Italian Premier Silvio Berlusconi, left, and Afghan President Hamid Karzai review the honor guard during their meeting at Chigi palace Premier's office, in Rome, Friday, July 22, 2005. After arriving in Rome Thursday Karzai met with Italian President Carlo Azeglio Ciampi, thanking his counterpart for Italy's support in Afghanistan,

Afghan President Hamid Karzai and his Italian counterpart condemn London bombings

ROME - (AP) Afghan President Hamid Karzai and his Italian counterpart condemned as "ferocious attacks" Thursday's explosions in the London Underground that followed the deadly suicide bombings two weeks ago in which 56 people were killed.

In a joint statement released after their meeting, President Carlo Azeglio Ciampi and Karzai said the attacks went against all religious sentiments. Only one person was reported injured in the nearly simultaneous lunch-hour blasts.

"We express a firm condemnation of these ferocious acts that show absolute contempt for human life," the statement said. "Terrorism is an intolerable threat to the peaceful coexistence between peoples and nations, an attack to the heart of civilized society."

The two said terrorism had to be vanquished with prevention and repression, but also by removing its deeper causes by promoting cooperation and dialogue "in reciprocal respect of different cultures and different civilizations."

Karzai arrived in Italy on Thursday for a visit that will include talks with Premier Silvio Berlusconi and other top Italian officials. Karzai also thanked Italy for it's support in Afghanistan, noting it had agreed to take command of The International Security Assistance Force under NATO command and send further troops. Italy now has 910 troops in Afghanistan, with an additional 80 providing logistical support from Abu Dhabi.

On Friday, he was to meet with Berlusconi and attend a conference on Afghanistan organized by Italy's Foreign Ministry. Karzai came from London, where he held talks with Prime Minister Tony Blair and joined in discussions the British leader held with Muslim leaders in that country following the July 7 London bombings. Karzai's European trip is focusing on Afghanistan's economic development and other issues.

Local official, driver killed in Taliban ambush in southern Afghanistan

KANDAHAR, Afghanistan - (AP)    Suspected Taliban rebels ambushed a car carrying a local administrator in southern Afghanistan, killing the official and his driver, a spokesman said Friday.

Gul Mohammed, an acting deputy district chief, and his unidentified driver were killed Thursday when militants opened fire on their car in the province of Helmand, said a spokesman for the provincial governor's office, Haji Mohammed wali.

"The Taliban was responsible for this attack," he said. "We haven't arrested anybody, but have started searching for suspects." Afghanistan's government has warned that Taliban and al-Qaida militants have launched a campaign of violence to undermine key legislative elections in September.

More than 700 people have been killed since a wave of fighting erupted in March. Authorities have warned the violence is likely to worsen ahead of the polls.

Nine shot dead in Pakistan's restive tribal area near Afghan border

ISLAMABAD, July 22 (AFP) - Gunmen have killed nine people in a Pakistani region bordering Afghanistan in attacks against tribal leaders who support a government campaign against Al-Qaeda linked insurgents, officials said Friday.

Unknown attackers on Friday shot dead tribal elder Malik Mirza Alam along with his two brothers, a son and a nephew near the South Waziristan town of Wana, a local administration official told AFP, requesting anonymity.

Alam, who had spoken out in support of the Pakistani troop deployment in the rugged border region, had survived an attempt on his life two week ago and lost a son in an attack about two years ago, the official said.

Also in South Waziristan, gunmen Friday shot dead another pro-government tribal elder, Malik Khandan, as well as his son and a companion, in an attack on their vehicle in Karwan Manza village, local official Anwer Zeb told AFP.

On Thursday, another pro-government tribal elder, Taj Mohammad, was shot dead by suspected Taliban-linked militants in Kurma village in South Waziristan, an administration official said. "The militants pumped some 80 bullets into Mohammad's body and asked his relatives to take the body," he said.

Mohammad had helped authorities in October last year to mount a military operation against militants who had kidnapped two Chinese engineers from a dam construction site in northwest Pakistan.

In neighbouring North Waziristan three Pakistani soldiers were wounded Friday when a remote-controlled bomb exploded next to their military convoy, a local military official said.

Pakistan, a key ally in the US "war on terror", has deployed about 70,000 troops along its border with southeast Afghanistan to track down foreign militants in the lawless tribal area. Taliban attacks in southeast Afghanistan have surged in recent months ahead of the country's landmark parliamentary elections in September.

Al-Qaeda and Taliban members fled to the traditionally deeply religious mountain region after the hardline Islamic regime was toppled in late 2001 in a US-led invasion that followed the September 11 attacks.

In a series of offensives since last year, Pakistani forces have destroyed hideouts and training camps of militants linked to Al-Qaeda and killed hundreds of rebels, officials say. About 250 soldiers have died.

2.5 million Afghan refugees repatriated from Pakistan 

ISLAMABAD, July 22 (Xinhua) -- More than 2.5 million Afghan  refugees have been repatriated from Pakistan as the UN refugee  agency's largest voluntary repatriation program continues to  assist refugees to return to Afghanistan, The News reported Friday.

The program initiated in 2002 in both Pakistan and Iran reached the new landmark a week after the total number of Afghans  returning this year from Pakistan with the assistance by the  United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) passed 200, 000, said a handout of the refugee agency.

In addition, more than 1.2 million Afghans have returned from  Iran, bringing to over 3.7 million the total returns to  Afghanistan from Iran and Pakistan.  "This is an unprecedented number of people returning to their  homeland and a testament both to the improving conditions in  Afghanistan and the desire of Afghan refugees to participate in  the rebuilding of their country," UN High Commissioner for  Refugees Antnio Guterres was quoted as saying in Geneva. 

"Even the 200,000 Afghans who have received UNHCR assistance to go home from Pakistan in 2005 make this largest voluntary  repatriation program anywhere in the world this year," he said. 

Nearly 1.6 million Afghans returned from Pakistan with UNHCR  assistance in 2002, followed by some 340,000 in 2003 and more than 390,000 last year. UNHCR estimates that 400,000 Afghans will  return from Pakistan in 2005. 

The UNHCR repatriation program from Pakistan is governed by a  Tripartite Agreement grouping UNHCR and the governments of  Afghanistan and Pakistan. The accord expires in March 2006 and the parties are negotiating what arrangements to follow. 

Under the program, Afghan refugees wishing to return from  Pakistan receive travel grants ranging between three US dollars  and 30 dollars per person, depending on the distance to the  destination in Afghanistan, plus a 12 dollars per capita grant to  help them reestablish themselves in their homeland.  

French Defense Minister To Afghanistan - RFE / Radio Liberty

22 July 2005 -- France's Defense Minister Michele Alliot-Marie is expected to meet with Afghan officials in Kabul to discuss security for the upcoming parliamentary elections and efforts to stem drug-trafficking.

During a visit to Tajikistan on Thursday, Alliot-Marie said supporting stability during the September 18 elections is one of the main tasks of the counter-terror coalition in Afghanistan.

The French defense chief was also expected to discuss initiatives to fight drug-trafficking in Afghanistan, which remains the world's leading producer of opium.

In Dushanbe, Alliot-Marie thanked Tajik President Emomali Rakhmonov for allowing France to deploy military personnel and aircraft at the Dushanbe airport to support anti-terror operations in Afghanistan.

Musharraf warns UK over militancy - BBC

Pakistan's president has urged Britain to do more to tackle its own militancy threat following the London bombings. Pervez Musharraf was speaking in an address to the nation in which he defended his crackdown on extremists.

He said the London bombers "cannot be called human beings" and said Pakistan stood with the UK in fighting terror. He also called for Pakistanis to join a holy war on extremists and announced all religious schools would have to register with the government.

A total of 56 people died in the London bombings and at least two of the bombers visited Pakistan last year. The family of one said he visited a religious school, or madrassa.

President Musharraf said Pakistan and Britain stood together in the fight against terrorism. "I would like to send a message to Prime Minister Tony Blair and his government that we strongly condemn this act of terrorism in London.

"We are together in the fight against terrorism, we need to remain together and fight it together," he said. However, he said that although three of the bombers may have been of Pakistani descent they had been born, bred and educated in England.

He also pointed to the background of the fourth bomber. He said he did not know if three bombers were indoctrinated in Pakistan, but asked: "Where did the Jamaican get indoctrinated?"

He added: "There are extremist organisations in the United Kingdom - there is the Hizbul Tahreer and al-Muhajiroun - who operate with full impunity in that area.

"They had the audacity of passing an edict against my life and yet they operate with impunity. "There is a lot to be done by Pakistan and a lot to be done in England also," the president said.

He called on the Pakistani people to fight militancy. "I urge you, my nation, to stand up and wage a jihad against extremism and to stand up against those who spread hatred and chaos in the society."

He said all religious schools would have to register with the state by December and he would found a new government department to deal with the madrassas. President Musharraf said banned militant groups would not be allowed to reorganise under new names.

Previous crackdowns in 2000 and 2002 eventually foundered because of the re-namings. The president also said the publication of all "hate material" would be banned.

This latest crackdown saw more arrests during overnight raids at Islamic schools, or madrassas, in cities in Punjab and Sindh provinces, and a number of publications said to be promoting religious extremism have been banned.

A senior security official told the BBC investigators had carried out a complete check on all those detained in the past week and none of them is wanted in connection with the London bombings of 7 July.

It denied reports a key British Muslim al-Qaeda suspect, Haroon Rashid Aswad, was arrested. The crackdown has caused concern among hardline Islamist parties and human rights groups.

The six-party hardline Islamist alliance, the Muttahida Majlis-e-Amal, has called for nationwide protests on Friday "to condemn the global conspiracy against Islam". And Asma Jehangir, of the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan, warned: "The government should proceed according to the law in the crackdown."

Musharraf looks two ways in extremist fight - By Aamer Ahmed Khan
BBC News, Karachi

Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf's address to the nation on Thursday appears to have been aimed in two directions, both inwards to his fellow Pakistanis and also to the rest of the world. Most of his time was taken up with painting a picture of the country's contemporary realities - not all of which may be visible from the outside.

Perhaps what is most significant was the subtext that strongly suggests that there is little Pakistan can do to tackle its problem of extremism without active assistance and support from the outside world.

One significant departure from President Musharraf's earlier references to extremism relates to his candid admission of Pakistan's "direct or indirect" linkages to the scourge of extremism.

"No matter where something happens, we end up being directly or indirectly involved," he said. Involved, he said, and not blamed. "It turns out that they [extremists] have either visited Pakistan or passed through it on their way to Afghanistan."

This is a marked departure from the country's existing policy of flatly denying any linkage with Islamist extremism.

MUSHARRAF'S NEW MEASURES

Banned groups not allowed to operate under new names

No public displays of unauthorised weapons

Clampdown on inflammatory material, including audio, video tapes and their publishers and distributors

Militant groups not allowed to collect funds

Monitoring hate sermons from mosques

all madrassas registered by December 2005

Gen Musharraf then elaborated on the extremism-related realities within the country. Between 20,000 to 30,000 Muslim militants, he said, flocked to Pakistan from all over the world during the US-backed war against the Soviets in Afghanistan through the 1980s.

He said all their finances and logistics were routed through Pakistan. "Where are they now?" he asked. "Not all could have stayed on in Afghanistan." The president let the question hang there. If one were to assume - even if purely for the sake of argument - that many of these subsequently found their base in Pakistan, then what was the environment that greeted them?

According to President Musharraf, the fallout from the Afghan war has divided Pakistani society into roughly three categories. There are those who subscribe to what he called orthodox Islamic thought. Then there are those that are enlightened and educated and finally there is the vast majority who have been left terribly confused about Islam by the Afghan war.

The president said that the orthodox group had for 26 years been raising funds, recruiting manpower, providing military training and spreading hate literature in aid of the extremists.

At times the extremists also draw support from Pakistan's mainstream religious parties, he said. It is hard to avoid concluding from his remarks that the country has been providing an ideal sanctuary for Islamic extremists. Not many are likely to find fault with the picture of Pakistan painted by General Musharraf in his address to the nation.

As the head of the Pakistan army - an institution credited with crafting and carrying Pakistan's pro-jihad policy in Afghanistan - few know more about what goes on in Pakistan than the army chief.

What is important is how the world reacts to the problems outlined by the president. His own prescription is multi-pronged. Gen Musharraf wants a far more dynamic role for the Organisation of Islamic Conference in the affairs of the Muslim world.

He also wants active assistance and support from the West - not only in tackling extremism but also in helping many Muslim nations in the developing world out of their vicious cycles of public poverty. But lastly, and perhaps most importantly, President Musharraf wants the West to give a deep think to the festering disputes that involve the Muslim world.

The subtext of all that he said seemed to indicate his conviction that only after the West and the Muslim world are able to resolve their disputes can the latest measures he has announced against extremism be expected to bear fruit.

To Many, Talk of a Crackdown in Pakistan Seems Hollow - The New York Times / Published: July 20, 2005 - By SOMINI SENGUPTA and DAVID ROHDE

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan, July 19 - Three and a half years ago, in a speech that crystallized a post-Sept. 11 turnaround, President Pervez Musharraf vowed to eradicate extremism in his country. "We will take strict action against any Pakistani who is involved in terrorism inside the country or abroad," he said.

That was Pakistan, Jan. 12, 2002. This week, evidence that three of the four London bombing suspects had visited Pakistan for up to three months last year has thrown new light on old facts.

Despite government promises and denials, radical groups continue to operate in Pakistan. Religious schools, or madrasas, still indoctrinate and recruit would-be militants to fight abroad. Several leaders and members of these extremist groups, arrested in 2002, are back on the street. Militant training camps remain; one Western diplomat said they have just "changed addresses."

Now, Pakistani officials have answered the London attacks with an investigation into any potential links here and calls for a fresh crackdown on militant groups. But the question arises whether the new steps will be any more effective in snuffing out extremism than efforts past. On Monday, an editorial in The Daily Times, an English-language newspaper, asked in a headline: "Is Pakistan Still a Launch-Pad for Terrorism?"

If the London bombing suspects did arrive here seeking contacts with extremists, they may not have been the only ones, American and Pakistani officials say.

Another young Briton of Pakistani descent, Zeeshan Siddique, was arrested on his visit here last May. He is being investigated for ties to radical Islamist groups and bomb plots in London. A journal kept by Mr. Siddique includes a March 6, 2005, entry, in which he laments that one of his contacts is "chickening out." A week later, he learned that "wagon is now called off." British officials are trying to discern whether "wagon" refers to a planned attack.

"It's an embarrassment to say the least," said a close confidante of General Musharraf, referring to potential Pakistani connections to the London attack.

On Tuesday, a leader of the country's Islamist political alliance announced that the police had detained one of the group's senior aides for questioning about the London bombings. In the heart of Islamabad, the capital, the police raided two mosques, setting off protests by hundreds of angry religious students wielding sticks.

On the record, officials caution against jumping to conclusions about Pakistan's role in the London attacks. They vehemently deny the existence of training camps. They say madrasa reform has begun and will be speeded up. They point out that militant groups have been officially banned, and that hundreds of Pakistani troops have died confronting Al Qaeda and Taliban forces in tribal areas near the Afghan border.

"Visiting Pakistan does not mean there is a connection to the bombing," the Foreign Ministry spokesman, Naeem Khan, said Tuesday. "President Musharraf has repeatedly stated we will not let extremism and terrorism flourish in Pakistan. There is a total commitment on the part of the government of Pakistan. You have to do it step by step."

But diplomats, analysts and even some religious leaders concede that the words have lacked teeth. Off a narrow alley in Lahore's ancient walled city, one pro-government religious leader said that, bans aside, some groups are quietly allowed to function.

"What they were doing, they are doing still," said the leader, Ajmal Qadri, the head of a seminary inspired by the austere Deobandi sect. "They are recruiting people. They are having missions in Kashmir. Their training is still going on. Officially they are banned. Actually they are working."

On the front of his seminary still hangs the signboard of the armed faction of his own group, Jamiat-ul-Mujahedeen. Mr. Qadri insists his group is not involved in armed campaigns anywhere.

He said he admired General Musharraf's principles of stamping out extremist activity. He also recognized that there was no use coming down too hard on religious radicals with a large following, and he did not expect anything terribly onerous after the London bombings.

A case in point: The former leader of Lashkar-e-Taiba, Hafiz Saeed, was arrested shortly after General Musharraf's speech in January 2002 and released on the order of a Lahore court a year later. He has renounced his ties to the militant wing and spawned a new political party called Jamaat-ud-Daawa, with 137 madrasas under its wing. Through a spokesman, Mr. Saeed refused to be interviewed by a woman journalist.

Since General Musharraf first vowed the crackdown, a familiar pattern has played out. A brazen attack is followed by a widely publicized response. Groups are banned. Militants are arrested.

"That's the usual pattern, they go after them, then after two months they relax," said Hasan Askari Rizvi, a military analyst in Lahore. "That gives these groups some breathing space so they can survive."

For years, a central question has been how to handle the militant groups unleashed 25 years ago by the Pakistani military, with American backing, first to wage war in Afghanistan and then in India. Today, even General Musharraf's backers acknowledge that training camps continue to be used by groups favored by the government to fight Indian forces in Kashmir.

Aides close to General Musharraf warned that a sweeping assault on all militant groups could cause an open insurgency. "We don't want to have an Iraq-like or Afghanistan-like situation in Pakistan," said one close adviser. "It will be bad for Pakistan and bad for the U.S."

Government officials continue to make the argument that they made three years ago: that the best way to contain extremism is to co-opt some Islamist groups, particularly those that enjoy popular support for fighting Indian forces, and isolate others.

Opponents of General Musharraf, on the other hand, have argued for years that the government simply does not realize that the good jihadi/bad jihadi strategy does not work: Once they leave training camps, militants cannot be so easily directed.

General Musharraf's backers in the West, who also acknowledge that the training camps still function, counsel patience, even as they express frustration with the slow pace of change.

"I don't think they can say, 'Damn it, we're resolved and now those groups are gone,' " one Western diplomat said. "There's a question of how aggressive they're going to be."

At the same time, they say, to back away from General Musharraf's government would be counterproductive. "For us to say, 'You're part of the problem and not part of the solution' and pack up and leave would be catastrophic," the diplomat added.

On Monday the president, in a speech to a youth group, called for a "jihad" against extremism and promised a robust crackdown on militant organizations and the madrasas that fuel them. Last week, he scolded his police chiefs for not doing enough to enforce a ban against militant groups, ordering them to defy interference from Pakistan's notorious military intelligence agency. It was an implicit acknowledgment of a long-running complaint: After militants are arrested, the police say, the intelligence agency then orders some to be freed.

The leaders of the religious groups have staunchly opposed General Musharraf's proposed interference in their affairs. "Banning religious organizations is not the solution," said Qari Habibur Rahman, head of Sipah-e-Sahaba in Faisalabad, which was banned by President Musharraf in 2002. "They have banned such organizations and have seen the results as well."

Muhammad Yahya Mujahid, 44, a spokesman for Mr. Saeed's group, seemed none too bothered about the president's latest promises. "I can't imagine a Pakistan government crackdown on an organization that is permitted under the law," he said.

Elections to be 'last stand' for Afghan insurgents: Canadian official

OTTAWA, July 21 (AFP) - The upcoming elections in Afghanistan in September will likely be the last opportunity for insurgents to stop or delay progress leading to the country's rebirth, Canadian military officials said Thursday.

"I believe their intent is to destabilize the elections that will take place in September. And there are certainly indications that this is their last stand," said Colonel Steven Noonan, who will be in charge of relocating Canada's base in the region from Kabul to Kandahar in the coming months.

"If the elections go on successfully on the 18th of September, that will be a strategic failure on their part," he said. Noonan refused to divulge the information that led him to this conclusion.

Later this month, 250 Canadian soldiers will travel to Kandahar in southern Afghanistan to form a so-called provincial reconstruction team (PRT), building ties with local officials and helping in the reconstruction of the war-torn region. They will be joined later by 700 soldiers who will provide security for the general election in September.

Thereafter, they will link up with the PRT and 1,100 more Canadian soldiers who will, as part of a Canadian-led multinational force, hunt down any remaining former Taliban members and Al-Qaeda supporters in early 2006.

They will also be joined by Canada's secretive commando unit Joint Task Force Two, officials told AFP. Meanwhile, Canada will double its embassy staff in Kabul to 12 and will send 10 Royal Canadian Mounted Police to help train local police.

Several companies have asked to start investing in the country, offering to build hotels, open mines and begin commercial flights, but the situation is still deemed too dangerous, senior officials said.

Officer defends Hillier's comments Afghan mission not 'any more untenable' - DANIEL LEBLANC - Friday, July 22, 2005

OTTAWA -- Canadian troops heading to Afghanistan have not been put at greater risk of an enemy attack because of a recent vow from the top Canadian officer to hunt down al-Qaeda and Taliban supporters, a senior officer said yesterday.

Colonel Steven Noonan, the commander of Task Force Afghanistan, said the situation on the ground has not changed since General Rick Hillier's verbal attack on the "detestable murderers and scumbags" behind recent terrorist attacks.

The forthcoming Canadian missions to Afghanistan will involve 2,000 troops over 12 months. The focus of the operations will move from the capital city of Kabul to the more volatile southern region of Kandahar.

"I do not believe [Gen. Hillier's] comments make the security situation any more untenable than it already is," Col. Noonan said. "That's not to say the situation is untenable. The situation is shaky. It's no secret . . . the number of incidents in that particular area of the country have increased over the last couple of months," he said.

Col. Noonan said that based on his gut feeling and classified intelligence, the recent increase in terrorist attacks in Afghanistan could be the "last stand" of the insurgency. He said the goal of the bombings is to disrupt the coming general elections.

"If the elections go on successfully on the 18th of September, that will be a strategic failure on their part," he said. Col. Noonan said his soldiers will be at their most vulnerable after the election, when they pull down Camp Julien in Kabul and transfer operations to Kandahar, down the only highway between the two cities.

He refused to provide the date for the move, saying the area is already "renowned for activity." Col. Noonan added he hopes the Canadian presence in southern Afghanistan will allow more non-governmental agencies to work in the area.

A major aid group, Médecins sans frontières (Doctors Without Borders), pulled out of Afghanistan last year, saying the heavy military presence blurs the lines between relief work and military operations. MSF said the situation places aid workers in danger of being attacked by insurgents who believe they are part of the military structure.

A senior official at Foreign Affairs, Paul Chapin, said the goal of the Canadian military in Kandahar, as part of what is known as a Provincial Reconstruction Team, is to make the situation safer for everyone.

He said 18,000 U.S. soldiers and 8,000 other foreign troops are in Afghanistan, in addition to the Afghan police and military. "Let me tell you, it's a brave Taliban or al-Qaeda group that wants to take on that kind of a situation," Mr. Chapin said.

He acknowledged, however, that "bruising business" is going on in the war-torn country. "We clearly are distressed when NGOs are targeted and hurt, and we're distressed when they feel so bruised by the experience they have to leave."

US discussing return of Guantanamo prisoners with Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia Thu Jul 21

WASHINGTON (AFP) - A US delegation will soon travel to Afghanistan and Saudi Arabia, the countries with the greatest number of nationals being held at the US terror suspect camp in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, a US diplomat said.

"We will travel to Afghanistan and Saudi Arabia, who have the two largest populations in Guantanamo, in the coming weeks to see what can be done to send some detainees home and if these governments can control the threat some may still pose," said Pierre-Richard Prosper, ambassador-at-large, Office of War Crimes Issues.

"We would prefer not to have these individuals in Guantanamo, and have their countries share the burden," he said. "We want to send home as many detainees as possible, those who no longer pose a threat -- or if they do, those that their governments can manage," Prosper said.

So "we continue to seek transfers, but not if we believe the detainees might be subjected to torture," he added. Of the 510 prisoners of 36 nationalities now at Guantanamo, there are "over 100 Afghans" and "over 100 Saudis," Prosper added.

Prosper pointed out that Afghan President Hamid Karzai was insistent on the return of detainees. Concerning Saudi Arabia, "a partner on the war on terror," Prosper explained that the United States did not want to add stress to "their internal problems by sending planeloads of detainees if they are not prepared to deal with them or to manage the threat they might still pose."

"We want to keep them off the battlefield, but we don't want to hold anyone longer than necessary," added Matthew Waxman, deputy assistant secretary of defense for detainee affairs.

In addition to those who are subject to transfer, others could remain at Guantanamo indefinitely and 15 have been selected to be tried by special military commissions. Four of them have been charged.

What ails our relations with Afghanistan? The News International (PAK), Kamal Matinuddin

The war of words between the two Muslim neighbours, Pakistan and Afghanistan, may have subsided, but has not gone away. President Karzai still suspects that Taliban and Al-Qaeda remnants are operating from within Pakistan's tribal areas. Islamabad denies these allegations and points out that it has deployed some 70,000 of its forces in the tribal areas -- more than the combined strength of the US and Afghan soldiers in the whole of Afghanistan. It has arrested around 500 militants and in the process has sacrificed the lives of hundreds of its valiant men in uniform.

What ails the Pakistan-Afghan relations, which have remained hostile ever since Pakistan emerged on the world map? After all we have a common faith and are linked by historical, ethnic, linguistic and cultural ties. Why then has there been this animosity and bitterness over the last fifty-eight years, even though Pakistan continues to host over three million Afghan refugees. The Afghans certainly would have to have a very short memory to forget that Pakistan helped the Afghans get rid of invading Soviet forces and provided board and lodging to thousands of Afghan students in our madrassahs. Are the Afghans just that ungrateful, or is it because we have been interfering in their internal affairs a bit too much?

It is strange that our relations with Hindu-dominated India, which played an instrumental part in the break up of our country, are on the mend, but in the meanwhile we have failed to establish good neighbourly ties with our western Muslim neighbour. Who is to blame for the continuing hostile relationship between Pakistan and Afghanistan? Kabul, Islamabad, New Delhi, Moscow or Washington?

Afghanistan is the only country in which the Pakistan embassy has been attacked not once, but five times. One has to turn the pages of history to try and find out the answer. The first step in muddying the waters was taken by Afghan rulers of the past. Although King Amanullah had accepted the Durand Line as the permanent border between British India and Afghanistan, subsequent rulers, who sat on the throne of Kabul, continued to have their eyes on Pushtun-dominated areas beyond their borders, on the basis of ethnicity.

By 1946, it had become clear that the British would soon be giving independence to India and that the country would like be partitioned. Zahir Shah saw an opportunity to enlarge his kingdom. In June 1947, when it was announced that a referendum was to be held in the North West Frontier Province, on the question of whether the people of NWFP wished to join India or Pakistan, Afghanistan sent a note to the British government, stating that the Afghans living between British India and the Afghan border must be given the third choice, which was that of remaining independent.

Since no heed was given to this preposterous proposal, the Afghan rulers felt dismayed and vented their bitterness against Pakistan, so much so that Afghanistan was the only country, which cast a negative vote, when the membership of Pakistan to the United Nations came up.

Abdul Husain Khan Aziz, Afghanistan's permanent Representative at the United Nations, while speaking on the issue of Pakistan becoming a member of the United Nations said, "we are unable to vote for Pakistan, because we cannot recognize NWFP as part of Pakistan, as long as the people of that province have not been given an opportunity to determine for themselves whether they wanted to become independent or to become part of Pakistan." The fact that there was a Congress government in the Frontier had much to do with this line of thinking. Afghan's Deputy Foreign Minister, Abdus Samad Ghaus argued that the tribal areas should have been treated like a princely state and the law of paramountcy should have applied to the tribal areas as well.

A Loya Jirga met on 26 July, 1949, and refuted all frontier agreements, which had been made with British India. Pakistan's knee-jerk reaction of halting all movement of goods to Afghanistan, through Pakistan, raised the temperature. The Afghans took revenge when Said Akber, an Afghan national, assassinated Liaqat Ali Khan in 1951.

The second reason why the two countries moved apart is that they moved into two different orbits, which did a lot to put them into a hostile mode against one another. Pakistan entered the US-sponsored anti-Soviet Baghdad Pact, while Kabul signed an arms agreement with Moscow. Soviet leaders then began to support Afghanistan in its relations with Pakistan. Daud described the military aid by the USA to Pakistan as a grave danger to the security and peace in Afghanistan. Indubitably, it was the interests of the then two superpowers, which put the neighbours on a collision course.

Immediately after Pakistan joined the anti-Soviet military pact Afghanistan was encouraged by Moscow to push forward its demand for Pushtunistan, the size of which, kept increasing from Pushtun lands to the whole of NWFP and Baluchistan. Both the Soviet leadership and the Afghan rulers are to blame for first creating and then cultivating this thorn in our relationship. Daud delivered another blow to efforts of good neighbourly relations when he allowed the attack on the Pakistan embassy, in which four Pakistani officials were killed, just because the four provinces of West Pakistan were incorporated into one political unit.

It was Moscow, which created a problem for Pakistan by sending its forces into Afghanistan in 1979. A third factor, which embittered our relations with Afghanistan, was the mishandling of the Afghan jihad. While carrying out this clandestine operation, the ISI did not remain neutral. They gave priority to a man named Hikmetyar, above all others, in the distribution of US-supplied funds and weapons. This short-sighted policy sowed the seeds of acrimony against Pakistan, amongst the non-Pushtuns of Afghanistan.

Pakistan made amends by agreeing to have Rabbani, a Tajik, as the President of Afghanistan, in accordance with the Islamabad Declaration. But by not agreeing to the extension of his term, which expired in June 1994, it contributed to a widening of the gulf. Pakistan cannot justify the non-acceptance of the decision of a handpicked loya Jirga. This gave an opportunity to Rabbani to turn towards India, which was ever willing to support any Afghan ruler that harboured bitter feelings against Pakistan.

Pakistan's direct involvement in the creation and subsequent rise of the Taliban brought it at loggerheads with the non-Pushtuns, who formed a United Front to prevent the Taliban from overrunning the whole of the country. By putting all eggs in one basket Pakistan denied itself the flexibility needed in foreign policy formulation.

Enter Bush in the field to query the pitch further. When deciding to punish Mullah Omar for harbouring Osama bin Laden, the prime suspect for masterminding the 9/11 attacks on New York, Bush not only needed the support of Pakistan but also the help of Pakistan's 'enemy' -- the Northern Alliance --whose militia could be used to pull out the American chestnuts from the fire. By not stopping them from sending their forces into Kabul as victors, they added to the problems Pakistan was going to face with the new leadership in Afghanistan.

Frustrated at not being able root out the Taliban and Al-Qaeda elements from Afghanistan, Karzai and his colleagues blamed Pakistan for not doing enough to prevent them from operating from Pakistani soil. The one time Viceroy of Kabul, Zalmay Khalilzad, chipped in with his statements to increase the bad blood between his country of origin, Afghanistan, and his target, Pakistan.

Though the allegations have not been substantiated, there is reason to believe that there are elements in Pakistan that still sympathise with the Taliban, and motivate people to go into Afghanistan to take part in what they wrongly believe is a jihad.

The blame for the unfriendly environment that prevails today, must be shared by all those who have played a role in the of Pak-Afghan friendship process ever since independence. On our part, we must ensure that religious zealots are prevented from sending 'volunteers' into Afghanistan to fight alongside the Taliban. The Afghan leadership must put their own house in order and not put all the blame on Pakistan for their inability to bring about peace in their war-battered country.  The author is a retired Lt. Gen. and the author of two books on Afghanistan.

U.S., Russia descend into mutual mistrust - Divisions threaten anti-terror efforts - Anna Badkhen, San Francisco Chronicle / Thursday, July 21, 2005

St. Petersburg, Russia -- Growing disputes between the United States and Russia are threatening to significantly chill the once warm relations between the two countries. They also may seriously undercut a major front in the U.S. war on terrorism.

The new fault lines lie in the rugged terrain of Uzbekistan and Kyrgyzstan, two former Soviet republics in Central Asia that the Pentagon has been using as launching pads for military and humanitarian operations in Afghanistan.

This month, the Kremlin -- backed by the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, an Asian alliance presided over by Russia and China -- said the United States should set a pullout date from the Central Asian bases, where approximately 2,000 American troops have been stationed for nearly four years.

Russia's demand angered the Bush administration, which does not want to lose its toehold in a region it considers pivotal to its anti-terrorism efforts and crucial to maintaining a presence close to its Cold War-era archenemy.

Gen. Richard Myers, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, accused Russia and China of "bullying" Uzbekistan and Kyrgyzstan into cutting off access to U. S. troops. And Douglas Feith, undersecretary of defense for policy, rejected any timetable for a withdrawal in an interview with the Washington Post last week, saying that the U.S. military operates based on "circumstances'' and not "dates.''

Russia responded to Myers' comments by saying, in a Foreign Ministry statement, that it is "bewildered by the comments" of the top U.S. general.

In a further sign of estrangement, Russia announced plans to conduct its first joint military exercises with China -- a hint to the United States that Russia has "other geopolitical options," said Anatol Lieven, an expert on Russia and U.S. foreign policy at the New America think tank in Washington, D.C.

Early in his first term, President Bush said he had developed a special relationship with Russian President Vladimir Putin, whom he called "my friend. " And as recently as 2003, Bush called Russia "a country in which democracy and freedom and rule of law thrive."

But "both sides see the other differently now," said Michael McFaul, a Russia expert at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in Washington. Bush has grown more suspicious of Putin, McFaul said, mainly because of "democratic backsliding" in Russia, "which cuts against the grain of (Bush's) liberty doctrine," and also because "the Russians are not delivering much on other aspects of the relationship."

After Sept. 11, 2001, Russia positioned itself as a major ally of the United States, supporting the war in Afghanistan and even, according to some reports, sharing military intelligence with Washington. In return, the Bush administration muted its criticism of the war in Chechnya and declining political freedoms in Russia. But as military operations in Afghanistan wound down after the initial assault and the United States began preparing for the war in Iraq, which Russia opposed, the mutual goodwill began to wane. The clash over the American military presence in Central Asia came after a string of setbacks in U.S.-Russian relations, including actions by the Kremlin to quash opposition voices, alleged human rights abuses in Chechnya, the dispute over Ukraine's 2004 presidential election and Moscow's assistance to Iran in building a nuclear facility that the United States fears may be used to make nuclear weapons.

"Russia did a lot in Afghanistan in the beginning, but not much since," McFaul said. "I think that many consider Russia a liability ... because of how unstable things still are in and around Chechnya."

Disappointment with the relationship has been mounting in the Kremlin as well, analysts say. Bush's repeated promises to help Russia join the World Trade Organization and lift the punitive 1974 Jackson-Vanik amendment, which curbed trade with the former Soviet Union, have so far yielded no results, undercutting Putin's drive to boost his country's economy by opening the Russian market to Western investment.

Recent popular uprisings in the former Soviet republics of Georgia and Ukraine have caused alarm in Russia, which believes they were orchestrated by Washington, said Nikolas Gvosdev, a Russia expert at the Nixon Center in Washington.

"Putin seems to think ... that forces in the State Department (and) Congress ... are working to use 'flower revolutions' not to advance democracy but to pursue American geopolitical objectives -- and even to try and affect the 2008 (presidential) elections in Russia itself," Gvosdev said. Putin is also frustrated that the West doesn't really see the war in Chechnya, which is now in its 12th year, as another front in the global war on terror.

Russia felt snubbed again last week when Congress invited Leonid Nevzlin, a major shareholder of Russia's embattled Yukos oil giant, to speak about Russia's jailing of Mikhail Khodorkovsky, the jailed Yukos owner and an opposition sponsor. A Kremlin official said the U.S. refusal to extradite Nevzlin -- who resides in Israel and is wanted in Russia on charges of organizing a double murder, fraud and tax evasion -- jeopardized relations between Putin and Bush, RIA Novosti news agency reported.

All this has translated into a growing mistrust of the United States. Almost half of the respondents in a May poll of 6,000 listeners by Ekho Moskvy radio saw the United States as hostile to Russia. It is not clear, however, how far Washington and Moscow are willing to distance themselves from each other, said Lieven.

"I don't necessarily think that we're in a period of drastic decline in the relationship," he said. "It will be a long, long chess game in which there won't be any clear decisions."

Washington needs Russia to secure the former Soviet Union's enormous, poorly guarded nuclear arsenal to prevent terrorists from getting their hands on weapons of mass destruction. The United States also hopes that Putin can play a mediating role between the West and nations such as North Korea, Iran and Syria. American companies also want to exploit Russia's rich oil and gas fields. Similarly, having Bush on his side is important for Putin.

In addition to pursuing more favorable trade status and membership in the World Trade Organization, Russia hopes the United States can prevent Georgia from sending troops to that country's pro-Russian secessionist regions of Abkhazia and South Ossetia, Lieven said. The Kremlin also hopes Washington can slow Ukraine's entry into NATO. Until the "Orange Revolution" last year, Ukraine had been seen as a crucial pro-Kremlin buffer between Russia and the West.

But Gvosdev said the time when the White House was prepared to overlook Russia's human rights abuses and imperial tendencies for the sake of partnership in the war against terror is over.

"Rhetorically, yes -- Russia is an important partner," Gvosdev said. "Effectively, though, I think we are returning to a pre-9/11 situation where each major actor in the international system ... evaluates cooperation with other partners on a case-by-case basis."

[Disclaimer: The content of this news bulletin does not necessarily reflect the view or policy of the Afghan Government, unless specifically stated as such. The collection of articles and commentaries from Afghan and international news sources is provided for informational purposes, and accuracy of the news is the responsibility of the original source.]