 |
||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Serving you since 1998 | ||||||||||||
|
|
Afghanistan: US killed civilians after false tip
By JASON STRAZIUSO, Associated Press Writer
KABUL, Afghanistan - An American bombing that killed up to 90 Afghan civilians last month was based on false information provided by a rival tribe and did not kill a single Taliban fighter, the president's spokesman said Sunday.
Six children, three UN staffers die in new Afghan violence
KABUL (AFP) - Six children were killed in a bomb explosion in Afghanistan Sunday while a suicide car bomb blew up a marked United Nations vehicle and killed two Afghan doctors and a driver, officials said.
British army suffers third casualty in a week in Afghanistan: MoD
Sun Sep 14, 5:57 AM ET
LONDON (AFP) - A British soldier has been killed in an explosion in southern Afghanistan, becoming the third British casualty there in a week, the Ministry of Defence said on Sunday.
Two Afghan UN doctors killed in suicide bombing: police
Sun Sep 14, 3:11 AM ET
KANDAHAR, Afghanistan (AFP) - Two Afghan doctors working for the United Nations were killed in a suicide car-bomb attack on their vehicle in southeastern Afghanistan Sunday, police said.
Factbox - Security developments in Afghanistan, 14 Sep 2008
Sept 14 (Reuters) - Following are security developments in Afghanistan at 1130 GMT on Sunday:
*denotes new or updated item
KANDAHAR - A suicide car bomber killed two local doctors in an attack on a United Nations convoy in the town of Spin Boldak near the Pakistan border, a provincial official said.
Moscow eyes Afghanistan in fear
By Dmitry Shlapentokh Asia Times Online / September 13, 2008
With Russia once again in the global arena, observers are focusing on its "conflict" with the West, namely its offensive in Georgia and its recognition of the breakaway Georgian states of South Ossetia and Abkhazia.
Defense Contracts Foretell Military Buildup in Afghanistan
By Walter Pincus Washington Post Staff Writer Sunday, September 14, 2008; Page A23
The Defense Department is seeking private contractors to carry out a variety of tasks -- such as clearing land mines, building detention facilities and providing fuel -- to assist U.S. forces in Afghanistan
$200 Million Needed To Power Kabul For Another Six Months
The Ottawa Citizen September 13, 2008
No wonder Afghans are getting frustrated with the Karzai government.
Ismail Khan, Karzai's minister responsible for water and power has asked the government for $207 million (U.S.) to provide extra fuel for Kabul city’s generators. He sent the budget request
Conor Foley v Lauryn Oates
What should we do in Afghanistan?
Take Two guardian.co.uk, Sunday September 14 2008
Conor Foley to Lauryn Oates
The recent call by the Afghan government for a "re-negotiation" of agreements regulating the presence of international troops in Afghanistan after the killing of up to 90 civilians in US-led air strikes is the latest sign
Alleged U.S. spy killed in Pakistan's tribal region
www.chinaview.cn 2008-09-14
ISLAMABAD, Sept. 14 (Xinhua) -- An Afghan man accused of spying for the United States was killed by militants in Pakistan's tribal region of North Waziristan, according to local press reports Sunday.
AFGHANISTAN: Groundwater overuse could cause severe water shortage
14 Sep 2008 12:18:45 GMT
KABUL, 14 September 2008 (IRIN) - The excessive use of groundwater for a variety of purposes has significantly depleted water tables and aquifers throughout Afghanistan and if the trend is not reversed
"Osama bin Laden" cop loses Afghan job
Sun Sep 14, 2008
LONDON (Reuters) - A senior police officer who dressed up as Osama bin Laden to attend a village fair has been dismissed from his job helping to build Afghanistan's security forces.
A humanitarian initiatives and progress report of Bayat Foundation
www.bayatfoundation.org
September 2008 Recent News Afghanistan Update
Afghan artist establishes non-profit organization to sponsor widowed families
BBC reported on Monday, August 11, 2008 that Afghan singer and composer Farhad Darya has begun a charity organization to supplement the incomes of widows in Kabul. Darya's organization
New batch of Canadian mentors to begin training Afghan soldiers
The Canadian Press
KANDAHAR, Afghanistan — A larger team of Canadian Forces mentors are arriving in Afghanistan with plans to step up the training of Afghan soldiers in a variety of combat specialties, the new commander
More answers needed on Afghanistan
Toronto Star, Canada Sep 13, 2008
I think that Stephen Harper will say anything in order to get a majority. I don't believe for one minute that he will have the troops out of Afghanistan in 2011. When the time comes he will say
Pressure mounts on India to send troops to Afghanistan
Times of India, India 14 Sep 2008
NEW DELHI-India is resisting renewed pressure from the West to send its troops into Afghanistan to boost the coalition troops there. This is increasing as coalition forces are coming under severe fire
Crowd demands hunt for Qadir's assassins
www.quqnoos.com Written by Abdulwali Arian Saturday, 13 September 2008
Residents refuse to co-operate unless government finds Qadir's killers
HUNDREDS of residents have taken to the streets in the eastern province of Nangarhar to demand the killers of former vice-president Haji Abdul Qadir be brought to justice.
Pakistan’s Dangerous Double Game
Unsure of Islamabad's loyalties, U.S. forces open up a more aggressive, controversial strategy in the tribal areas.
Newsweek By Ron Moreau and Mark Hosenball Sep 13, 2008
Mullah Nasrullah, a Taliban commander, made what has become a routine trek from his guerrilla base in Afghanistan across the jagged peaks into Pakistan last month. His destination: the headquarters of his patron and supplier
Women swim Channel to aid Afghans
Sunday, 14 September 2008 BBC News - World
A group of six women have begun a charity sponsored swim across the English Channel to raise money for a maternity hospital in Afghanistan.
Police seize large amount of heroin
www.quqnoos.com Written by Abdulwali Arian Saturday, 13 September 2008
Three men arrested after police find stash of drugs in southern province
POLICE in Kandahar have seized 45kgs of raw hash, hundreds of narcotic pills and 71 bags of heroin from different parts of the southern province.
Taliban using Skype phones to dodge MI6
The Daily Mail - News By Glen Owen 13th September 2008
Taliban fighters targeting British troops in Afghanistan are using the latest ‘internet phones’ to evade detection by MI6, security sources said last night.
Food left to rot on Kabul shop shelves
www.quqnoos.com Written by Ghafoor Saboory Sunday, 14 September 2008
Kabulis urge government to clean up shops that sell out of date food
THE GOVERNMENT has failed to collect out of date food from shop shelves, Kabulis say.
Taliban urged to take part in elections
www.quqnoos.com Written by Zabiullah Jhanmal Saturday, 13 September 2008
Commission says Taliban must come forward to vote for country's president
THE election commission has asked the Taliban to take part in next year’s presidential and parliamentary elections.
Back to Top
Afghanistan: US killed civilians after false tip
By JASON STRAZIUSO, Associated Press Writer
KABUL, Afghanistan - An American bombing that killed up to 90 Afghan civilians last month was based on false information provided by a rival tribe and did not kill a single Taliban fighter, the president's spokesman said Sunday.
The claim contradicted a U.S. contention that the Aug. 22 raid on the western village of Azizabad killed up to 35 Taliban fighters.
"There was total misinformation fed to the coalition forces," Humayun Hamidzada, the spokesman for President Hamid Karzai, told The Associated Press.
Afghan police arrested three suspects accused of giving the U.S. military false intelligence that led to the bombardment, the Interior Ministry has said.
An Afghan government commission found that up to 90 civilians were killed, including 60 children, a finding backed by a preliminary U.N. report.
The bombing strained the U.S.-Afghan relationship but the countries remain committed allies, Hamidzada said.
The operation, conducted by U.S. Special Forces and Afghan soldiers, targeted Afghan employees of a British security firm and their family members — the reason the U.S. military recovered weapons after the battle, Hamidzada said.
The U.S. has said its forces were fired on first during a raid that targeted and killed a known militant commander named Mullah Sidiq. But villagers say their homes were targeted because of false information provided by a rival tribesman named Nader Tawakil.
An Afghan parliamentarian has said Tawakil is in the protective custody of U.S. forces. The coalition has declined to comment.
"How the information was gathered, how it was misfed, and their personal animosity led to trying to use the international forces for their own political disputes, which led to a disastrous event and caused a strain on the relationship of the Afghan government and international forces," Hamidzada said.
"Not a single Talib was killed," he added. "So it was a total disaster, and it made it even worse when there were denials, total denials."
The U.S. at first said that 30 militants and no civilians were killed. A formal military investigation found that the operation killed up to 35 militants and seven civilians.
But after video images showing at least 10 dead children and up to 40 other dead villagers surfaced last week, the U.S. said it would send a one-star general from the United States to investigate the strike.
Afghanistan's Interior Ministry said Friday three suspects had been arrested for allegedly giving false information to the American military, but it did not say who they were. Hamidzada and the Interior Ministry spokesman have also declined to say who was arrested.
A U.S. military spokeswoman did not respond to an e-mail seeking comment.
Villagers had gathered for a memorial ceremony in Azizabad to honor a tribal leader named Timor Shah, who had allegedly been killed by Tawakil, the rival tribesman, about eight months ago. Villagers said families had traveled to Azizabad for the ceremony, one of the reasons so many children were killed.
The top NATO spokesman in Afghanistan, Brig. Gen. Richard Blanchette, has said the U.S. coalition, U.N. and Afghan government would hold a joint investigation, but Hamidzada said the Afghan government would not take part.
"The Afghan government did not agree to a three-way investigation, because we have already completed two investigations," he said.
"There is no need to go around to the village and actually harass people one more time and remind them of the terrible ordeal they went through. We have the facts straight, we have all the information."
Karzai has long pleaded with international forces to reduce the number of civilians killed in operations, and now the government is studying its "status of force" agreement governing U.S. and NATO operations in the country. Afghan officials are also reviewing the use of airstrikes by international forces.
Hamidzada said Azizabad strained a relationship between friends.
"We can be critical of one particular issue but we are still partners," he said, adding there are ways of killing Taliban without hurting civilians.
"If we only rely on air raids, we know these are not accurate, we know the potential for civilian casualties is extremely high," he said. "So there has to be a combination of ground forces and the use of Afghan military forces. But you cannot just conduct operations from the air alone, because you hurt civilians."
In violence Sunday, a suicide car bomber attacked a convoy carrying Afghan doctors working for the United Nations in southern Afghanistan, killing two doctors and their driver, officials said.
The U.N. said it was trying to determine whether the bombing was an explicit attack on the world body or if the doctors were a target of opportunity.
Also in the Afghan south, a British soldier was killed in an explosion on Saturday, the Ministry of Defense said.
Elsewhere, seven children died after ordnance they were playing with exploded, and militants ambushed and killed seven police, officials said.
Back to Top
Back to Top
Six children, three UN staffers die in new Afghan violence
KABUL (AFP) - Six children were killed in a bomb explosion in Afghanistan Sunday while a suicide car bomb blew up a marked United Nations vehicle and killed two Afghan doctors and a driver, officials said.
Authorities meanwhile reported that seven policemen were dead after Taliban militants attacked a remote district centre on Saturday, the same day a British soldier was killed in a bomb blast in the troubled south.
The bloodshed comes amid growing concern over deteriorating security, seven years after a US-led invasion ended the Taliban regime, with top-level talks on rising extremist attacks due in London and Washington due in the coming days.
The children were killed when a bomb they were playing with exploded in a village in the central province of Ghazni, Andar district governor Abdul Rahim Daisiwal told AFP.
Around a dozen more children were wounded in the blast and some are in a critical condition, he said, adding it appeared the bomb had been planted and was not one left over from countries decades of war.
Some of the wounded children had been transferred to an international military base for treatment, the NATO-led force headquarters in Kabul said.
The Taliban, behind a wave of unrest, denied involvement in the bomb blast.
But the insurgents did claim responsibility for a suicide car bombing that ripped through the southeastern town of Spin Boldak, hitting a vehicle of UN staff on a mission to monitor efforts to vaccinate children against polio.
Afghan doctors Mamoon Tahiri and Shamsulhaque Kakar were killed outright in the explosion, the Afghan health ministry said in a statement. A driver died in hospital from his injuries, it said.
The doctors were under contract to the World Health Organisation's polio campaign, the UN special representative in Afghanistan, Kai Eide, said.
Afghan officials said between 15 and 18 other people, most of them civilians, were wounded in the blast which struck a UN-marked car as it drove through a market in Spin Boldak on the Pakistan border.
"This attack was on innocent civilians working only for the people of Afghanistan, and is beyond comprehension," Eide said.
Health Minister Amin Fatimie condemned the "very horrible incident" in a statement that called on parties in the Afghan conflict to respect the impartiality of health workers.
Afghans receive health care without discrimination but health ministry "staff and clinics are targeted by opposition," Fatimie said in a statement.
"Doctors are kidnapped and killed. This time, unfortunately, suicide attack has taken lives of two doctors and one driver."
Separately, three policemen wounded in a Taliban attack on a district centre on Saturday died, taking the toll from the incident to seven, Ghazni province deputy police chief Mohammad Zaman said.
Another two policemen were missing, he said. A Taliban spokesman, Zabihullah Mujahid, said his group was holding the men and was "deciding on their fate."
A British soldier was also killed on Saturday after being caught in an explosion in Helmand province, the Ministry of Defence in London said. The province is a Taliban stronghold.
And in another incident blamed on the Taliban, an Afghan interpreter working for the US military was shot dead as he stepped out of his home Sunday, police said.
President Hamid Karzai is due to meet US President George W. Bush in Washington on September 26 for talks to include security issues, the White House announced this week.
Pakistan's new president, Asif Ali Zardari, is to discuss the conflict with Taliban and Al-Qaeda militants on his side of the border with British leaders in the coming days.
Back to Top
Back to Top
British army suffers third casualty in a week in Afghanistan: MoD
Sun Sep 14, 5:57 AM ET
LONDON (AFP) - A British soldier has been killed in an explosion in southern Afghanistan, becoming the third British casualty there in a week, the Ministry of Defence said on Sunday.
The serviceman, from 2nd Battalion, the Parachute Regiment, was killed while on a routine patrol near Kajaki in the restive Helmand province on Saturday.
He was not immediately named, but his next of kin have been informed.
He is the second soldier from the regiment to die in Afghanistan in the space of 48 hours, after Private Jason Lee Rawstron, 23, was killed in a firefight with Taliban extremists in Helmand on Friday.
Gaz O'Donnell, a 40-year-old father of four, was killed in Afghanistan on Wednesday as he tried to defuse an explosive device set by the Taliban.
The deaths bring to 120 the number of British soldiers who have died in Afghanistan since the US-led invasion in late 2001 that ousted the Taliban from power in Kabul.
Of these, 93 were killed as a result of hostile action, while the other 27 died either as a result of illness, non-combat injuries or accidents, or have yet to be assigned an official cause of death.
Britain has approximately 7,800 soldiers in Afghanistan, most of them in Helmand Province, where the Taliban has mounted a resurgence over the past 12 months.
The figure is to rise to just over 8,000 by early 2009.
Back to Top
Back to Top
Two Afghan UN doctors killed in suicide bombing: police
Sun Sep 14, 3:11 AM ET
KANDAHAR, Afghanistan (AFP) - Two Afghan doctors working for the United Nations were killed in a suicide car-bomb attack on their vehicle in southeastern Afghanistan Sunday, police said.
The explosion was near the town of Spin Boldak on the border with Pakistan, Kandahar province police chief Mutiullah Khan Qatah told AFP.
"The explosion killed two UN workers," he said, adding they were doctors.
Three Afghan government officials and a dozen civilians were hurt in the attack, he said, correcting earlier information that another two UN workers had been wounded.
The United Nations confirmed there had been an attack involving two vehicles in the area but it did not immediately have information.
The border police commander in Spin Boldak, General Abdul Raziq, said the blast was caused by a suicide car bomb.
There was no immediate claim of responsibility. Taliban insurgents are active in the area and have carried out a wave of suicide attacks as part of a campaign against the Western-backed government and its allies.
A man who saw the attack said the bomb had been powerful.
"It was a suicide car bomb attack which struck the UN vehicle. It was a very strong blast," the witness, who gave his name as Rahmatullah, told AFP.
Back to Top
Back to Top
Factbox - Security developments in Afghanistan, 14 Sep 2008
Sept 14 (Reuters) - Following are security developments in Afghanistan at 1130 GMT on Sunday:
*denotes new or updated item
KANDAHAR - A suicide car bomber killed two local doctors in an attack on a United Nations convoy in the town of Spin Boldak near the Pakistan border, a provincial official said.
GHAZNI - Taliban militants killed seven Afghan police officers and kidnapped two others in an ambush in the Zana Khan district of Ghazni province on Saturday, an intelligence officer in the province said.
KHOST - U.S.-led coalition and Afghan troops killed several militants loyal to veteran Taliban commander Jalaluddin Haqqani during air strikes in the eastern province of Khost, a U.S. military statement said.
HELMAND - A British soldier was killed in an explosion while on patrol in southern Helmand province on Saturday, the British Defence Ministry said.
Back to Top
Back to Top
Moscow eyes Afghanistan in fear
By Dmitry Shlapentokh Asia Times Online / September 13, 2008
With Russia once again in the global arena, observers are focusing on its "conflict" with the West, namely its offensive in Georgia and its recognition of the breakaway Georgian states of South Ossetia and Abkhazia.
Certainly, Moscow sees Georgia as an American proxy and resents the intrusion into its backyard, as well as the encroachment of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO).
Russia has other regional concerns, though. Its decision to conduct military maneuvers with Kazakhstan went largely unreported, yet this demonstrates Moscow's increasing worries over a possible threat from the east - Afghanistan. And while Russia is convinced it can withstand considerable pressure from the West, this is not the case with the danger posed by Afghanistan.
When the Taliban took power in 1996, they evoked much apprehension among Russian leaders, including General Alexander Lebed, the strongman who many had regarded as the most likely successor to president Boris Yeltsin.
As it turned out, it was the newly elected Vladimir Putin who in 2001 acquiesced to the US's invasion of Afghanistan and ouster of the Taliban, as well as to the placement of US bases in Central Asia
This was not just to please the George W Bush administration, but because of the belief that the US could play a large role in erecting a protective shield around the Taliban and other Islamic extremists.
Russia's relationship with the West, particularly the US, has since deteriorated, reaching, as some pundits claim, the levels of a new cold war. But Moscow's fear of Islamists has not diminished and corresponds with the ongoing general tension between Moscow and Russia's growing number of Muslims.
Putin was able to "Chechenize" the conflict in Chechnya by providing the Muslim-dominated region virtual independence from Russia, including lavish subsidies, which look almost like tributes. As president, separatist religious leader Akhmad Kadyrov was able to attract a considerable number of nationalists - including former members of the resistance - to his side; and the major Russian military operations in Chechnya were over.
Still, the end of the marginalization of the nationalists led to the spread of jihadis, who in a way reinterpreted the Marxist slogan "workers of the world unite" into a call for Muslims of all countries and ethnicities to form a collective front against the perceived enemies of Islam.
They spread their operations from Chechnya into the northern Caucasus and beyond. While Russia was busy in the war with Georgia, the authorities proclaimed they had discovered a jihadi group, "Bulgarian Jamaat" in Bashkiria, in the heartland. Muslim-dominated Bashkiria had previously not been known to have harbored extremists.
Troubles were also recorded in nearby Tatarastan, where locals demanded the creation of a monument to commemorate the Tatars who defended Kazan, the Tatarastan capital, from Russian troops in 1552.
Russian authorities believe al-Qaeda wanted to take advantage of the conflict between Georgia and Russia and engage in acts of terror and sabotage. Taliban successes - and especially victory - would definitely aggravate the situation.
It is not just the fear of terrorist attacks that concerns Russian authorities. The economic implications of a Taliban victory are clearly on their minds. A Taliban success could easily destabilize Central Asia, from which Russian receives a considerable volume of gas for resale to Europe.
As a result, while Russia's relationship with NATO declined steadily through most of Putin's tenure, recently it has cooperated with NATO with regard to Afghanistan - Russia has agreed to provide a corridor for goods that the alliance sends to Afghanistan.
This arrangement still stands, but Moscow recently sent a message to NATO that it could close the corridor whenever it wants. Officially, the explanation is that NATO has continued to press for the admission of Georgia and the US has engaged in the re-armament of the Georgian army.
There might be another reason: the Russians might have come to the conclusion that the corridor will make no difference to the ultimate fate of the Afghan regime of President Hamid Karzai.
The Russians bitterly remember their losing fight in the country in the 1980s, which came despite their vast troop numbers. The Kremlin is preparing for the worst, including strengthening military cooperation with Central Asia states.
It is in this context that Russia plans military maneuvers with Kazakhstan.
After the Georgian-Russian war, Russia became increasingly alienated from Central Asian states, many of which are concerned that Russia will engage in the same policy in their domains.
Now, with the possibility of a collapsing Karzai government and the marginalization of the American Middle Eastern empire, the Central Asian elite could once again look to Russia as the only viable protector against the possible "Talibanization" of their region.
Dmitry Shlapentokh, PhD, is associate professor of history, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, Indiana University South Bend. He is author of East Against West: The First Encounter - The Life of Themistocles, 2005.
Back to Top
Back to Top
Defense Contracts Foretell Military Buildup in Afghanistan
By Walter Pincus Washington Post Staff Writer Sunday, September 14, 2008; Page A23
The Defense Department is seeking private contractors to carry out a variety of tasks -- such as clearing land mines, building detention facilities and providing fuel -- to assist U.S. forces in Afghanistan, which are set to grow following President Bush's announcement last week that he will expand military operations there.
This month, the Pentagon issued a proposal seeking civilian contractors to help clear land mines in Afghanistan, including the outer areas of Bagram air base, where new construction is underway. A $25 million contract to build about 14 miles of roads inside the Bagram complex will be awarded later this month. The roads are to "ease traffic flow" and "provide diversions for construction traffic" on the expanding base, according to the published solicitation.
Last week, the Defense Department put out a contract proposal seeking firms that could supply airborne surveillance in Afghanistan with the capability of Constant Hawk, a system now deployed in Iraq. From a single-engine aircraft, Constant Hawk's sensors record and archive data from an area over time in order to capture events such as exploding roadside bombs. Civilian analysts are also being sought to review the recorded incidents and identify perpetrators.
"The military is stretched very thin, and to keep low the deployments numbers, there is a tendency to go to contractors who have played a huge part in Iraq," said Rep. David E. Price (D-N.C.), who as a member of the House Appropriations Committee has sponsored legislation limiting contracts in the intelligence field.
Bush announced on Tuesday that over the new few months, he will send nearly 5,000 additional troops to Afghanistan, which he characterized as an increasingly important front in the battle against extremism. Recent Pentagon contracts provide a picture of what the expanded U.S. presence may be called upon to accomplish in that country.
Some contractors are needed because the military lacks particular equipment or personnel. On Monday, U.S. Central Command said it would be advertising for a contractor who could provide 22 medium- and heavy-lift helicopters to transport passengers and cargo in Afghanistan and Iraq. In his Wednesday appearance before the House Armed Services Committee, Adm. Michael Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said in discussing Afghanistan, "Helicopters is the biggest shortfall we have, and it is very clearly supportive of the [intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance] effort in addition to the attack effort, as well."
Another Army contract, posted this month, calls for a firm to process, clean, repair and provide secure storage for 4,600 incoming vehicles ticketed for the Afghan National Police. The current contractor is storing 1,200 vehicles. But a flood of new ones, expected over the next year, will arrive at a rate of 300 or more a month, including 3,600 light tactical vehicles, 600 Humvees and 100 Humvee ambulances, according to the notice.
Some larger contracts give an indication of how long the U.S. military might intend to remain in Afghanistan. For example, on Aug. 1, the Army Corps of Engineers announced that Prime Projects International, a firm based in Dubai, United Arab Emirates, had won a $50 million contract to design and build a prison complex at Bagram to hold 1,000 high- and low-risk detainees. The complex is not expected to be completed before October 2009.
Bagram has become a central location for holding detainees picked up in Afghanistan and Pakistan. Similar to its activities in Iraq, the U.S. military has begun hiring intelligence contractors, many with military experience, to screen those captured to determine whether they should be held as enemy combatants. This month, the military advertised for an "Islamic religious specialist" to support "counterinsurgency and information operations" in the Bagram prison.
That person's job would be to "deliver Islamic religious services for enemy combatants detained" with the facility and also "act as a linguist/interpreter in emergency situations," according to the statement of work attached to the contract solicitation.
Back to Top
Back to Top
$200 Million Needed To Power Kabul For Another Six Months
The Ottawa Citizen September 13, 2008
No wonder Afghans are getting frustrated with the Karzai government.
Ismail Khan, Karzai's minister responsible for water and power has asked the government for $207 million (U.S.) to provide extra fuel for Kabul city’s generators. He sent the budget request to the cabinet for approval on the weekend. That money will pay for the 1.8 million litres of diesel fuel needed to run Kabul’s generators for six months.
Electrical power is a precious commodity in many places but especially so in Afghanistan. When I was in Kabul last year I interviewed a hotel owner who told me the guy who supplies electricity to Kabul was more important to him than President Karzai. To deal with the numerous blackouts, the hotel was also equipped with its own generator system.
This article, written by Ghafoor Saboory of the Afghan news agency Quqnoos.com, further outlines the ongoing problems with Kabul’s electricity situation:
“One kilowatt of thermal electric energy costs Afg7.50 - more than three times the cost of hydro-electric power.
The minister (Ismail Khan) blamed the lack of water and the delay in a power agreement with neighbouring Uzbekistan on the lack of electricity in the capital and for his reliance on diesel generators.
One Kabuli asked why Khan had spent millions of dollars on the generators but had failed to use them regularly.
Khan came under fire from Kabulis earlier this week after he announced plans to dish out eight hours of electricity per day to 70% of Kabul homes during Ramadan, a promise many said he broke three days into the holy month.
The ministry says there are enough generators to power the whole of Kabul but that there is not enough fuel to run them with.”
And if that isn’t challenging enough for Kabul residents, new reports from Afghanistan point out that fighting between insurgents and Afghan government forces has been going on 45 kilometres from the city. Both the Taliban and the Afghan government are claiming victory in the battle in Saydabad district.
Back to Top
Back to Top
Conor Foley v Lauryn Oates
What should we do in Afghanistan?
Take Two guardian.co.uk, Sunday September 14 2008
Conor Foley to Lauryn Oates
The recent call by the Afghan government for a "re-negotiation" of agreements regulating the presence of international troops in Afghanistan after the killing of up to 90 civilians in US-led air strikes is the latest sign of a broader failure of western strategy.
We have both worked in Afghanistan and probably share the same analysis of what went wrong: the lack of a credible international peacekeeping force at the beginning, the co-option of warlords and gangsters into the state apparatus, the diversion of international attention by the US invasion of Iraq and the counter-productive nature of its blatantly illegal "war on terror". The question now is what to do next and I can only see two options.
The first option is to continue with the current strategy of hoping that a combination of military force and bribery can defeat the anti-government insurgency. The second is for negotiations leading to a broader-based government in Afghanistan, underwritten by regional agreements with Iran and Pakistan, and appropriate guarantees from the international community.
President Karzai has already offered the Taliban a place in government if they end their military campaign and accept the constitution. They continue to insist that the withdrawal of western troops is a prerequisite for negotiations.
We know that there are deep splits both within the ranks of the insurgency and, of course, within the government itself. Last year Karzai expelled Michael Semple and Mervyn Patterson, two of the international community's most experienced diplomats, for allegedly opening a line of communication to the insurgents. Humanitarian aid organisations can now only operate in many areas with the Taliban's tacit approval.
A negotiated settlement will neither be pleasant nor easy, but I do not see any other alternatives. If you have got any I would love to hear them.
Lauryn Oates to Conor Foley
While I believe we both share a genuine concern about the prospects for peace in Afghanistan, we diverge over the minimum principles that must form the parameters for dealing with the Taliban.
For starters, the Taliban are a misogynist band of illiterate, xenophobic thugs. They legalised and encouraged stoning women to death as punishment for prostitution or adultery. They massacred Hazaras. They took authoritarianism to new levels, making the Spanish inquisition look like a walk in the park. Even attempting to meet the basic needs of their subjects was far down on their list of priorities, somewhere well below banning images of living things and outlawing musical instruments.
There is a stark difference between recognising the sovereignty of an elected government, and condoning behaviour from an illegal armed group which violates nearly every single article of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Karzai's government is indeed corrupt and deeply flawed. But it is also elected. And while Afghan women and girls continue to live with a plethora of problems rooted in patriarchal traditions and insecurity, there are also millions of girls in schools, where once the only girls' classrooms were clandestine home schools.
That's a start, and it's one that must be given more of a chance before negotiating with the likes of the Taliban. This is not Iraq. There is a foundation here to build upon, and that's another point on which we diverge. You cite a failure of "western strategy". Part of that strategy, which is hardly only "western" is the Afghanistan Compact, deriving from the initial Bonn Agreement, and it has led to vast improvements in development and to a democratically elected government.
Power-sharing of any kind with the Taliban is a slippery slope, I have heard little mention of any guarantees of women's rights. They tend to be the very first thing negotiated out. Perhaps more importantly, there is little evidence that Afghans are prepared to tolerate the medieval governance methods of the Taliban again. Who are we to contribute to installing an unpopular extremist militia of fascists in a country screaming for democracy?
It's time to stop romanticising the idea that what the Taliban stand for is even remotely acceptable to Afghans, especially to women, and to call for more from Nato, not less. Afterall, would you (or your wife or sister) be fine with having some Taliban seats in your House of Commons?
Conor to Lauryn
Since the Taliban have murdered several of my friends, kidnapped others, bombed my organisation's office and narrowly missed killing me, I am hardly likely to romanticise what they stand for. This is not a contest for who dislikes them most!
It is not me that has offered them a place in the government. A year ago President Karzai said he wanted to meet Mullah Omar and Gulbuddin Hekmatya for face-to-face talks and that "If a group of Taliban or a number of Taliban come to me and say, 'President, we want a department in this or in that ministry or we want a position as deputy minister ... and we don't want to fight any more ...' If there will be a demand and a request like that to me, I will accept it because I want conflicts and fighting to end in Afghanistan." The main opposition have also called for political talks and the Afghan parliament has already voted to give Hekmatya an amnesty.
The Taliban responded to Karzai's offer by saying that they would not even begin to negotiate while foreign troops remain in the country and until they have some guarantees about the international community's intentions. A Taliban spokesperson stated: "On the one hand, America has put our leader's name on a wanted persons list and is calling us terrorists; and on the other hand, Karzai is talking about peace talks. It's a joke."
We know that the anti-government insurgency is not a homogenous grouping and that the government is also deeply split. This creates a number of challenges, but also opportunities, for the international community.
The failure of western strategy that I referred to dates back to the period immediately after the fall of the Taliban and encompasses a range of mistakes from the decision to limit the size of the International Security Assistance Force (Isaf), to the initial US reluctance to become involved in nation-building, to the demonisation of Iran and the indulgence of Pakistan's military dictatorship. We warned at the time of the dangers of Pashtun alienation and the carte blanche being given to the Northern Alliance. You can read a briefing I wrote here five years ago and many articles since. I take no pleasure in being proved right in retrospect.
But my previous question you is the same. Do you see an alternative to the two options that I outlined, and if not, which one of them would you prefer?
Incidentally, you asked how I would feel about people whose political views I despised being elected to the British House of Commons. But surely that is what democracy is all about.
Lauryn to Conor
Firstly, let me clarify that conceding power to a plague of bloodthirsty, heavily-armed fanatics and criminals is not "what democracy is all about". A power-sharing agreement whereby the Taliban find themselves in charge of a ministry, a few provinces, or a government without being elected into power, is hardly progress. Should the Taliban drop their weapons, form an unarmed political group, come up with an enticing platform, and be voted into government by male and female voters in free and fair elections, then their power would be legitimate. In the meantime, the consequences of your vaguely plotted out Option 2 are fairly predictable, and precisely the opposite of a solution.
What makes you believe the Taliban will stick to their promises? That all they want is to see foreign troops withdrawn and then they will happily accept the constitution, women in parliament, girls in school, and the presence of foreign organizations building roads and health clinics – the foreign organisations where your friends and mine who were murdered were working? As the International Crisis Group rightly points out, while "negotiations are credible and acceptable if they help resolve conflict and save lives, that will not be the case in Afghanistan's current environment."
The notion that there are only two options is utterly false. Your second option contains the typically vague parameters such as "a broader-based government" (meaning with unelected representation from the loathed Taliban?), "underwritten by regional agreements with Iran and Pakistan" (the same Pakistan that helped arm the Taliban to take over Afghanistan in the first place? The same Iran that is currently a theocracy?), and "appropriate guarantees from the international community" (even if we ignore the Taliban's characteristic disregard for what the international community thinks or wants, what exactly are the mechanisms here? How will they be enforced?)
There are other options. These include robustly addressing Pakistan's various roles in fuelling this conflict, countering the Taliban's propaganda machine, protecting communities where the Taliban forcibly recruit or the ones where they pay villagers to murder foreigners or threaten them from accepting western aid, fighting corruption in the government, supporting demobilisation and amnesty programmes for ex-insurgents, getting more Nato troops into southern Afghanistan immediately, and continuing to implement all goals of the Afghanistan Compact. In particular, alleviating poverty and fighting onwards with micro-credit schemes, building schools, opening universities and supporting farmers will snuff out some of root causes of violence in Afghanistan. This is the only course – it's a three-steps-forward, one-step-back sort of progress, but it must be given a chance.
Finally, a question back to you: why is "war on terror" in parentheses but not the ludicrous term "anti-government insurgency"? What this war is really about, which you won't acknowledge, is a fascist war against women, an illegal war against international aid in the form of medicine, food, roads, and textbooks, and a primitive but a well-financed religious war against modernity itself. It's a war worth fighting, and particularly when Afghans are asking us to do so.
Conor to Lauryn
I am not sure why you find the term "anti-government insurgents" ludicrous – it is a fairly standard one used by the UN, Nato, the Afghan Human Rights Commission and the government itself. The power-sharing deal to which you are so opposed also comes from Afghanistan's democratically-elected president.
You started by arguing that we should "recognise the sovereignty of an elected government", but now seem to be denying its right to conclude a peace agreement. The thought of a Taliban minister in charge of education or social affairs turns my stomach, but I have as much right to tell Afghans how to run their own country as I have to tell Canadians how to administer Quebec.
The difference, of course, is that the government of Afghanistan cannot survive without international military backing and the problem, which even the International Crisis Group (ICG) concedes, is that it is currently offering negotiations from a position of weakness. Now that is a terrible indictment of the international community and the US government in particular. Having ousted the Taliban at the end of 2001, President Bush actively opposed expanding Isaf or involving US forces in nation-building. Both policies were subsequently reversed, but only after the seeds of the current insurgency had been sown.
The number of international troops in Afghanistan has scaled up rapidly in the last few years. I agree that these should be increased further. The whole country needs to be secured and it was the failure to do this from the beginning that created the conditions for the Taliban's subsequent rise.
What you are proposing is a continuation of the current strategy – although I would be interested to learn what you mean by a "more robust approach" to Pakistan, given that everything short of invasion has been tried. The alternative is peace talks and I cannot predict their outcome since that would be for the parties themselves to decide.
What the international community can do is support that process. As the ICG acknowledges, the immovable object at the moment is the attitude of the current US government, but that will change in November and presidential elections are also scheduled next year in Afghanistan. The various candidates will probably campaign on a "peace talks" platform because that is what most Afghan people appear to want.
A new US government could help – or at least stop hindering – the process, by closing Guantanamo Bay, and other facilities, through which so many Afghans have been ghosted and in which many have been tortured. A recognition that the "military victories" of offensive operations are being more than offset by the damage caused to "hearts and minds" would also be welcome. Sidelining Iran has not been helpful and listening to the elected government of Pakistan – rather than its shadowy military leaders – would be useful.
Lauryn to Conor
The elected Afghan government has indeed reached out to the Taliban – and the Taliban wholly rejected the overture, except under conditions which the government could only reject. That strategy has been attempted more than once before; it's time to move on. Your proposal failed with the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people in the seven long years between 1994 and 2001, when the UN and the "international community" wasted everyone's time brokering truces that never lasted, all in aid of bringing the "warring factions" to the table around a negotiated solution. If there is any lesson at all in any of this, it is that talking truce with fascists is a failed idea.
I am by no means proposing a continuation of the current strategy, as you claim. I have indicated several avenues for action in addition to Nato's continuing (and hopefully, expanding) presence.
As for launching a more robust approach to Pakistan, I would start by pointing out the ongoing problem of the porous border between Afghanistan and Pakistan. Wearing a burqa, I once walked right across the border with a nary a soul checking my identification. More importantly, there is the largely unaddressed complicity of former and current Pakistani ISI agents in supporting the Taliban, and the continued operation of Taliban training camps in Pakistan. Indeed, many Afghan friends have told me they believe that Nato should also be in Pakistan.
There are also other issues which demand long-term solutions, such as addressing the root causes of militant Islamic radicalism in Pakistan, by reforming their education system, alleviating poverty and restricting the activities of radical groups. Why a robust strategy? The answer can be found in the death tolls inside both Afghanistan and Pakistan: Pakistan is one of the largest sources of terrorist attacks in the world, with terrorism-caused deaths there doubled during 2006-2007.
Your letters suggest that you condemn the Taliban for their atrocities committed against Afghans and foreigners alike, yet you imply that you are willing to tolerate a course of action that would potentially see them once again governing the Afghan people.
Let's be frank here and imagine what a Talibanised government would look like. If you need some visual stimulation, you can watch tapes of the Taliban shooting a woman in the head, carrying out public hangings with cranes, slitting a man's throat, or beating a woman on the streets.
You say you that you have no right to tell Afghans how to run their country, yet you are advocating a position which poses some very real threats to prospects for peace and human rights in their country. I hope you are prepared to take responsibility for that position, should the time come. I also hope you are indeed serious when you say you could tolerate Taliban members in your own parliament. Because, if not, your argument ultimately comes down to being one seeped in cultural relativism and isolationism – leaving the citizens of other countries to their own devices in the face of threats from a violent, extremist, undemocratic force with a record for committing crimes against humanity.
In the same vein, the term "anti-government insurgents" is ludicrous in the specific context of the failed "power-sharing" approach that you say should be revived and imposed upon the Afghan people with the collusion of Iran and Pakistan, with the "international community" serving as some sort of head waiter to the proceedings. The ludicrousness stems from deftly avoiding the ahistorical and illogical core of your proposal. It obscures what the Taliban really are, and what they really want. They want to plunge Afghanistan back into a nightmarish seventh century dystopia, and to slaughter everyone who has stood in the way of their savage vision these past seven years.
If your primary concern were really with Afghanistan's sovereign and democratic rights, it would follow that sharing power with the Taliban would be most peacefully and effectively achieved by seeing to it that they put the gun down and campaign for public office at elections like everyone else.
Conor to Lauryn
As this is my final letter I would like to sketch out what I think could positively be done by the international community to help Afghanistan. Hopefully we will agree on at least some of the points.
First of all, I agree, again, on the need for more troops on the ground. The over-reliance on airstrikes is one of the main reason for the spike in civilian casualties. The US and Nato reviewed their rules of engagement over a year ago, after a similar tragedy to the one that we have just witnessed in Azizabad, and the civilian death toll dropped for six months until the arrival of new American commanders. Personally I support the government of Afghanistan in their calls for a re-negotiation of the international military mandate.
Secondly, I think we agree that this war is not going to be won by purely military means. The strategy of pouring aid into areas that are not under effective government control has been expensive and unsuccessful. The recent massive operation at the Kajaki dam, for example, just gives the Taliban another target to attack. The slower and less glamorous task is to increase the capacity of Afghanistan's own police and army and to establish a functioning judicial system capable of holding its national institutions to account. The International Criminal Court could play a useful role here, in tackling some of the "untouchables", although that would require a big change in attitude by the US government.
Thirdly, the UN mission needs to continue scaling up its own presence. The "light footprint" approach was a failure and it would have been better to have given it executive powers, from the beginning, drawing on the lessons from Bosnia, East Timor and Sierra Leone. As you say, the Taliban has rejected proposals for talks, except under unacceptable conditions, but I think it is likely that some elements within the insurgency (I use this term entirely neutrally) may one day sign up for talks. We disagree on what approach to take to this scenario, but the UN has had some successes transitioning countries through peace processes. I have worked in many countries which are better places as a result.
We also disagree about what approach to take to Pakistan – at least if you agree with those who are calling for Nato attacks inside the country. I do agree with the points you make about the porous border and the probable support that the ISI is providing to the insurgents (more to Hekmatyar than Mullah Omar, I would guess). However, Pakistan now has a democratic government and we must respect its sovereignty. We have a common interest in working with the people of Pakistan to counter the influence of the Taliban in their own country, but we cannot impose things on them from the outside.
Finally, we agree that the international community should not abandon Afghanistan again, as it did in the 1990s, when the result was anarchy and civil war. A "troops out" position, in the absence of a political settlement, would be an utter disaster and could well lead to the type of scenario that you so graphically describe.
Stay safe and best wishes for the future,
Lauryn to Conor
I am glad we both agree that an infusion of Isaf troops is urgently needed. I also believe that furthering the rule of law needs to be at the top of the list and that war crimes need to be prosecuted regardless of whether the perpetrators are in the government or not. I also firmly support professionalising and growing the police force, and I am deeply concerned that it is the US military who are training the police for the most part, rather than police training police. This will result in paramilitaries rather than community protectors which is what Afghan communities need after decades of not being able to trust the police.
But development projects, large and small, are equally important. They will always be at risk. And they will always serve as critical investments into infrastructure and poverty alleviation. Poverty, being part of what draws the desperate and disfranchised to the Taliban, cannot afford to be left until security is achieved because security and development are fundamentally linked – something you probably also saw in the other societies recovering from conflict where you've spent time.
All of this is about working away at the Afghanistan Compact goals, but this demands a big attitude shift by those animated by such pessimism and dreariness that they can see no way forward in Afghanistan without accommodating the likes of the Taliban.
These are important discussions, but I think we need to wrap up by getting back to your central argument, which is that the "only alternative" to Afghanistan's agony is to bring the Taliban back into power by inviting it to some sort of banquet hosted by Pakistan and Iran, with the "international community" as the foot waiters, after the Taliban presumably kiss and make-up with Karzai and the countless Afghan "collaborators" and "puppets" they had vowed to annihilate. You may not like the way I word it, but this is the ugly side of your second, favoured option outlined in your first letter. The Taliban are clear: no negotiations without a withdrawal of Nato troops; and you are clear that you favour negotiations: "I do not see any other alternatives".
And I will also return to my counter argument that it is preposterous to conclude that there are only two possible options. Indeed, many action points well beyond your Option 1, the status quo, have been fleshed out even in our own brief correspondence. No one has ever said that military means alone will win the war.
I'll close with one last bit of evidence for the ahistorical folly of Taliban-appeasing which comes in your presumption that "some elements" of the Taliban "may one day sign up for talks." The evidence is twofold. The first is that more than 50,000 "insurgents" have already been reconciled with the Afghan government. They surrendered and participated in rehabilitation and reintegration programs under the UN – this has been going on for years. The second is that if there are elements of the remaining hardcore Taliban leadership that may one day "sign up for talks," it will only be because the alternative they face is death, either at the hands of Afghan or Isaf troops.
In the meantime, the only thing to negotiate with the Taliban is their surrender. Their surrender would be a triumph for human rights, for internationalism and for progress; and as a believer in these things, I know which side I'm on.
Back to Top
Back to Top
Alleged U.S. spy killed in Pakistan's tribal region
www.chinaview.cn 2008-09-14
ISLAMABAD, Sept. 14 (Xinhua) -- An Afghan man accused of spying for the United States was killed by militants in Pakistan's tribal region of North Waziristan, according to local press reports Sunday.
The private NNI news agency quoted witnesses as saying that the bullet-ridden body of Gul Rahim Shah was found in North Waziristan, and it was believed to be a hideout for al Qaeda and the Taliban.
A note in the native Pashto language was found near the body of the slain man, said that he was spying for the United States and Afghanistan.
The note warned that anyone spying for the U.S. or Afghanistan would face the same situation.
Militants are blamed for attacking people suspected of spying for the U.S. or Pakistani authorities in the region, which borders Afghanistan, and where al Qaeda- and Taliban-linked militants operate.
Scores of people, including Afghan refugees and Pakistani tribesmen and clerics, have been killed in such attacks in the region in recent years.
Pakistan has deployed some 90,000 troops to its regions bordering Afghanistan, including North Waziristan, to track down militants.
But U.S. and Afghan officials claimed that militants still have bases in the Pakistani territory from where they orchestrate attacks inside Afghanistan.
The U.S. has intensified missile strikes from drones which have created tension between the two sides.
Editor: An
Back to Top
Back to Top
AFGHANISTAN: Groundwater overuse could cause severe water shortage
14 Sep 2008 12:18:45 GMT
KABUL, 14 September 2008 (IRIN) - The excessive use of groundwater for a variety of purposes has significantly depleted water tables and aquifers throughout Afghanistan and if the trend is not reversed soon the country will face a severe shortage of drinking water, the Ministry of Water and Energy said.
Recurrent droughts, low precipitation and poor water management have exacerbated the country's water crisis, ministry officials said.
"Our assessments indicate that due to several factors, mostly drought and excessive use, about 50 percent of groundwater sources have been lost in the past several years," Sultan Mahmood Mahmoodi, general director of the water management department at the Ministry of Water and Energy (MWE), told IRIN in Kabul.
Almost 70 percent of the country's estimated 26.6 million people are dependent on agriculture, according to the Ministry of Agriculture, Irrigation and Livestock (MAIL). Limited access to surface water has prompted many farmers, mostly in the drought-stricken south and north, to increasingly use groundwater to irrigate agricultural land or dig deep wells.
Deepening wells
"Most farmers dig deep wells and use pumps to irrigate land," Naeem Tokhi, a hydrogeology expert at the Ministry of Mines and Industries (MMI), said.
As groundwater depletes the search for it intensifies.
"Every two months or so we dig wells deeper in order to provide adequate water for our land," Obaidullah, a farmer in the southern province of Kandahar, said.
Tokhi said over the past few years levels of groundwater had gone down 4-10 metres in different parts of the country.
Shortage of drinking water
The UN Children's Fund (UNICEF) estimates that only about 23 percent of households in Afghanistan have access to drinking water (43 percent in urban areas and 18 percent in rural).
According to the MWE, the majority of Afghans use groundwater as their prime and often only source of drinking water. So as groundwater declines, the number of people with access to drinking water declines. The very poor suffer the most as they do not have the means to dig deep wells.
In a bid to ensure people's access to drinking water and prevent water-related displacement, the Ministry of Rural Rehabilitation and Development (MRRD) has dug hundreds of deep wells across the country.
The MRRD's deep wells have helped tackle the immediate drinking water problem but have created a new burden for children who spend hours collecting water for their families, often at the cost of their education.
Environmental concerns
The excessive use of groundwater and mushrooming deep wells also have an adverse impact on the quality and quantity of water, experts say.
"Groundwater is consumed and polluted in several ways," said Mahmoodi of MWE, adding that increased pollution of groundwater would have serious health and environmental implications.
"Contaminated and polluted groundwater may harm agriculture, livestock and will also pose health risks to humans," he said.
Back to Top
Back to Top
"Osama bin Laden" cop loses Afghan job
Sun Sep 14, 2008
LONDON (Reuters) - A senior police officer who dressed up as Osama bin Laden to attend a village fair has been dismissed from his job helping to build Afghanistan's security forces.
Chief Superintendent Colin Terry of the Devon and Cornwall Police dressed up as the architect of the September 11 attacks, complete with turban, Arab robes and a face mask, to attend the local charity fete last week.
He was spotted by a photographer and reported to the Independent Police Complaints Commission by his own force. Now he has also been dismissed by the Foreign Office, which oversaw his policing contract in Afghanistan.
"Chief Superintendent Colin Terry will not be returning to the EUPOL mission," a spokesman for the Foreign Office said.
EUPOL is a European Union-backed police training scheme.
Witnesses at the family fete and colleagues on the Devon and Cornwall police force were shocked when Terry was revealed to be the man behind the Osama bin Laden fancy dress.
Terry was in turn surprised by everyone's outrage.
"I am quite horrified that someone would see this negatively," he was quoted as saying in the Guardian newspaper at the time. "This is a local event that has been running for many, many years, raising money for charity."
Nearly 3,000 people were killed on September 11, 2001 when four hijacked planes crashed into the World Trade Centre in New York, the Pentagon in Washington and a field in Pennsylvania.
(Reporting by Luke Baker; Editing by )
Back to Top
Back to Top
A humanitarian initiatives and progress report of Bayat Foundation
www.bayatfoundation.org
September 2008 Recent News Afghanistan Update
Afghan artist establishes non-profit organization to sponsor widowed families
BBC reported on Monday, August 11, 2008 that Afghan singer and composer Farhad Darya has begun a charity organization to supplement the incomes of widows in Kabul. Darya's organization, called Kochah, is able to help the widows by using money generated through private donations as well as from Darya's performances.
On Kochah's news page Darya said his organization was able to help sponsor 100 widowed families in 2007 through the "Street Accounts" program which was funded by concert revenue from performances in the United States, Canada and Germany. Darya's organization has had the cooperation of the Ministry of Labor and Social Affairs as well as the Kabul Bank, which set up 20,000 available accounts for families.
Saffron could replace poppy production in rural Afghanistan
According to IRIN News, the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs said saffron could replace poppy as a lucrative cash crop in rural Afghanistan. In a story reported on August 6, 2008, IRIN reported that international aid groups and donors are helping the Afghan government establish saffron as a solid money-making crop in the Pashton Zargon District in the Herat Province.
Department of Agriculture's irrigation and livestock official Bashir Ahmad Ahmadi told IRIN, "We plan to distribute 49 tons of saffron bulbs to farmers in Herat and 11 other provinces this year." Production has soared in the last two years and officials said an additional 1,000 farmers have requested the flowers.
Canadian charity ball raises money for expectant mothers in Kabul province
In a press release dated August 11, 2008, officials from UNICEF Canada said the recent Toronto Garrison Officers Ball raised $250,000 for expectant mothers and newborns at the Khair Khana Hospital in Kabul province. Skyhawks Canadian Army footage reported the ball provided a venue for business and military leaders to come together to support the cause.
Bayat Foundation Announcements
Afghanistan's first Olympic medalist receives continuing Olympic training grant
On August 28, 2008 in Kabul the Bayat Foundation announced an Olympic training grant for continued training and related efforts to 21-year old Rohullah Nikpai, Afghanistan's first Olympic medalist who won the men's 58-kg taekwondo competition against the former world champion on August 20, 2008 in Beijing. (Sponsored by Bayat Foundation NGO Afghanistan)
A field of dreams: new Parwan Province Stadium promises hope
Situated just north of Kabul the Parwan Province is now home of a new 4 thousand square meter sports facility. In the August 6, 2008 opening ceremony Chairman Ehsan Bayat said that the people of the Parwan and surrounding provinces now have a venue for sports training and competition. The new stadium and facilities are replete with a running track, football field, basketball and volleyball courts, weight rooms and dressing rooms. The stadium illustrates the Bayat Foundation's commitment to rebuilding facilities which will create hope, opportunity and enable victories for the Afghan people. (Sponsored by Bayat Foundation NGO Afghanistan)
Back to Top
Back to Top
New batch of Canadian mentors to begin training Afghan soldiers
The Canadian Press
KANDAHAR, Afghanistan — A larger team of Canadian Forces mentors are arriving in Afghanistan with plans to step up the training of Afghan soldiers in a variety of combat specialties, the new commander said Saturday following an evening change of command ceremony.
Col. Joseph Shipley has officially assumed command of the Operational Mentor and Liaison Team (OMLT) as members of the fifth rotation of troops in Afghanistan wrap up their tour and head home.
His 250-strong sixth rotation of troops from Petawawa, Ont., will, for the first time, have complete coverage of all the Afghan army brigade's capabilities - including its artillery, engineering and reconnaissance companies, he said.
Up until now, Afghan forces have largely relied on the coalition for support in such areas.
"What we have to do is we have to take them so they're not just fighting in partnership with coalition forces but that they're doing it by themselves," he said.
"That they have the ability to sustain their own operations in the field and be able to bring in all the enablers that they need that they're relying on the coalition for right now."
It's a "significant step," he said, that won't be completed over the next six months. His rotation's job will be to "sow the seeds" for the future.
Building up the Afghan army and police is key to Canada's 2011 exit strategy.
"They're trying to grow an army while fighting a war. It's extremely difficult," Shipley said.
"I can't say how long that's going to take. It could take generations."
Outgoing OMLT commander Col. Jean-Francois Riffou said his troops made a lot of progress since they arrived in February, even though a spike in insurgent activity during the heavy spring-summer fighting season has meant more focus on combat and trying to hold their ground.
"Yes, we were fighting quite seriously through June and July (but) the building was going on back here because we always had a Kandak (battalion) in the training phase and we were delivering courses and providing professional development to those people, so we've accomplished our mission," he said.
Despite some suggestion Canadian and Afghan troops have actually lost ground in the volatile Zhari and Panjwaii areas of Kandahar over the last few months, Riffou said there must be a balance between "maintaining the fight" and "building capacity."
"We can take our (battalions) and throw them out into the fight and sure, we'd probably make a bit of headway but we wouldn't really be developing the institution," he said.
"There has to be a fine balance struck between how much do we push in the field and how much effort we put on building those leaders, building those enablers that are required so they can eventually become autonomous."
During the last rotation, he said, both the number of Canadian mentors increased as did the number of Afghan troops.
The next rotations, he added, can look forward to even more Afghan troops as a new battalion comes online in the spring. Over the next three to four months, the Afghan army will also see its equipment improved with the addition of armoured humvees and more modern weapons as part of the NATO small arms program.
Shipley added he's also having discussions with other coalition partners in the hopes they'll be able to take part in different training initiatives and take some of the burden off the Canadians.
Back to Top
Back to Top
More answers needed on Afghanistan
Toronto Star, Canada Sep 13, 2008
I think that Stephen Harper will say anything in order to get a majority. I don't believe for one minute that he will have the troops out of Afghanistan in 2011. When the time comes he will say, "There are different circumstances now, and the people have given me the power to decide on their behalf."
He lies, and he really thinks he has the right to do so. And the electorate doesn't seem to be bothered. I hope he shows his true colours before it's too late. He already has for those of us who watch politics constantly, but those who watch just around election time need to study and look out for all the innuendos and half-truths.
Therese MacDonald, Chatham
How can Stephen Harper promise to withdraw the troops from Afghanistan in 2011 when he doesn't know what the situation will be at that time? If Harper and the other coalition leaders intend to set up a friendly dictatorship before withdrawing, that's one thing. If, on the other hand, Harper thinks that by 2011 Afghanistan will be, in the words of George Bush, a functioning democracy, then John McCain's statement that the troops could be there for a hundred years is, if anything, way too optimistic.
William Bedford, Toronto
Prime Minister Stephen Harper says he will pull our troops out of Afganistan in 2011. This is totally unacceptable. Based on recent losses (96 to date) this means that about 48 more of our men or women will die. Is this what we want? Afganistan is a lost cause. We are beating a dead horse. We should pull out before Christmas this year and let the people of Afganistan settle their own problems.
John McKay, Scarborough
By indicating that we will be leaving the Afghanistan war in 2011 regardless of success, Stephen Harper has devalued the sacrifices made by our soldiers to date and put into question the sacrifices they will be asked to make in the future. If we are not there to win, then why be there at all? The Taliban now know that the NATO mission has a weak member. The Taliban now know that hitting the Canadians hard and often will be the key to success. The Taliban are there to win.
The Afghan mission is over. It is time to bring our soldiers home. Since we are not there to win, any future sacrifices made by our brave men and women will wasted. Furthermore, the Canadian people should question the judgment of our Prime Minister in using the Afghan mission on the campaign trail. How low is he prepared to go to win the election?
Alton Barkley, Trenton
Why should Canadians believe Stephen Harper's claim that he plans to withdraw troops from Afghanistan by 2011? Harper has already extended the mission twice, and has alluded to extending it a third time. And with a federal election now underway, we have another reason to question Harper's commitment to "fixed dates."
In his statement, Harper claimed that Canadians will have lost their appetite for war by 2011. But a majority of Canadians already oppose the war. Just weeks after Harper last extended Canada's mission on March 13, an Angus Reid poll showed that 58 per cent of us believed it was the wrong decision.
At current rates, thousands more Afghan civilians will be killed, and many more will be detained and tortured. Nearly 100 Canadian soldiers have been killed in combat so far. That number could more than double if we wait another three years to leave Afghanistan.
Harper may be willing to make that sacrifice, but most Canadians aren't. We need to bring our troops home now, and not in three years' time.
Sid Lacombe, Canadian Peace Alliance
It's time for all Canadians to put on our shoes and head down to the town hall meetings, the local MPs' offices and political rallies with our own clear agendas in mind. We need to demand a clearly defined mission, fashioned from no less than noble and honest purpose complete with attainable goals and objectives. This would provide our young men and women in the service with the absolute best tools available for personal protection while actively seeking a successful resolution through aggressive negotiations with all parties involved.
If we serve no other purpose than assisting the U.S. objective in building and securing their Unocal gas pipeline while the worsening conditions of the Afghan people are causing farmers to turn to growing and harvesting opium to survive, then it's time to bring our troops home.
As Canadians we need to ask for nothing less from politicians and parties asking for our support at the polling stations next month.
Jeff Leggat, Vancouver
The U.S. is intent on extending the Afghanistan conflict into Pakistan. Six cross-border strikes within the last nine days. Not just drones but American boots on Pakistan ground. All without NATO allies being informed, let alone being asked for consent.
U.S. Defence Secretary Robert Gates has a plan to seek "contributions from allies to help underwrite the $20 billion cost over five years." Planned as well is a "command reorganization (that) implies that an American officer will be in charge of the NATO and American missions for the foreseeable future."
Canadian Forces were committed to Afghanistan originally expecting to face little direct combat and to focus on reconstruction and on maintaining security. They are now engaged in a war that cannot be won and that is being unilaterally extended into Pakistan. Exiting in 2011 is a mirage.
The most useful role Canada can play is to withdraw our forces and urge the United States to negotiate power sharing among the various factions in Afghanistan, which will be the eventual outcome in any case. It would be in our tradition as peacemakers.
Joe Hueglin, Niagara Falls
Back to Top
Back to Top
Pressure mounts on India to send troops to Afghanistan
Times of India, India 14 Sep 2008
NEW DELHI-India is resisting renewed pressure from the West to send its troops into Afghanistan to boost the coalition troops there. This is increasing as coalition forces are coming under severe fire in southern Afghanistan from a resurgent Taliban most of whom are getting trained and armed in Pakistan.
India is not about to enter this particular cauldron because its troops would fan the flames in a way that no others would do. They would draw fire from Pakistanis and India would be sucked into a battle, which would have huge implications for its internal security.
Meanwhile, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh will meet Pakistan's new president, Asif Ali Zardari, in New York at the UN General Assembly. India is ready to resume dealings with Pakistan, but believes Pakistan's internal instability would be preventing it from doing so.
Indian sources also debunked any movement on the peace process front — there is no sign of any progress on either Siachen, Sir Creek or J&K — though Zardari has held out a tantalizing prospect of a peace deal with India before the UPA government goes in for elections. "There will be good news on Kashmir soon," Zardari had told journalists in Islamabad on the day he took over.
In another development, the new Nepal prime minister, Prachanda, will be in Delhi on Monday, a visit that has been clouded by the fact that he chose to go to Beijing first. Prachanda wants to review all treaties with India, but India will tell him that it doesn't want Nepal to become a staging ground for Pakistan's ISI against India. That would be at the core of India's concerns that would be expressed with the visiting leader.
Back to Top
Back to Top
Crowd demands hunt for Qadir's assassins
www.quqnoos.com Written by Abdulwali Arian Saturday, 13 September 2008
Residents refuse to co-operate unless government finds Qadir's killers
HUNDREDS of residents have taken to the streets in the eastern province of Nangarhar to demand the killers of former vice-president Haji Abdul Qadir be brought to justice.
Some protestors, who marched through the Khogaini district, warned that if the government failed to hunt down Qadir’s killers then they would stop their efforts to improve security and to keep drugs out of the province.
Qadir was a leading mujahideen commander in the province during the Soviet invasion, becoming governor of Nangarhar after Jalalabad fell to the mujahideen.
After the Taliban were ousted in 2001, Karzai appointed him Minister of Public Works and then vice-president.
He was killed in broad daylight on July 6 2002 in front of his ministry by unknown gunmen.
Some say the Taliban killed him while others say his assassination was the result of political rivalry within the government.
Back to Top
Back to Top
Pakistan’s Dangerous Double Game
Unsure of Islamabad's loyalties, U.S. forces open up a more aggressive, controversial strategy in the tribal areas.
Newsweek By Ron Moreau and Mark Hosenball Sep 13, 2008
Mullah Nasrullah, a Taliban commander, made what has become a routine trek from his guerrilla base in Afghanistan across the jagged peaks into Pakistan last month. His destination: the headquarters of his patron and supplier, the powerful insurgent leader Sirajuddin Haqqani. A genial young man in his late 20s or early 30s with a bushy black beard, Haqqani leads the bloody Taliban insurgency in eastern Afghanistan, where American casualties are highest. Interviewed by NEWSWEEK on the Pakistan-Afghanistan border, Nasrullah refused to specify the reason for his meeting with Haqqani, though it's likely he was looking for more suicide bombers, explosive vests, weapons and money to use against U.S. and NATO forces.
Once inside Pakistan, Nasrullah says, he traveled between insurgent camps. He rode in a new four-wheel-drive vehicle with a towering radio antenna fixed to the front bumper, followed by four pickup trucks filled with militants. Yet their convoy sailed through Pakistani military checkpoints. Whenever they neared one, the jihadists would hail someone named "Col. Niazi" on the radio, who would arrange their safe passage. Nasrullah believes this was a Pakistani Army officer and possibly an operative in the military's premier spy agency, Inter-Services Intelligence, or ISI. "He seems to feel invulnerable," Nasrullah says of his patron, Haqqani. "The ISI protects him."
Washington seems to agree. Combating Haqqani fighters has become one of the top priorities for American commanders in Afghanistan. But U.S. officials who would speak only on condition of anonymity when discussing sensitive matters say they have evidence that some elements of Pakistan's ISI are protecting or even helping the Haqqani network. That's helping to drive a far more aggressive U.S. strategy in the tribal areas along the Pakistan-Afghanistan border, where the Haqqanis and other Taliban groups have established a network of safe havens and training camps for their own and Al Qaeda fighters. And it's raising tensions between America and Pakistan, supposed allies in the war against terror, to levels not seen since September 11.
Senior Pakistani officers say now is not the time to move against Haqqani. They have limited forces, and are concentrating on militants like Baitullah Mehsud, another powerful Taliban leader who is the source of most of the suicide bombers deep inside Pakistan, and who may have been behind the assassination of former prime minister Benazir Bhutto. Because of their mistrust of the United States and neighboring India, the Pakistani military and the ISI may also see the Haqqani network and other Taliban forces as potential assets to gain influence inside Afghanistan. As long as they're not attacking Pakistani targets, say several Pakistan experts, the Haqqanis are not a priority.
According to the Americans, however, Pakistani inaction has allowed the Haqqanis to grow from one insurgent group among many into perhaps the most deadly threat to U.S. forces in Afghanistan. This July, top U.S. military and CIA officers confronted their Pakistani counterparts with evidence of the ISI links to Haqqani. One consequence: over the summer President George W. Bush approved new, more relaxed rules of engagement along the border. The Pentagon once required "90 percent" confidence that a "high-value target" was present before approving Predator strikes in Pakistan territory. Now U.S. officials on the ground need to have only 50 to 60 percent confidence to shoot at compounds suspected of sheltering foreign fighters, according to knowledgeable U.S. sources who would speak of sensitive matters only anonymously. The CIA declined to comment.
The new rules also allow "hot pursuit" incursions by U.S. Special Operations troops into Pakistan, a move that Bush had long avoided so as not to offend his close ally President Pervez Musharraf, who resigned last month. On Sept. 3, in the first known raid in Pakistani territory, two dozen U.S. Navy SEALs were airlifted into a cluster of huts near the village of Angor Adda, located about one mile from the Afghan border. Last week Pakistani Army chief Ashfaq Kayani furiously denied the existence of "any agreement or understanding with the Coalition Forces" allowing them to cross the border, and he said he would not permit such actions.
Relations between Pakistan and the United States took a sharp downward turn after the July meeting between Kayani and Adm. Michael Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, which one Pakistani military official described as "extremely testy." Perhaps seeking to placate the Americans, Kayani ordered a new offensive in early August in the Bajaur tribal area in northwestern Pakistan. Afterward, Kayani asked for another meeting with Mullen and other senior U.S. commanders, according to the Pakistani military source, who asked for anonymity in order to speak freely. In late August, the Pentagon responded by inviting Kayani to huddle on a U.S. aircraft carrier in the Persian Gulf with Mullen and a team that included incoming CENTCOM commander Gen. David Petraeus; Gen. David McKiernan, commander of NATO forces in Afghanistan, and Adm. Eric Olson, chief of the Special Operations Command.
At that meeting, pressed to deal with Haqqani's growing power as well as that of other militants, Kayani told the Americans that he didn't have the military capability to take on several, sizable insurgent strongholds at once. He asked Washington to provide more modern and highpowered military equipment, notably attack helicopters. But the U.S. commanders were apparently not prepared to give the Pakistani Army chief what he wanted. According to a Pakistani diplomat who asked for anonymity in order to discuss sensitive matters, the Americans told Kayani the United States now reserved the right to strike, even on the ground, against significant Qaeda and Taliban targets inside Pakistan without getting prior approval. Less than one week after the aircraft carrier meeting, the U.S. military launched the Sept. 3 operation, killing what U.S. officials say were two dozen Qaeda and Taliban fighters.
Kayani and his high command were embarrassed by the operation and became enraged, Pakistani officials say. The Pakistanis insist that the dead were almost all civilians, including women and children. "The attack was carried out with bad and faulty intelligence," says the senior military source. "It crossed an acceptable threshold and had a negative impact inside the military and on Pakistani public opinion." Despite protests, at least four more Predator attacks were carried out shortly afterward in North Waziristan against areas controlled by the Haqqani network. One attack on Sept. 8 hit a madrassa complex where Haqqani family members lived and where Qaeda and Taliban fighters frequently sheltered while moving back and forth across the border.
At least one U.S. official, who would discuss American dealings with Islamabad only on condition of anonymity, suggests that there may be some political theater at work in the Pakistani reaction. He says that the U.S. and Pakistani military have reached a "more than tacit" understanding about the new U.S. tactics, in which the Pakistani side has agreed to allow "hot pursuit" operations by American troops, provided that Pakistani authorities are allowed to maintain complete "deniability." That means the Pakistanis will be permitted to publicly criticize the United States for any such operations and assert, without fear of contradiction from Washington, that U.S. forces were acting without Pakistani approval.
Still, U.S. officials acknowledge that if they're not careful, these new aggressive U.S. tactics could backfire. If large numbers of innocents are being killed, U.S. attacks could motivate even more Afghans and Pakistani tribals to join the insurgency on both sides of the frontier. That would widen the war further and undermine the already shaky Pakistani government. It could also create more Islamist sympathizers inside the Pakistani Army and ISI.
Washington is willing to take that risk, in part because Haqqani has become the most active, aggressive and powerful Taliban commander along the border. The son of Maulvi Jalaluddin Haqqani, an aging, ailing former Afghan mujahedin commander who became legendary leading the fight against the Soviet occupation in the 1980s, Siraj is increasingly admired by many jihadists for his smarts and discretion. "He is always friendly, polite and simple, is a good listener, answers directly and has a computerlike memory," says Nasrullah. "He is wise beyond his years."
Under Siraj's leadership, the Haqqani network has come a long way since 2004, when its men were waging small-unit, small-arms, hit-and-run attacks on U.S. bases just a mile or two across the border. Qaeda military experts, ideologues and senior leaders now operate out of Haqqani bases in the tribal areas, and the network has become the primary pipeline for foreign fighters looking to join the jihad in Afghanistan. According to senior Taliban sources who did not want to be identified for security reasons, Siraj also enjoys a steady stream of funding from the Gulf, where three of his brothers are based. "We weren't strong like they are today," says Malem Jan, 42, a veteran Haqqani fighter who led guerrilla strikes across the border until he defected in early 2005 because he thought the Americans were "invulnerable." "If I'd known Siraj would get so strong, I would have never defected."
U.S. Army Maj. Gen. Jeffrey J. Schloesser, who leads the 19,000 U.S. soldiers operating on the frontier, estimates that his forces are facing some 7,000 to 10,000 insurgents in eastern Afghanistan—a higher number than previously disclosed by any U.S. commander. Most of them operate under Haqqani's control, including the insurgents who launched a multiple suicide-bomber attack on a major U.S. military base, Camp Salerno, in Khowst province, last month. Schloesser says the attack was striking because all the suicide bombers were Arabs and Chechens; normally foreigners act as trainers and organizers, not cannon fodder. He says combat incidents have risen by 20 to 30 percent this year compared with last—one reason Bush recently announced that he plans to send an additional 4,000 or so troops to Afghanistan.
Haqqani has also claimed responsibility for the January attack on Kabul's premier hotel, the Serena, that killed seven and nearly missed the Norwegian foreign minister, and the abortive April assault on the country's National Day parade that targeted Afghan President Hamid Karzai, who escaped unharmed. Afghan and U.S. intelligence have fingered Haqqani as the mastermind of the bloody suicide car bombing of the Indian Embassy in Kabul last July that killed two Indian officials and more than 40 others. U.S. officials say they intercepted communications between an ISI officer and the Haqqani operatives who were planning the embassy attack. Pakistani officials strenuously deny the charge.
U.S. counterterrorism officials, who asked for anonymity discussing official assessments, say they do not believe that the top levels of the Pakistani military or ISI have sanctioned aid to the Haqqanis; they think local and perhaps retired operatives are to blame. Nevertheless, the insurgents certainly believe that they have powerful connections. One jihadist, a 25-year-old named Shah Muhammad who fights for Haqqani, says he recently got caught in a roundup of militants by the Pakistani Army in North Waziristan. After checking the identity papers and the loyalties of the fighters, the soldiers released the Afghans who could prove they were linked to Haqqani and arrested those tribal militants linked to Baitullah Mehsud.
Today, Haqqani has become the ISI's "darling," says a former Taliban cabinet minister who is still an active supporter of the insurgency and who would speak only on condition of anonymity for security reasons. According to Jan, the Haqqani defector, the clan frequently received visitors he believed to be ISI operatives in the family's North Waziristan camps back in 2004. Jan says a young Pakistani Army officer named Salim, who he believed worked out of the ISI office inside the 11th Army Corps's main base at Miran Shah, located near the Haqqani madrassa complex, used to meet regularly with Siraj. Jan also claims he believes the Pakistanis used to tip off Siraj whenever a U.S. missile strike was imminent. Soon after suddenly huddling with a visitor, whom Jan associated with the ISI, Siraj would immediately change his position and order his men to move from the Miran Shah area to the mountains.
While top Pakistani officers reject out of hand any accusation that the ISI or any Pakistani intelligence agency is aiding the Taliban, Pakistani Army Maj. Gen. Athar Abbas, the armed forces' spokesman, does not rule out that the ISI is maintaining contacts with the Haqqanis. "Do you think any intelligence agency in the world would like to sever its last contact with any organization it has an interest in?" he asked rhetorically. "It would like to maintain at least one last channel through which it can access and get feedback on the on the-ground realities." Indeed, Afghan Taliban sources say that at the behest of the ISI, Haqqani may now be trying to persuade his ally Mehsud to cease his attacks against Pakistan and to focus on Afghanistan instead.
Whatever ties they may have to the ISI, the Taliban don't feel entirely secure, says the former cabinet minister. He claims the ISI knows the location of Taliban safe havens, training and military facilities, and the precise addresses in towns and villages along the border where commanders and their families live. "I wouldn't be surprised if the ISI arrested us all in one day," he says. "We are like sheep which the Pakistanis could round up whenever they want." He adds that many insurgents still don't have a strong enough foothold inside Afghanistan to spend the winter months there. But more and more are planning to do so, worried about their position within Pakistan.
Recognizing that trend, Schloesser plans to keep his troops operating deep inside Taliban territory this winter. "I plan on having a winter campaign that will take advantage of the mobility that I have to seek out any [insurgent] safe havens in Afghanistan, any facilitation areas, any places they go to for rest and recreation in Afghanistan," Schloesser says. "We're going to give them those options: either flee, get killed or captured, or reconcile." But if they escape across the border—and Islamabad doesn't step up—a new kind of war could well begin.
With John Barry and Michael Hirsh in Washington
Back to Top
Back to Top
Women swim Channel to aid Afghans
Sunday, 14 September 2008 BBC News - World
A group of six women have begun a charity sponsored swim across the English Channel to raise money for a maternity hospital in Afghanistan.
The women range in age from 26 to 65, and hope to raise £50,000 for Afghan Mother and Child Rescue (AMCR).
They are due to take turns swimming, and aim to cover the 21 miles from Dover to Cap Gris Nez near Calais by Sunday evening.
The money they raise will go towards building a 10-bed hospital.
This will be located in a remote area of the Panjsher valley in collaboration with Afghanistan's Ministry of Public Health.
The women, who expect to be in the water for up to 20 hours, have been training intensively since May and coached by Freda Streeter, the mother of Alison Streeter, who has completed 43 solo Channel crossings to date.
The six swimmers are Clare Doyle, 64, Martha Fray, 56, Lorraine Jones, 56, Anne Macalpine-Leny, 51, Maree Mitchell, 31, and Alice Constance, 26.
All are members of the Serpentine Swimming Club in London's Hyde Park.
Ms Macalpine-Leny said: "The hardest thing is going to be the cold and the other thing is the strength of the currents and the waves.
"We wanted to raise money for the charity as we know exactly where it's going. "These areas are very remote - it is very difficult for the women to get any good maternity care at all and we think our struggle is nothing compared to what these women go through."
Back to Top
Back to Top
Police seize large amount of heroin
www.quqnoos.com Written by Abdulwali Arian Saturday, 13 September 2008
Three men arrested after police find stash of drugs in southern province
POLICE in Kandahar have seized 45kgs of raw hash, hundreds of narcotic pills and 71 bags of heroin from different parts of the southern province.
Head of the province's anti-narcotics division, Nisar Ahmad, said three people had been arrested over the last week for possession of the drugs.
Ahmad said hundreds of mandrix tablets were also seized and a gun was found on one of the arrested men.
Back to Top
Back to Top
Taliban using Skype phones to dodge MI6
The Daily Mail - News By Glen Owen 13th September 2008
Taliban fighters targeting British troops in Afghanistan are using the latest ‘internet phones’ to evade detection by MI6, security sources said last night.
Skype, a popular piece of consumer software that allows free calls to be made over the web, has been adopted by insurgents to communicate with cells strung out across the country.
Unlike traditional mobile calls, which can be monitored by RAF Nimrod spy planes, Skype calls – the commercial application of a technology called Voice Over Internet Protocol (VOIP) – are heavily encrypted.
Voice calls are broken into millions of pieces of data before being sent down the line and reassembled by the other caller’s computer.
The British and American governments are investing considerable resources to crack the codes, and in the UK the Government is introducing legislation to force internet service providers to log all web activity by subscribers, which could then be turned over to the security services on demand.
The disclosure comes as the 8,000 British troops in Afghanistan are facing attacks almost daily from an increasingly well co-ordinated Taliban.
‘The trouble with this technology is that it is easily available but devilishly hard to crack,’ the source said. ‘The technology can now be accessed on mobile internet devices and the country’s mobile phone network is expanding rapidly.’
Skype was created in 2003 and three years ago was bought by eBay for £1.4billion. It has 300million accounts and at any one time, more than 12million people are using the service.
Sir David Pepper, the head of GCHQ, the British Government’s top-secret listening post, has told MPs that internet calls are ‘seriously undermining’ his organisation’s ability to intercept communications.
Skype said last night it did not want to comment.
Back to Top
Back to Top
Food left to rot on Kabul shop shelves
www.quqnoos.com Written by Ghafoor Saboory Sunday, 14 September 2008
Kabulis urge government to clean up shops that sell out of date food
THE GOVERNMENT has failed to collect out of date food from shop shelves, Kabulis say.
Kabul citizens say food long passed its "sell by" date can easily be found in many shops around the capital and they complain that the food is bad for their health.
The ministry of health says it had distributed leaflets with 33 regulations designed to prevent the sale of old and rotten food.
A spokesman for the ministry, Abdullah Fahim, said research teams were dispatched once or twice every month to collect old food from shops.
One Kabuli said expired food caused the spread of disease and urged Kabul’s city council to control the quality of food sold in the market on a daily basis.
Back to Top
Back to Top
Taliban urged to take part in elections
www.quqnoos.com Written by Zabiullah Jhanmal Saturday, 13 September 2008
Commission says Taliban must come forward to vote for country's president
THE election commission has asked the Taliban to take part in next year’s presidential and parliamentary elections.
The head of the Independent Election Commission (IEC) said on Thursday said that any Afghan could take part in the country’s elections under the constitution and urged the militants to vote.
The head of the IEC, Azizuddin Ludeen, said: "We are saying this on the basis of law. On the basis of the constitution of Afghanistan, any Afghan has the right to take part in the election, any Talib or non-Talib should come courageously and choose any person they want."
Voter registration for the elections starts on October 6 and ends on February 3 2009.
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).