Taliban agreed to an 18-day ceasefire with the Najibullah regime to let India's most popular actor have an uneventful shooting stint. And the government-controlled Kabul TV agreed with this exceptional gesture, screening one Bachchan movie every one of those 18 days.
The Big B, as former prime minister Rajiv Gandhi's friend, and his team were assured of security by the Najibullah government. But vast swathes of Afghanistan were under Taliban control and all the government help would have resulted in nothing had the Taliban not cooperated, Khuda Gawah co-producer Manoj Desai said on Monday.
Director Kabir Khan's Kabul Express was the first international film to be shot in post-Taliban Kabul. But that was not such a happy experience as the crew received death threats from the Taliban: "We were tipped off by the Afghan intelligence that the Taliban sent five people to attack our crew."
Khan, who also shot a documentary, Taliban And Beyond , was worried about actors John Abraham and Arshad Warsi. "But, just when we made up our minds to return, the Afghanistan security minister came and requested us to stay back; they did not want a wrong signal to go out. We were provided with 60 guards and areas where we shot were sanitised a day before and entire zones would be cordoned off during the shoot."
But Bollywood's popularity was still evident; Khan's shooting used to be watched by thousands of Afghans. "A Mujaheedin came up to us when I and Rajan (a colleague) got off helicopter. We told him we were from India and he started singing: Mere sapnon ki rani kab ayegi tu.
Back to Top
Back to Top
U.N. envoy denounces hidden abuse of Afghan boys
Mon Jul 7, 2008 3:01pm EDT By Claudia Parsons
UNITED NATIONS (Reuters) - Afghanistan must do more to end an age-old practice of young boys being kept as sex slaves by wealthy and powerful patrons, the U.N. special representative for children and armed conflict said on Monday.
Radhika Coomaraswamy said the practice, called "bacha bazi" -- literally "boy play" -- was a taboo subject, but she had heard reports of warlords and military commanders keeping young boys and "exploiting them in terrible ways."
"What I found was nobody talks about it; everyone says 'Well, you know, it's been there for 1,000 years so why do we want to raise this now?'" she told a news conference at U.N. headquarters, reporting on a visit to Afghanistan last week.
"That seems to be the general attitude among everyone, but somebody has to raise it and it has to be dealt with."
Known as "bacha bereesh," boys without beards, the victims of such abuse are teenage boys who dress up as girls and dance for male patrons at parties in northern Afghanistan.
"We feel that a campaign should be run to raise awareness about this issue and to stop this practice," she said.
"We talk about sexual violence against girls and women, which is also terrible, but this hidden issue of sexual violence against boys should also be dealt with seriously."
Afghan police have tried to crack down on the practice and Islamic clerics say those involved should be stoned for sodomy, which is forbidden under Islamic law.
In a society where the sexes are strictly segregated, it is common for men to dance for other men at weddings in Afghanistan. But in northern Afghanistan, former warlords and mujahideen commanders have taken that a step further, sometimes taking the boys as "mistresses."
Police and security officials in northern Afghanistan say they have been doing their best to arrest the men involved.
"It is sad to state that this practice that includes making boys dance, sexual abuse and sometimes even selling boys, has been going on for years," General Asadollah Amarkhil, the security chief of Kunduz province, told Reuters last year.
"We have taken steps to stop it to the extent that we are able," he said. Amarkhil said poverty, widespread in Afghanistan after nearly three decades of war, forced teenage boys into compliance.
Coomaraswamy said raising awareness and prosecuting those responsible was the first step to ending the practice as it would act as a deterrent to others.
She said she was also concerned about a rise in the recruitment of child soldiers by the Taliban and others in recent months, as well as about civilian casualties including children from U.S.-led coalition raids and air strikes.
(Editing by Eric Walsh)
Back to Top
Back to Top
Afghanistan's Struggling Security Services
Greg Bruno The Washingto Post Council on Foreign Relations Monday, July 7, 2008; 2:51 PM
Afghan President Hamid Karzai threatened to invade Pakistan last month if militants continue to cross the border into his country, and Islamabad responded with indignation. "Under no circumstances will foreign troops be allowed to operate inside Pakistan," the Pakistani government declared in a statement (Reuters). Few expect military action by Afghanistan anytime soon. But lost in the rhetorical war between neighbors was a tactical reality -- Afghanistan's security services remain incapable of self-defense, let alone hot pursuit across the border.
Afghan President Hamid Karzai threatened to invade Pakistan last month if militants continue to cross the border into his country, and Islamabad responded with indignation. "Under no circumstances will foreign troops be allowed to operate inside Pakistan," the Pakistani government declared in a statement (Reuters). Few expect military action by Afghanistan anytime soon. But lost in the rhetorical war between neighbors was a tactical reality -- Afghanistan's security services remain incapable of self-defense, let alone hot pursuit across the border.
Seven years after the United States toppled the Taliban, Afghanistan's security forces remain underfunded, underequipped, and poorly organized, military analysts and government auditors say. A June 2008 report on Afghan security by the U.S. Government Accountability Office, the investigative arm of Congress, finds that despite $10 billion in U.S. aid, only two of 105 Afghan National Army (ANA) units are judged "fully capable" (PDF). None of the 433 units of Afghanistan's National Police (ANP) are capable of conducting independent patrols, and only twelve -- 3 percent -- are capable of leading operations with coalition support, the GAO says. Weakness of Afghan security services was exposed in a July 7 blast that leveled the Indian mission in Kabul (NDTV), killing dozens.
The grim tally comes as violence in Afghanistan climbs, and as NATO countries continue to balk at increasing their troop commitments. A June 2008 Pentagon report on stability in Afghanistan finds that despite some gains by coalition and Afghan forces, the Taliban is regrouping in the south. A second insurgency in the east, dominated by al-Qaeda, Hizb-i-Islami, and various Pakistani militant groups, is "prepared to cooperate with the Taliban's Kandahari-based insurgency," the Pentagon report estimates. June was the deadliest month for U.S. soliders in Afghanistan since the war began (WashPost), and U.S. officials say attacks on coalition forces in the eastern part of the country were up 40 percent over the first five months of 2008, compared with the same period last year. Maj. Gen. Jeffrey Schloesser, the top U.S. commander in the eastern region, says the spike in violence is due in part to a change in militants' tactics. They are targeting schools, roads, and anything else the coalition is building to "improve the quality of life for the normal Afghan citizen," Schloesser told reporters on June 24.
Despite the poor assessment, there are signs the Afghan army is improving. A June 2008 Pentagon plan lays out a long-term strategy for sustaining the forces' fighting and policing capabilities, including the creation of fifteen light infantry brigades, an air corps, and command and control units. Antonio Giustozzi, a research fellow at the Crisis States Research Centre of the London School of Economics, acknowledges aspects of the army's rebuilding effort have been successful. He writes that retention rates have increased, and the army has become a "reasonably well behaved" force that is "quite popular throughout most of Afghanistan." A March 2008 update on Afghanistan security by UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon adds that militants are changing tactics due to "the superiority of Afghan and international security forces in conventional battles." Currently 58,000 strong, the Afghan army has been authorized to grow to 80,000 by 2011, though Afghanistan's own defense minister has advocated for at least 150,000 (AP).
The ANP has bigger issues than force size to confront. According to the Pentagon's own analysis, the Afghan police have "not been sufficiently reformed or developed to a level at which it can adequately perform its security and policing mission." The Pentagon blames corruption, a dearth of trainers, and a lack of assistance from the international community. Independent analysts, meanwhile, take a different view. The January 2008 Afghanistan Study Group Report (PDF) urged the United States to "play a greater role" in training and expanding the ranks of the national police, a responsibility presently spearheaded by German forces in the country. Among the ANP's deficiencies identified by the study group's co-chairs, retired Marine Corps Gen. James L. Jones and Ambassador Thomas R. Pickering, are a dismal payroll system and sectarian divisions that make the ANP "a greater cause of insecurity than the Taliban" in some parts of the country.
Back to Top
Back to Top
Afghan president orders probe into civilian deaths
By Jon Hemming
KABUL, July 6 (Reuters) - Afghan President Hamid Karzai has ordered an investigation into a U.S.-led coalition air strike that local officials say killed 15 civilians, but the U.S. military says killed only armed Taliban militants.
But just as the president gave the order, accusations surfaced that another coalition airstrike had killed 23 civilians travelling in a wedding convoy.
The issue of civilian casualties is an emotive one in Afghanistan, feeding a common perception international forces do not take enough care when launching air strikes, and undermining support for their continued presence in the country.
Nearly 700 Afghan civilians were killed in the first six months of this year, 255 of them by Afghan government and international troops, the rest by Taliban militants.
Karzai ordered the Defence and Interior Ministries and a body that oversees local government to investigate an airstrike in the northeastern province of Nuristan on Friday.
Coalition ground troops called in attack helicopters after militants fired at an outpost, the U.S. military said.
'The helicopter crews coordinated with ground forces to positively identify the militants' vehicles. The attack helicopters then destroyed the two vehicles, killing more than a dozen militants,' it said in a statement on Saturday.
But the governor of Nuristan said 15 civilians were killed and seven wounded in the attack in the Waigal district of the province and none of the victims were militants.
'President Hamid Karzai has repeatedly emphasised the (need for) coordination of military operations and has been deeply saddened since learning about this incident,' a statement from the presidential palace said on Sunday.
BRIDE KILLED
Both the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) and U.S.-led coalition forces say they take the utmost care to avoid killing civilians and ISAF tightened procedures for launching air strikes a year ago, which has had some effect.
ISAF accuses the Taliban of launching attacks from built-up areas in order to deliberately court civilian deaths and also spreading false rumours to discredit international forces.
But residents and local officials said 23 people were killed early on Sunday, when aircraft bombed a convoy bringing a bride to her new husband's village in the eastern province of Nangarhar on Sunday, the Afghan independent Pajhwok news agency said.
'We were bringing the bride back to our village and on the way the Americans bombed us. I was in the first vehicle and all the vehicles behind me were destroyed,' Shafiqullah, who brought some of the wounded to hospital in the city of Jalalabad, told Reuters. Three young boys were among those wounded.
The bride was among the dead, Pajhwok said.
The U.S. military said airstrikes targeted a large group of militants in Nangarhar and no civilians were in the area.
'Intelligence revealed a large group of militants operating in Deh Bala district. Coalition forces identified the militants in a mountainous region and used precision air strikes to kill them,' a U.S. military statement said.
'We don't have any reports of any civilian casualties,' said U.S. military spokesman Captain Christian Patterson. 'There were not any women or children present in the area.'
Civilian deaths at the hands of foreign troops have in the past sparked violent protests in Afghanistan.
(Editing by Dominic Evans)
Back to Top
Back to Top
True or False: We Need a Wartime President
Washington Post, United States by Fareed Zakaria July 6, 2008
George W. Bush is fond of describing himself as a "war president." And he has made many decisions involving soldiers and battle. But does this make the description an appropriate one? For many people the answer is obvious. We're engaged in conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan, after all. But Bill Clinton initiated hostilities in the Balkans twice, George H.W. Bush invaded Panama and Iraq, and neither president ever described himself as a "war president."
For a superpower, being involved in a military conflict somewhere is more the norm than the exception. Since 1945, only one president has not presided over combat that engaged American troops—Jimmy Carter. (Between the Bay of Pigs operation and the American "advisers" in South Vietnam, John F. Kennedy doesn't make the cut.) America remains the world's dominant military-political power, so local crises often engage American allies or interests. Britain was in a somewhat similar position in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. As a result, British forces were fighting someone, somewhere for most of that period. But Britain did not think of itself as "at war," nor would British prime ministers have described themselves as "wartime" leaders. (In fact, Tony Blair has never described himself as such, even though he presided over British military involvement in the Balkans, Sierra Leone, Afghanistan and Iraq.)
America (and before it, Britain) has felt it was "at war" when the conflict threatened the country's basic security—not merely its interests or its allies abroad. This is the common-sense way in which we define a wartime leader, and by that definition the politicians in charge during World Wars I and II—Wilson, Lloyd George, Roosevelt, Churchill—are often described as such. It's not a perfect definition. The United States has been so far removed from most conflicts that even World War I's effects could be described as indirect (incorrectly in my view). But it conjures up the image of a threat to society as a whole, which then requires a national response.
By any of these criteria, we are not at war. At some level, we all know it. Life in America today is surprisingly normal for a country with troops in two battle zones. The country may be engaged in wars, but it is not at war. Consider as evidence the behavior of our "war president." Bush recently explained that for the last few years he has given up golf, because "to play the sport in a time of war" would send the wrong signal. Compare Bush's "sacrifice" to those made by Americans during World War II, when most able-bodied men were drafted, food was rationed and industries were commandeered to produce military equipment. For example, there were no civilian cars manufactured in the United States from 1941 to 1945.
Of course, there are people, including Bush, who would argue that we are at war even in this deeper sense. In its June 23 issue, Fortune magazine asked Sen. John McCain what the gravest long-term threat to the U.S. economy was. He took a while to answer—an 11-second pause, by Fortune's count—but then said, "Well, I would think that the absolute gravest threat is the struggle that we're in against radical Islamic extremism, which can affect, if they prevail, our very existence."
It is by now overwhelmingly clear that Al Qaeda and its philosophy are not the worldwide leviathan that they were once portrayed to be. Both have been losing support over the last seven years. The terrorist organization's ability to plan large-scale operations has crumbled, their funding streams are smaller and more closely tracked. Of course, small groups of people can still cause great havoc, but is this movement an "existential threat" to the United States or the Western world? No, because it is fundamentally weak. Al Qaeda and its ilk comprise a few thousand jihadists, with no country as a base, almost no territory and limited funds. Most crucially, they lack an ideology that has mass appeal. They are fighting not just America but the vast majority of the Muslim world. In fact, they are fighting modernity itself.
The evidence supporting this view of the threat was already growing by 2003. Scholars like Benjamin Friedman, Marc Sageman and John Mueller collected much of it. I've been making a similar case in columns and a book since 2004. James Fallows wrote a fine cover essay in The Atlantic in September 2006 arguing that if there was ever a war against militant Islam, it was now over and the latter had lost.
These writings never really changed the debate because they fell into a political vacuum. The right wanted to argue that we lived in scary times and that this justified the aggressive unilateralism of George W. Bush. And the left was wedded to the idea that Bush had screwed everything up and created a frighteningly dangerous world in which the ranks of jihadists had grown. But these days, the director of the CIA himself has testified that Al Qaeda is on the ropes. The journalist Peter Bergen, who in 2007 wrote a cover essay in The New Republic titled "The Return of Al Qaeda," recently wrote another cover essay, "The Unraveling," about the group's decline. The neoconservative Weekly Standard finally recognizes that "the enemy," as it likes to say ominously, is much weaker now, but quickly notes that Bush deserves all the credit. Terrorism is down in virtually every country, including ones that took a much less militaristic approach to the struggle. (Ironically, the two countries where terrorism persists and in some cases has grown as a threat are Iraq and Afghanistan.)
The administration does deserve some credit for its counterterrorism activities. The combined efforts of most governments since 9/11—busting cells in Europe and Asia, tracking money, hunting down jihadist groups—have been extremely effective. But how you see the world determines how you will respond, and the administration has greatly inflated the threat, casting it as an existential and imminent danger. As a result, we've massively overreacted. Bush and his circle have conceived of the problem as military and urgent when it's more of a long-term political and cultural problem. The massive expansion of the military budget, the unilateral rush to war in Iraq, the creation of the cumbersome Department of Homeland Security, the new restrictions on visas and travel can all be chalked up to this sense that we are at war. No cost-benefit analysis has been done. John Mueller points out that in response to a total of five deaths from anthrax, the U.S. government has spent $5 billion on new security procedures.
Of course, this is actually what Osama bin Laden hoped for. Despite his current weakness, he has always been an extremely shrewd strategist. In explaining the goal of the 9/11 attacks, he pointed out that they inflicted about $500 billion worth of damage to the American economy and yet cost only $500,000. He was describing an LTA, a leveraged terrorist attack. But by the same token, the 9/11 attacks caused an economic swoon because of their scope, and because they were the first of their kind. Since then, each successive terrorist attack—in Indonesia, Saudi Arabia, Morocco, Turkey, Spain, Britain—has had a much smaller effect on the world economy.
We are in a struggle against Islamic extremism, but it is more like the cold war than a hot war—a long, mostly peacetime challenge in which a leader must be willing to use military power but also know when not to do so. Perhaps the wisest American president during the cold war was Dwight Eisenhower, and his greatest virtues were those of balance, judgment and restraint. He knew we were in a contest with the Soviet Union, but—at a time when the rest of the country was vastly inflating the threat—he put it in considerable perspective. Eisenhower refused to follow the French into Vietnam or support the British at Suez. He turned down several requests for new weapons systems and missiles, and instead used defense dollars to build the interstate highway system and make other investments in improving America's economic competitiveness. Those are the kinds of challenges that the next president truly needs to address.
In a sense, the warriors are pessimists. In the old days they were scared that communists would destroy America. Today they rail that Al Qaeda and Iran threaten our way of life. In fact, America is an extremely powerful country, with a unique and extraordinary set of strengths. The only way that position can truly be eroded is by its own actions and overreactions—by unwise and imprudent leadership. A good way to start correcting the errors of the past would be to recognize that we are not at war.
Answer: False
Editor of Newsweek International, columnist PostGlobal co-moderator Fareed Zakaria is editor of Newsweek International, overseeing all Newsweek's editions abroad. He writes a regular column for Newsweek, which also appears in Newsweek International and often The Washington Post.
Back to Top
Back to Top
Afghan children the victims amid 'deteriorating security situation' – UN envoy
Source: United Nations News Service 07 Jul 2008
A surge in recruitment of child soldiers, the maiming and killing of children, child detention and a serious humanitarian situation are all posing major threats to children in Afghanistan, according to the United Nations envoy on children and armed conflict who has recently returned from a five-day visit to the country.
'The deteriorating security situation in the country was of concern to everybody everywhere. They are very worried about the kind of insecurity and lawlessness that is now prevailing,' Radhika Coomaraswamy, the Secretary-General's Special Representative for Children and Armed Conflict, told reporters today in New York.
Among child rights violations Ms. Coomaraswamy investigated during her visit was the killing and maiming of children during military operations by Taliban and anti-government combatants, as well as by international forces in Afghanistan.
The envoy held discussions with ISAF [International Security Assistance Force] and OEF [Operation Enduring Freedom] commanders and said she had received updated guidelines on new procedures to limit 'collateral damage' – civilians killed in military raids.
'However, I must say even the religious leaders who were sympathetic to the Government complained bitterly about this type of collateral damage,' she added. 'There is therefore a need for the international forces to take these complaints seriously, to put in place measures to prevent excesses, to have prompt investigations and, where necessary, pay compensation.'
Ms. Coomaraswamy also stressed that she was concerned about children being detained after military operations by Afghan and international forces, and that there was a lack of guidelines and operating procedures on the issue.
On the issue of child soldiers, Ms. Coomaraswamy said that she had received information from Afghan sources that there had been a surge in under-age recruitment by the Taliban and other anti-government forces in the last few months, especially from Pakistan.
She noted that the Taliban had recognized that the recruitment of children was illegal through their own rule that mujahadeen fighters were not allowed to take young boys with no facial hair onto the battle field.
'However, it seems that in the last few months this rule is not being obeyed and that children are being used even as suicide bombers,' she added, saying that she had three verified cases of failed suicide attempts by children.
Condemning attacks on schools, Ms Coomaraswamy said such attacks 'kill children who are completely innocent of the politics around them' and urged community and tribal leaders to unite to protect their schools, as well as to devise a security plan that did not militarize schools or endanger children.
Citing a serious humanitarian problem in many of the conflict areas in Afghanistan, the envoy urged all parties to give access to relief organizations and praised the proposal by the UN Children's Fund (UNICEF) to create 'days of tranquillity' in the country when military operations would be suspended to allow immunization drives to take place. She noted that a previous polio vaccination campaign had been a success.
'We hope the children then can be a bridge for the beginning of peace in Afghanistan,' she said.
One of the major objectives of Ms. Coomaraswamy's visit was to set in place the monitoring and reporting process called for by the Security Council in resolution 1612 (2005) to assess six grave violations against children in situations of armed conflict.
The monitoring and reporting mechanism – which sets up a task force at the country level – will feed into a comprehensive report on the situation of children and armed conflict in Afghanistan that will be presented to the Security Council in October.
Back to Top
Back to Top
65 steps to the Afghan desert grave that began decades of war
The Times Anthony Loyd July 7, 2008
Thirty years had separated the moment since Pacha Mir last stood at the secret grave in a desert wasteland on the eastern side of Kabul and his return 12 days ago.
In 1978 he had been a young major in the Afghan Army, ordered in the dead of night to perform a clandestine mission by the Communists who had just seized control of his country in a coup.
Despite the passage of time, Pacha Mir, now 60, remembered how to find his way back to the spot. He told The Times at the weekend: “I knew that, just as day follows night, at some point in the future I would have to recall the place.
“So I had paced its position from a mark in the track. And I remembered those 65 steps for all the years that followed.”
On the morning of June 25, accompanied by members of a special Afghan commission, Pacha Mir took the 65 steps again and directed a group of labourers to the small knoll at his feet. They began to dig.
Shortly after 11am they found a shoe barely 3ft beneath the ground. By early afternoon they had found the first bones, and by the close of day they had discovered 29 skeletons in two graves: men, women and children. Pacha Mir had been among the men who buried them. Now he had helped to exhume them.
His memory, the turning of the earth and the bones, may have ended one of Afghanistan's greatest mysteries. The dusty human remains, the women's shoes made in France, the frayed scraps of clothing and children's dress, the gold teeth, a leg brace, bits of uniform and jewellery - all suggest the grave to be the final resting place of the country's first President, Sardar Mohammad Daoud Khan, killed with his family and entourage in the bloody coup of April 1978. It was an event that precipitated the nation into the era of violence from which it has yet to emerge.
The skeletons, now shrouded and placed in coffins, are under lock and key in the special hospital of Afghanistan's intelligence service, pending DNA tests and an identification process that began yesterday. One corpse is already thought to be that of President Daoud: his patent black leather shoes and the remains of his favoured dark suit have apparently survived.
The murdered family's servants, ageing in exile across several continents, are being contacted to help with the identification, as they know better than any the family's clothes. The Afghan authorities are discussing the organisation of a funeral ceremony befitting a head of state.
Yet not everyone will be so happy with the end of the mystery. Today Daoud is regarded by many Afghans as a progressive, even heroic, ruler, who famously stood up for the country's independence by thumping his fist on the table in front of the Russian President, Leonid Brezhnev, during a state visit to Moscow, when he objected to the Soviet demands being placed on his country. The act of defiance was to cost him his life.
But Daoud had Afghan enemies, too. Though a member of the royal family, he deposed his cousin, King Zahir Shah, in a bloodless coup in 1973, ending Afghanistan's monarchy with the establishment of a republic over which he presided.
While many of the royal family forgave him, some did not. He later suppressed both Islamist and Marxist opposition groups. Today elderly Afghan communists, who for so long sought to keep secret Daoud's unmarked grave, are again numbered among the Government. A re-examination of who did what in the 1978 coup is the last thing they wish for.
Pacha Mir has stark memories of his participation in the burial. A day earlier a battalion of tanks loyal to the Marxist plotters, backed by jets and helicopters, had besieged President Daoud, along with his special guard and family, in their palace. The death toll was huge as tanks blasted the palace walls and jet aircraft strafed the city streets.
Zahra Ghazi, Daoud's granddaughter, was only 16 at the time and was one of the few to survive. She flew into Kabul two days ago from Switzerland to help with the identification process.
In an interview with The Times yesterday she described her family being whittled down in murderous volleys of fire that sent bullets ricocheting among the marble columns of two rooms in which they had taken cover after a request to surrender was apparently rejected by Daoud. She was shot three times, and as she was finally led from the carnage she remembers passing the bodies of Daoud and her father.
“The strange thing was that many of the soldiers were crying,” she said. “They said they were sorry for having killed the father of their nation.”
That night Pacha Mir was on duty with his soldiers in a base at Pul-e-Chakri, in the east of the capital. There was still sporadic fighting when a group of the new Marxist regime arrived at the barracks. They ordered Pacha Mir to gather a work detail and follow them to the nearby desert wasteland at Deh Sabz. It was nearly midnight when they arrived.
Pacha Mir said: “They told me that they had some bodies for us to bury. I asked, ‘Whose?' They didn't reply.” A truck arrived. All headlights were extinguished. Pacha Mir's troops were told to unload bloodsoaked bodies from the truck. There were 13 in the first batch, including three women. They were laid in a fold in the ground.
Pacha Mir bent down to turn the faces of the dead towards Mecca, in accordance with his Muslim faith. In the starlight one seemed familiar. “Seconds later I realised that it was Nezam Ghazi, Daoud's son-in-law, whom I had known for a long time. At that moment I knew we were burying Daoud's family. But I said nothing. No one did.”
The soldiers were ordered to cover the bodies with soil. Then a Marxist commander drove a vehicle over the mound to flatten it, jeering. “He said, ‘Daoud Khan, you wanted to bury me, but now I'm burying you'.”
The next night Pacha Mir's troops buried another 16 bodies in a second grave at the same location. Most were women; three were children. Their numbers correlate with those of the murdered presidential family.
Pacha Mir had still not told his wife what had happened when he fled to Pakistan with his own family 34 days later, after hearing that the Marxists wanted to kill him for knowing too much. “I told her nothing. It was a bad story. Many Afghans loved Daoud. I couldn't admit to being part of such an awful thing.”
Granted asylum in Pakistan, he joined the Mujahidin, attacking communist forces in cross-border raids. The secret stayed with him.
In 2003, while attending the constitutional Loya Jirga in Kabul, Pacha Mir saw surviving members of Daoud's exiled family who had returned to participate in the political process. He mentioned to them that he knew the location of the murdered President's grave. They contacted the Government.
Insiders say that further investigation was obstructed by Sardar Abdul Wali, a government adviser and son-in-law of the deposed King, who was once jailed by Daoud. But the elderly Wali became seriously ill and left Afghanistan for treatment in Delhi this year.
When it became apparent that he was too sick ever to return - he died last week - a commission was authorised to find Daoud's grave. They called Pacha Mir, who travelled to Kabul from his home in eastern Afghanistan to lead them to the spot.
If memories of the coup, the nocturnal burial party, the twisted limbs, bloodied bodies and the years of war that followed haunt Pacha Mir, they have not softened him.
“Because of those communists, Afghanistan lost its national leader,” he concluded vengefully. “They have to be found. And executed.”
Sardar Mohammad Daoud Khan: cruelty and reform
Daoud served as Prime Minister to his cousin, Zahir Shah, from 1953 to 1963 but was forced to resign, mainly because of his authoritarian style of governing
His strong support for the creation of Pashtunistan from Pakistani and Afghan regions led to a breakdown in relations with Islamabad, causing Afghanistan to ally itself with the Soviet Union
Daoud encouraged the abandonment of the veil by Afghan women, granted them equal rights to institute divorce cases and established family courts
During his presidency he largely abandoned other promised reforms and curtailed democracy, imprisoning and executing hundreds of leftwingers and Islamists without trial
By the mid 1970s he had turned Afghanistan away from the Soviet Union and towards the West and Middle Eastern nations. It was a move which, along with his brutal suppression of Marxist Afghans, triggered the 1978 Communist coup
Source: Times Archive
Back to Top
Back to Top
As Afghanistan boils, McCain keeps focus on Iraq
For voters, a resurgent Taliban may challenge McCain's view that Iraq is the center of the war on terror.
Christian Science Monitor, MA By Ariel Sabar Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor July 7, 2008
WASHINGTON -John McCain has called Iraq the "central front" of the war on terror, a crucible of America's ability to defeat violent Islamic extremists the world over.
But with record US casualties in Afghanistan in June, a resurgent Taliban, and new reports of Al Qaeda regrouping in northwest Pakistan, Senator McCain is likely to face new questions about his judgment on the one issue – national security – where voters consistently give him higher marks than they do his Democratic rival.
McCain has resisted calls for more troops in Afghanistan and has rejected criticism that the Iraq war is detracting from efforts to secure Afghanistan. He labeled Barack Obama "naive" for saying he'd strike terrorist targets in Pakistan with or without the cooperation of President Pervez Musharraf.
And while McCain vowed more than a year ago to follow Osama bin Laden "to the gates of hell," he has offered few details about how his approach to Al Qaeda might differ from that of the Bush administration.
"I will not describe what I will do in order to get bin Laden, except to say that I'll get him," he said in Iowa last September.
Aides to the Arizona senator said Wednesday that he continued to view success in Iraq as the best chance for victory in the global war on terror.
"As on many things, Senator Obama is not listening to our commanders, and Senator McCain is," says Kori Schake, a senior policy adviser to McCain. "General David Petraeus believes Iraq is the central front in the war on terror. Al Qaeda has even said it is."
But with spiking US casualties in Afghanistan and fresh reports of growing Al Qaeda activity in Pakistan and North Africa, that may be a hard sell to voters already deeply skeptical of the Iraq war.
Ms. Schake's comments came about two hours after Adm. Michael Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said additional troops were needed in Afghanistan but that too many were tied down in Iraq to send more.
The Obama campaign last week seized on the news reports of a resurgent Taliban and Al Qaeda as evidence of McCain's policy shortcomings.
"Instead of questioning Barack Obama's consistent call for a new direction in Iraq and Afghanistan, John McCain should explain why he is offering nothing more than four more years of a failed foreign policy that has asked nothing of the Iraqi government, overstretched our military, failed to finish the job in Afghanistan, and failed to bring Osama bin Laden to justice for over six years," Tommy Vietor, an Obama campaign spokesman, said in a statement.
For McCain, the stakes for drawing contrasts with the Bush administration – in affairs both domestic and foreign – are high. A USA Today/Gallup Poll released last week found that 2 in 3 Americans are concerned that McCain would pursue policies "too similar" to President Bush.
McCain came closest to sketching a new direction in remarks to a newspaper industry group in April. He suggested that the Bush administration had relied too much on technology – and not enough on spies – in its efforts to foil Al Qaeda.
"We don't have today sufficient numbers and kinds of people who can go into Waziristan, in one of the most ungoverned places on earth, and blend in with the countryside and the people and gather information and get it back to us, because human intelligence is the only way you are able to ascertain the intentions of the enemy," he said, after a reporter asked about his pledge in a May 2007 presidential debate to follow bin Laden to the "gates of hell."
Obama has set a 16-month timetable for the withdrawal of major combat troops from Iraq and would commit two additional brigades to Afghanistan to reinforce counterterrorism operations there. He has also pledged a $1 billion increase in nonmilitary aid to the country, partly to find new work for poppy farmers who benefit from the heroin trade. In a remark that sparked controversy, he said he would not rule out a unilateral strike in Pakistan.
"If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and President Musharraf won't act, we will," he said in a Washington speech last August.
McCain later highlighted the statement as a sign of Obama's lack of foreign-policy experience. "You don't broadcast that you are going to bomb a country that is a sovereign nation," McCain, who has endorsed a cooperative approach with Mr. Musharraf, said in February. "It's just fundamentals of the conduct of national security policy."
McCain supports an open-ended troop presence in Iraq. Though critical of the Bush administration's war planning, he has said that defeat in Iraq would embolden Islamic extremists, provide a sanctuary for terrorists, destabilize the Middle East, and strengthen Iran.
He assigns a lower priority to Afghanistan and Pakistan. In an essay last fall for the journal Foreign Affairs, he called for a larger and more agile NATO force in Afghanistan, better training for Afghan soldiers, and a variety of civil reforms. He also proposed technical assistance to help Pakistanis root out terrorist cells, cultivate political moderates, and remove children from extremist madrassahs.
"There is lots we need to do in Afghanistan," Schake, McCain's adviser, acknowledged Wednesday during a conference call, responding to a question from the Monitor. "But we don't surrender to Al Qaeda in Iraq. That doesn't help American interests."
McCain aides faulted Obama early last week after high-profile supporters of the Illinois senator said recent advances in Iraq would not change Obama's 16-month withdrawal timetable. Later in the week, however, Obama signaled some flexibility, saying he would "continue to refine my policy" after visiting Iraq later this summer.
How voters respond to McCain's continued focus on Iraq may depend on how closely they are following the news, some analysts say.
"If the public is not aware that Al Qaeda is cropping up in North Africa and Afghanistan and other locations, then McCain's message might be accepted," says Gordon Smith, a political scientist at the University of South Carolina in Columbia. "For those members of the public who are well informed, to hear him argue as if Al Qaeda exists primarily in Iraq might lead to questions of, 'What's he thinking? Where's he getting his information from?' "
Back to Top
Back to Top
Alarm in Kandahar as a local protector is killed
The Globe and Mail - International GRAEME SMITH July 6, 2008
KANDAHAR, AFGHANISTAN -Neighbours woke to the sound of gunfire, then a car horn blaring continuously.
Habibullah Jan lay slumped against the steering wheel of his Toyota Corolla, bullet holes peppering the modern white sedan.
The killing of the 47-year-old parliamentarian on Friday night has deepened the sense of alarm in Kandahar city, as the provincial capital lost another of its local protectors.
The chain-smoking tribal elder controlled the city's western suburb, Senjaray, with a private militia and a talent for deal-making.
Fighting wars almost constantly since he was a teenager, Mr. Jan had acquired so many enemies that nobody could say for certain whether the gunmen on motorbikes who ambushed him in the dirt laneway outside his home were sent by the Taliban, the government or any of his other antagonists.
But it's widely believed that his death will give fertile new ground to the insurgency.
“The area is full of Taliban now,” said Atta Ulla, the eldest of the parliamentarian's 14 sons, speaking by telephone from Senjaray. He apologized for the fact that it was too dangerous to invite a Western journalist to the condolence ceremony for his father, only five kilometres from the city limits. “There will be much fighting, I think,” he said.
Mr. Jan's is only the latest death among a fractious group of former anti-Soviet warriors who rose to prominence in the 1980s and suffered under the Taliban regime in the 1990s. Many of them returned to power after 2001, and largely served as bulwarks against the rising insurgency in recent years as they staked out territory.
They have been heavily targeted in the past nine months after the most prominent among them, Mullah Naqib of Arghandab district, died of a heart attack in October after a roadside bombing. His death was followed by a suicide bombing that killed one of his allies, Abdul Hakim Jan, along with perhaps 100 others in February. Another prominent former commander, Malim Akbar Khakrezwal, was gunned down in early June by attackers on motorbikes, a tactic frequently used by the Taliban.
The killing of Mr. Jan followed the same pattern. He was usually surrounded by three or four bodyguards but had dismissed them for the evening, as he was travelling only a few hundreds metres between his house and the high-walled mud compound on the north side of Highway 1 that served as his guesthouse and office.
The heavyset old warrior had married for the fourth time two years ago, his cousin Haji Amanullah said, and he was headed toward his new wife's sleeping quarters when his vehicle was struck by gunfire from three directions.
It was a violent end for a man whose life was steeped in warfare. Mr. Jan had quietly assisted Canadian and U.S. military officials with the planning of Operation Medusa in 2006, the largest offensive by Canadian troops in the war. He proudly kept certificates of appreciation he had received from the foreign military commanders.
“They needed some advice from me and I gave them good advice,” Mr. Jan said in an interview last year, fondly remembering his conversations with Canadian Brigadier-General David Fraser. “We know this area, these Taliban.”
As leaders of the Alizai tribe, his family had been influential in the farmland west of Kandahar city for generations. His father, Haji Mohammed Omarzai, was among thousands of prominent figures arrested by the Communist regime of Nur Mohammad Taraki in 1978.
Mr. Jan. joined the mujahedeen resistance at age 16 and eventually drew support from three of the Islamist parties supplying weapons for the anti-Soviet war. After the Russian withdrawal, he carved out a territory controlling the highway west of the city.
The Taliban chased the warlords out of Kandahar in 1994, forcing Mr. Jan to flee north and join forces with famed Tajik commander Ahmad Shah Massoud.
His experience fighting in northern Afghanistan led him to forge an alliance with a Tajik presidential candidate, Yunus Qanooni, and he was among the few prominent figures to openly campaign against Hamid Karzai in his home city of Kandahar during the 2004 presidential elections.
That opposition did not endear Mr. Jan to the Karzai family. He feuded with Ahmed Wali Karzai, the president's younger half-brother, until the two of them formally reconciled with a three-day ceremony of feasting last year. The detente didn't last, however, and in recent months he became the first politician in Kandahar to publicly accuse the younger Karzai brother of involvement of the opium trade. Ahmed Wali Karzai has denied the accusation.
A Taliban spokesman denied any role in Mr. Jan's death, and Taliban sources in the districts west of Kandahar said they weren't aware of any order to kill him.
One of Mr. Jan's relatives initially said he was skeptical it was an insurgent attack, because he understood that Mr. Jan's militia had an informal ceasefire agreement with the Taliban.
But the same relative corrected himself the next day, saying the family had recently obtained information that gave them certainty he was assassinated by insurgents.
“We know which Taliban killed him,” he said, without elaborating.
Niaz Mohammed Sarhadi, commissioner of Zhari district, said Mr. Jan had recently grown vocal about attacking the Taliban. A cluster of villages known as Ashokay, just west of Mr. Jan's territory in Senjaray, is a notorious hideout for the insurgents and Mr. Jan had recently made a proposal to help set up a 30-man outpost that would have disrupted insurgents in the area, Mr. Sarhadi said.
Still, the district commissioner said it's too early to say who killed him.
“He was a commander for many years,” Mr. Sarhadi said. “He had many enemies.”
Back to Top
Back to Top
Kabul: A city where war is never far away
International Herald Tribune - Asia-Pacific By Tyler Hicks July 6, 2008
My first trip to Kabul was in 2001. I arrived as Northern Alliance soldiers were fighting Taliban gunmen in and around the Afghan capital. Those who resisted were killed, and those captured were more likely to be executed than taken prisoner.
There was a power vacuum in Kabul, a brief moment when one set of rulers had fled and the next had not yet taken over. This can be a liberating time for a photographer. There were no clear rules, no central authority that might restrict you from taking pictures. I've returned to Afghanistan nearly every year since then.
Today, at first glance, the dusty stalls and kebab joints of Kabul, with their bearded men and covered women, look much the same - in at least one important way - as they did when the Taliban were forced to flee.
Ordinary people seem stoic under the circumstances, which are better than they were in 2001 but still deeply uncertain.
Generations of conflict have numbed the senses. From the Russian occupation during the 1980s, through the years of Taliban rule in the 1990s, and now the intensifying coalition war against the Taliban insurgency, violence has become ingrained in their lives. After a recent period being embedded with the U.S. Marines in southern Afghanistan, I stopped in Kabul to wander the streets and take photos of a city forever in transition. The Western presence was something not tolerated during Taliban rule, so there have been some changes.
A new shopping mall, with escalators in a city where constant electricity is a luxury, offers Western-style clothes, gold jewelry, a cafe. A fast-food establishment, mimicking American chains, offers fried chicken and fries instead of lamb kebab and rice.
Meanwhile, refugees and internally displaced civilians, left homeless by decades of war, have created a beggar society, with the sick and disabled desperate for food and work. The cost of housing in urban Kabul is very high compared with that in the countryside, and many people live in crumbling buildings and makeshift tents.
There is also, on a hill overlooking the city, an Olympic-size pool built by the Soviets in the 1980s. It is said that the Taliban forced criminals off the platforms to their deaths at the bottom of the pool.
Now, as then, it contains little or no water.
With unemployment at about 40 percent, a large number of idle men have little to do. Snooker clubs, where men play and smoke cigarettes, are popular. So are small video arcades. Most popular are the Indian and Pakistani movies that dominate the theaters; there, for the price of a ticket, viewers can watch increasingly revealing scenes of women.
Drug addicts crowd into a dilapidated section of the old city, smoking hashish and shooting heroin. Drug addiction is on the rise in Afghanistan, fed in part by a flow of refugees from Pakistan, who find no work but can buy the drugs cheaply. War or no war, West or no West, Afghanistan remains the world's largest producer of opium, an industry that the Taliban continue to profit from.
The newly resurgent Taliban continue to push for greater influence, and not just in the remote regions near the Pakistan border. A recent assassination attempt on President Hamid Karzai during a military parade in Kabul killed three people. Then the Taliban freed 1,200 inmates in a brazen attack on a prison in the southern city of Kandahar.
The Taliban, clearly, are still strong in Afghanistan. So war, as it has been for generations, is never far away.
Back to Top
Back to Top
Canada agrees to build so-called 'Great Wall of Kandahar' to protect university
The Canadian Press, Afghanistan 06/07/2008
KANDAHAR, Afghanistan -They've dubbed this project the Great Wall of Kandahar.
The Canadian government struck a deal last week with officials at Kandahar University to build a three-kilometre perimeter of stone, brick and iron around the school campus.
Construction is slated to begin within weeks and officials hope that by mid-fall, the new wall will address a litany of concerns hampering the school's development.
The school blames its wide-open campus on a dusty plain for a vast assortment of woes, which range from serious safety issues to the simpler frustrations of life in chaotic Kandahar city.
Least among their concerns are the nomadic goat-herders who have been erecting tents and grazing cattle on the campus lawn, while slowly laying claim to one piece after another of the school property.
More serious are the fears that keep young people away - especially women.
Administrators say many women have told them they'd like to come to school, but won't enrol because they fear being attacked by those who believe they have no business in a classroom.
Females represent barely five per cent of the student body.
Administrators would also like to attract guest-lecturers and visiting scholars in order to enrich the student experience at Kandahar U - but for now they're hesitant to even bother sending invitations.
Then there's robbery.
Just a few weeks ago, burglars busted into the school overnight and made off with one of its coveted electricity-generating solar panels.
The Canadians heard all these complaints and detected within them a common thread.
They agreed with the school on a possible remedy and have offered a $500,000 budget for a construction project they've since nicknamed the Great Wall of Kandahar.
"There are a lot of projects the university has planned," said Capt. Tylere Couture, the military man leading the project for the Canadian government.
"But it always seems to come back to (the reality that) without a perimeter security wall, a lot of these projects either won't get off the ground - or if they do they won't be fully utilized because of the lack of security."
The story of this university is like a tiny snapshot of the heartbreaking history of greater Afghanistan.
Built in 1991 in the latter days of the pro-Soviet regime, the school began with only one faculty: agriculture.
The institution was later decimated as civil war tore the country apart: teachers weren't getting paid, there were chronic staff shortages and classes were frequently cancelled as Afghanistan slipped into its turbulent nightmare.
Then came the Taliban.
Women were banished from the classrooms, and the ruling mullahs had little interest in subjects other than Islamic studies. However, they ushered in an era of relative security.
At least teachers were getting paid again, and the school added a faculty of medicine in 1994 and of civil engineering in 2000.
Now, under the post-9-11 Karzai regime, enrolment has shot up from 150 students in the late 1990s to over 1,200 today. The school now has a faculty of education, and plans to add economics and Islamic law.
But security is once again a concern.
Vice-chancellor Abdurrahim Farahi says it's not that students are being attacked by insurgents, but that a general climate of fear and instability is dragging the place down.
He says the wall would help in a variety of ways.
It would help provide an enclosed area on which to build a soccer field, instead of having nomads digging tents into the campus lawn, he says.
Guests from abroad might feel safer to visit and share their knowledge with the students. It might attract more women than the 95 currently enrolled at the school.
And, more young people from Kandahar's rural areas would feel safe coming to study in town and sleep in a campus dormitory, he says.
"We're hoping to have such interesting activities in the future," Farahi said. "But for the moment we do not have such activities.
"The boundary wall is very, very important. It will bring big changes to the university."
A school band is not on the university's immediate radar screen. But the students were excited when a South Korean university recently brought over a cultural exhibition that included musicians.
Administrators are hoping a Canadian university might want to establish a more formal partnership.
In other regions of Afghanistan, schools have established partnerships with Harvard University as well as academic institutions in Kansas, California and Berlin.
Because Canada and its military have the lead role in Kandahar province, the faculty here hope a Canadian institution might take some interest in helping them.
Maybe they could help review the school's curriculum, provide some books, deliver a few guest lectures by teleconference, and perhaps even offer a scholarship or two, says one faculty member.
There aren't many opportunities here for young people to pursue post-graduate studies, says the dean of engineering.
"It would be a great achievement if a Canadian university would partner with us," said faculty head Roshaan Wolusmal.
In the meantime, his engineering students will get some on-hands experience at building a wall.
The agreement with the Canadians was contingent on students from the engineering faculty participating in the land-surveying, soil-testing, and the building phase of the project.
School officials had been negotiating details with the Canadian government over the spring, and they reached a final agreement on Canada Day.
Back to Top
Back to Top
Taliban set up Sharia courts in Bajaur Agency
Dawn (Pakistan) By Anwarullah Khan July 6, 2008
KHAR-The Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan has established Sharia courts in the Bajaur Agency and a large number of people are using them to get disputes resolved, instead of waiting for action by the tribal administration.The courts have been functioning in the Sewai area, about 20kms northwest of the agency headquarters of Khar, for a couple of weeks. About two dozen ulema have been designated as ‘Qazis’.
“We have set up the courts in accordance with people’s wishes,” said Taliban spokesman Maulvi Umar, adding that people were fed up with the previous legal system. He said that the Qazis were “competent scholars well versed in Islamic jurisprudence”.
During a visit to the area, the correspondent saw people going to courts with issues relating to monetary matters and land and family disputes, and women bringing complaints about maltreatment by husbands.
Some people visiting the court told this correspondent that the judicial system under the Frontier Crimes Regulations (FCR) was oppressive and the courts run by the tribal administration were not able to provide them justice. “The Sharia courts are delivering speedy and cheap justice.”
One man interviewed by this correspondent said that his dispute, which had been lingering for several years in a tribal administration court, had been decided by the Sharia court in a few days.
Maulvi Umar told journalists that people were approaching these courts voluntarily to get their long-standing disputes settled and the Taliban had not forced any litigant to go to the courts.
He said that inordinate delays in resolving disputes resulted in blood feuds which continued for decades. “The Sharia courts resolve these disputes speedily and in accordance with Islamic jurisprudence.”
Back to Top
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).