Karzai upbeat on US security pact as he returns to Afghanistan – AFP 05/27/2005

KABUL - Afghan President Hamid Karzai is upbeat about his just-concluded visit to Washington, saying that his expectations had been exceeded with Afghan authorities gaining more influence over US military operations.

"I got what we wanted. We've got more than what we expected," Karzai told a press conference in Kabul. He was commenting on the so-called strategic partnership agreement which he signed with US President George W. Bush Monday.

After at least 15 Afghans died in a wave of anti-US protests earlier this month sparked by the alleged abuse of the Koran at a US detention facility in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, Karzai said he had won greater control of US military operations and assurances that US soldiers would consult local officials more.

"No soldiers can go to the people's homes unless they have consulted with the government. The people own this soil," Karzai said. Karzai also told reporters the United States would gradually hand over Afghan prisoners in US military detention, although no firm date had been set for their release.

"This cannot be done overnight. As our government's strength improves and our prison facilities improve, the Americans will hand over prisoners," he said. Ahead of his meeting with the US, Karzai called for greater Afghan involvement in certain areas, including consultations with Afghan officials before US military operations. He also was seeking the release into Afghan custody of all Afghan prisoners in US military detention.

He said he had condemned, directly to the US government, reports of US soldiers torturing Afghan prisoners. He would do so again, he said. Among the key points of the agreement was allowing US military forces operating in     Afghanistan to have continued access to the key Bagram Air Base as well as to other military facilities as "may be mutually determined."

American access to these facilities was necessary for US forces to "help organize, train, equip, and sustain Afghan security forces" according to the joint declaration of the US-Afghanistan Strategic Partnership.

Despite Karzai's claims of greater Afghan government control, the wording of the declaration was vague. "The United States and international coalition forces in performing, required military operations will have freedom of action based on consultations and pre-planned procedures," it said.

Karzai also said Afghanistan would continue to fight the battle against drugs but added: "Thinking that it will be done in one day is impossible". Afghanistan is the world's top producer of opium and ahead of his visit to the US, Karzai came under fire from US officials in a leaked memo for being too soft on drugs.

While in Washington, Karzai predicted a 30-percent drop in opium cultivation by the end of the year. But neither the United Nations nor the Afghan government have released solid figures on the number of hectares (acres) of poppies planted this year.

Karzai's US trip a flop: Opposition - Pajhwok Afghan News 05/26/2005
By Najib Khilwatgar

KABUL - The National Understanding Front, a grand opposition alliance, Thursday described President Hamid Karzai's US visit as a huge failure. Speaking on behalf of the 13-party alliance led by Younus Qanuni, Sayed Ali Jawed said Karzai had failed to meet the promises he made to the public before his departure for the United States.

Hamid Karzai told a press conference on May 21 apart from seeking continued military and economic cooperation from the US, he would negotiate with his interlocutors on three main issues.

Jawed said Karzai's visit was centered around three issues including the handover of Afghan prisoners to Afghanistan, punishment of US soldiers accused of killing two Afghans at the Bagram Airbase and control of anti-terror operations.

The opposition politician, who tended to play down the strategic partnership agreement signed between Kabul and Washington, claimed none of the three objectives was realized.

He observed: "The agreement suggests President Bush has not heeded Karzai's demands and has rejected them all." He added the agreement revealed the US and the international coalition forces would continue to operate according to principles already agreed.

"It doesn't explain what the already agreed principles are," he said, adding the accord just mentioned the Afghan government's demand for prisoners' handover to Afghan authorities, but didn't specify whether or not America had approved it.

But Rafiullah Mujaddedi, press officer at the presidential palace, was tight-lipped on the accord. He said: "If anyone wanted questions about the trip answered, they should wait until the president returns."

Karzai calls kidnapped Italian aid worker 'daughter of Afghanistan,' hopes she will be freed soon - The Associated Press 05/27/2005

President Hamid Karzai on Friday paid tribute to an Italian aid worker kidnapped in Kabul last week, calling her a "daughter of Afghanistan," and said he hoped that she would be released soon. Clementina Cantoni, 32, a worker for CARE International, was abducted by armed men May 16 as she was being driven to her home in the capital.

"We feel very, very sorry. The Afghan nation feels very, very sorry," Karzai told reporters in Dari language, adding that no true Afghan could commit such a crime. Karzai said Italian authorities were being kept informed about the efforts to secure Cantoni's release.

"We have good relations with Italians and we hope that this lady will be released very, very soon," he said. "She is like a daughter of Afghanistan, and we want that daughter of Afghanistan to be freed very, very soon."

The government said in a statement Wednesday it was in contact with Cantoni's kidnappers and was optimistic about those contacts. It gave no further details. Posters seeking information about Cantoni have been plastered across the city, and Afghan widows who benefited from her aid work have held rallies demanding her release.

Afghan FM sees no evidence bin Laden in Afghanistan

Afghan Foreign Minister Abdullah Abdullah said in an interview released that he has seen no evidence to convince him that Al-Qaeda chief Osama bin Laden is hiding in Afghanistan.

"Personally, as well as the foreign minister of Afghanistan, I haven't seen any evidence to convince me that he is in Afghanistan at this stage," Abdullah said in an interview with CNN to be aired Sunday.

"Perhaps in other phases, he was able to come back and forth, go back and forth" between Afghanistan and Pakistan, he said. Abdullah noted that Abu Faraj al-Libbi, Al-Qaeda's alleged third in command and a close aide of Osama bin Laden, was captured in Pakistan earlier this month.

"We all were witness to a situation where hundreds of Al-Qaeda, high-ranking people, including al-Libbi very recently, were arrested outside Afghanistan. So that's one of the evidence," the foreign minister said.

US, Afghan forces kill insurgent, capture arms cache (AFP)

KABUL - US-led coalition troops killed a suspected insurgent and separately seized three large arms caches in southeastern Afghanistan, the US military said on Saturday.

The assailant, who was riding a motorcycle, was killed when he attacked a military patrol Friday in Shinkai district of Zabul province, some 325 kilometers (203 miles) south of Kabul, it said.

“A man riding a motorcycle east of Shinkai attacked an Afghan and coalition patrol with small-arms fire,” it said, adding that the troops returned fire and killed the man.

US and Afghan troops also seized three cache of arms and ammunition with the help of local Afghans in the neighbouring Ghazni province on Wednesday, it said.

“An unusual number of munitions were turned in to Afghan and coalition forces ... accounting for, among other items, more then 500 mortar rounds and 100 rockets,” the statement said.

More than 18,000 coalition troops, including some 16,000 US forces, are in Afghanistan hunting Taleban remnants who, three years after the ouster of the extremist regime, are still waging a guerrilla-style insurgency.

"US presence in Afghanistan detrimental": Asefi

LONDON, May 27 (IranMania) - Iran's Foreign Ministry spokesman Hamid-Reza Asefi said that the long-term presence of the US in Afghanistan and establishment of military bases in the country would cause instability and be a threat to regional security.

Asefi said, "Undoubtedly, the issues would inflict heavy military costs on the people in Afghanistan and regional states, ruining the international community's reconstruction project in the country," according to IRNA.

He said protests by Afghan people and different personalities in different parts of Afghanistan against Americans' behavior in Guantanamo Bay and Afghan prisons prove the displeasure of people and public opinion in the country against US presence.

Asefi said the pile up by the Americans of weapons of mass destruction in clandestine bases in Afghanistan rings out warning for the future of the region and international cooperation as well as removing the process for establishing stability, calm and development in the country. He stressed the need for the US to reconsider its wrong policies in Afghanistan.

A Bold Ally - The Washington Post, Editorial 05/25/2005

SINCE 2001, many governments in the Islamic world have quietly staked their future on close relations with the United States, from Morocco to Pakistan. But no Muslim leader has been as willing to openly and boldly embrace an alliance as Afghanistan's Hamid Karzai. Mr. Karzai was in Washington this week to sign a memorandum on a "strategic partnership" with Washington: In return to committing itself to democracy, human rights and opposition to terrorism, Mr. Karzai hopes Afghanistan will continue to be protected by American troops and bolstered by U.S. aid for another decade or more. Without this long-term commitment, he says frankly, his country has no hope of achieving lasting stability or emerging from the ranks of the world's poorest nations.

Lots of Muslim leaders think this way; Mr. Karzai is virtually alone in his willingness to argue the case for friendship with the United States to an often suspicious or hostile public. He has been willing, even, to forgive the Bush administration's misdeeds -- including the brutal mistreatment of Afghan prisoners by U.S. guards and interrogators. "It's my job as a Muslim to let the rest of the Muslims know that we all make mistakes like that," he said during a visit to The Post. Support like that from a democratically elected leader in a country that once hosted al Qaeda is priceless -- which is why it's disappointing that the Bush administration remains relatively parsimonious in its support for Mr. Karzai.

Some 17,000 U.S. troops continue to defend the Afghan government from the remnants of the Taliban and al Qaeda, and more than two dozen have been killed in escalating violence since the end of March. But the military commitment, even when bolstered by 11,000 NATO and other allied troops, remains well short of what would be needed to fully pacify a sprawling country of 24 million people. By Mr. Karzai's account, Afghan army and police forces are years away from being able to handle the job on their own. Equally, the Afghan government is able to fund only half of its own operating budget, and has nothing for reconstruction; in that context $5 billion in U.S. non-military aid, while generous, is not enough to decisively turn the country around.

Now would be a good time to accelerate the aid effort. The upsurge in violence, including recent anti-American riots, is in part aimed at derailing September parliamentary elections that would consolidate Afghanistan's transition to democracy. More U.S. and NATO troops are needed to secure those elections; more aid would help convince Afghan voters that Mr. Karzai's bet on Washington makes sense. For no cost at all, the administration could cease its gratuitous undercutting of its ally -- including this week's leaked complaint that the Afghan leader was not sufficiently committed to combating opium trafficking. Since the U.S. government is itself divided over the wisdom of an aggressive assault against poppy cultivation, it makes little sense to fault Mr. Karzai for his caution. Better, again, to supply his government with the resources that would allow it to tackle the underlying problems.

The Poppies of Afghanistan - The New York Times, Editorial 05/27/2005

It requires breathtaking audacity for United States officials to complain that efforts to curb opium poppy production in Afghanistan have been lagging because President Hamid Karzai "has been unwilling to assert strong leadership." Washington waited almost two and a half years to heed Mr. Karzai's calls for help on this problem.

Even now, the Bush administration is disproportionately concentrating on the most visible, but least effective approach, forcible crop eradication, which merely moves the problem around and enriches traffickers by raising the price of their opium holdings. It is also creating turmoil in rural areas during the run-up to this year's crucial parliamentary elections.

Mr. Karzai was right to use his just-completed four-day visit to the United States to press for coordinating eradication with the crop substitution, agricultural credit and alternative development programs that would provide Afghanistan's rural population with better ways to feed their families. The money that Washington has promised for those broader efforts has been lagging behind, and the planning that will be required to spend that money wisely has barely begun.

Blaming Mr. Karzai may look smart in Washington, where forcible eradication has always been more popular than long-term alternative development. But it is costly folly in Afghanistan, where the politically nimble Mr. Karzai has slowly begun to turn around an almost impossible situation, gradually extending the writ of the central government and nurturing a fragile electoral process. Instead of using Mr. Karzai as a scapegoat for its own failed anti-drug policies, Washington should now be doing all it can to help him create favorable conditions for those parliamentary elections, which have had to be repeatedly postponed.

Mr. Bush should also have come up with a more thoughtful answer to the urgent request Mr. Karzai made on Monday to transfer Afghan prisoners now under United States military custody to Kabul's control.

Mr. Karzai's anguish over this issue is understandable. Two Times articles in recent days have documented the inexcusable breakdowns at the Bagram detention center that let American soldiers almost casually torture an innocent Afghan prisoner to death in 2002 and then saw Army investigators in Afghanistan try to close the case without any charges being brought. Seven of those suspected of involvement in the abuse have finally been charged after a nearly two-year delay that even the Pentagon acknowledges seems "excessively long."

As Afghanistan's democratically elected president and a proven American ally, Mr. Karzai would have been remiss not to call for turning over the remaining Afghan prisoners. Washington should work with his government to build and staff secure Afghan-run detention centers so that those transfers can take place at an early date. Regrettably, Mr. Karzai came away from the White House on Monday without any visible progress on either of these issues.

Questions for Nato in Afghanistan - By Paul Adams - BBC chief diplomatic correspondent 05/27/05

When the US withdraws many of its troops from Afghanistan in 2006, Nato forces will take over in areas of the country where they can expect far tougher challenges than they face at the moment. Paul Adams spent a week with a Nato general to get a closer look at the problems that may lie ahead.

The general leaned forward and peered out of the cockpit of his Hercules, his gaze resting on the endless, rolling ridges of dun-coloured hills. As he looked at this apparently desolate landscape, I wondered what thoughts were going through his mind. General Gerhard Back - former fighter pilot and head of the German air force - is the man with operational control of Nato's presence in Afghanistan.

That presence, limited to a few thousand troops in a handful of locations, is now expanding. and with expansion comes responsibility and danger. It was a big step for Nato to come here at all. But the coming months will test the resolve of an organisation that has a hard time living up to its own expectations.

After visiting Kabul, where Nato first got its boots on the ground, and Herat in the west, where Italian and Spanish troops are only just settling in, our journey took us to Kandahar, close to the front line in Washington's so-called war on terror.

It is a huge, dusty base which sprawls across the southern plain, a short helicopter ride away from the caves that perforate the mountains along the Pakistani border. It is from here that the United States supports its combat troops in their forward operating bases.

And while we in Britain do not seem to hear much about this war any more, let me tell you that the skies above Kandahar are alive with men and machines, attempting to finish what they came here to do. Great lumbering C-17 transport planes fly in direct from Germany, carrying all manner of equipment.

The air reverberates to the sound of helicopters. And everywhere soldiers and civilian contractors tramp about in wraparound shades, getting on with their business. Which is, in short, to destroy what is left of the Taleban. And they think they are winning.

Since the end of a particularly harsh winter, the Americans have been going after their opponents with renewed vigour, hoping to finish them off once and for all. "They're showing their teeth and we're showing ours," an attack pilot, Alexander Swyryn, told me.

And the result? By the end of the summer, he said, almost diffidently, most of them would be either killed or captured. It is easy to talk, of course, but all over the base I sensed that the Americans really believe they are reaching the end.

As we toured the facilities, General Back's eye was caught by the strange spectacle of a fleet of ghostly unmanned planes known as Predators. These are flimsy, improbable machines that can monitor the ground by day and by night, eavesdrop on phone calls, fire missiles and stay aloft for almost 24 hours.

Oh, and they are piloted by someone sitting more than 7,500 miles away in Nevada. A useful bit of kit if you're looking for an enemy in the remote, rocky mountains of Afghanistan. The general was clearly wondering whether he could have some and fell into conversation with a burly, moustachioed contractor who seemed only too happy to oblige.

He had the polished patter of the best used car salesmen but, as the conversation strayed into matters of capability and contracts, he and the general drifted away. This was not for our ears. It was sensitive stuff.

As the Americans reduce their presence in Afghanistan next year, handing over more and more of their combat responsibilities to Nato, they will inevitably take a lot of their favourite toys with them. Nato does not have the same kinds of capabilities.

And since this is hardly a secret, it seems reasonable to assume that any Taleban fighters left after this new offensive may choose to lie low and bide their time; wait for an altogether less intimidating opponent to take the field.

General Back told me he was confident. In spending millions of dollars on the Kandahar base, he said, the Americans had prepared a nice nest for Nato. But he did not tell me whether he had done a deal on the Predators. The burly contractor did not let on either but, when he told me what they could do, I almost felt he was trying to flog me one.

This man was not just a salesman, he was an evangelist. "They help us all," he said, as he put his fleet of strange machines to bed in their hangar. "They help us all in the free world." After three days of criss-crossing the country, General Back headed home to his Nato headquarters in the Netherlands. Difficult months of discussion lie ahead.

Will Nato members be willing to change their rules of engagement to allow them to fight the way the Americans have? Will the perennial problem of so-called "national caveats" prevent some countries from getting involved in dirtier, more dangerous work?

Germany, for one, will not send troops to the south. Britain is among a handful of countries that will. And will the alliance be able to stump up the troops and equipment needed for such an enlarged undertaking? Lots of questions for General Back to ponder as the battle-scarred landscape of Afghanistan slid away beneath us.

Afghan players arrested for waving Indian flags – Newindpress 05/27/2005

MIRANSHAH - Five Afghan football players have been arrested on charges of displaying Indian national flags during a football tournament in North Waziristan, Online news agency reports.

According to the Voice of America, the organisers of the football tournament said the Indian flag was displayed along with flags of other countries for beautification purpose only and there was no political motives behind the move.

Officials confirmed the arrest of the five football players and said they were under investigation. Authorities said the act of the Afghan players was against national laws.

However, the tournament's organisers said that the flags of Pakistan, Afghanistan, India, the former Taliban movement and other political and religious parties were displayed at the ground.

Income tax imposed on Afghans - Pajhwok Afghan News 05/26/2005 By Zainab Mohammadi

KABUL - The Customs and Incomes Tax Department Thursday announced a tax on private and commercial income would be levied from September 23.

Addressing a press conference here, Deputy Director of Customs and Income Department Asad Sakhi Farhad said all Afghan nationals, in government and private service, would be required to pay the tax.

According to the new tax law signed by President Karzai in March, each Afghan national whose monthly earning exceeds 12,500 afghanis ($250) will have to pay 10 per cent of his/her income to the government.

Companies registered with the government will deposit 20 per cent of its annual income in the national exchequer. Farhad said organizations having two or more workers would pay tax to the government.

At the end of each month, he pointed out, there would be a 10-day deadline for the salaried class to pay the tax failing which a fine of 0.01 per cent would imposed on the errant individual.

Asked if the financial position of the war-weary people allowed them to pay taxes, the official replied: "We have moved up the tax bracket as high as 12,500 afghanis to provide relief to the low-income class."

Besides individuals, the law also applies to restaurants, Internet clubs, aviation companies and other commercial enterprises. Owners of real estate like residential buildings hired by NGOs and companies will have to pay 20 per cent of the monthly rent - if it exceeds 15,000 Afghanis ($300).

Abdul Malik Rahmani of the Finance Ministry estimated 6,000 - 20,000 people would come under the tax net, with government coffers receiving up to $200 million a year from the levy.

Jumping the gun, candidates kick off poll campaign - Pajhwok Afghan News
05/26/2005 By Sher Ahmad Haidar

GHAZNI - A number of candidates in the southern Ghazi province kicked off a campaign for upcoming parliamentary elections days before the date set by the poll panel.

The Joint Electoral Management Body (JEMB) has announced candidates would not canvass till the release of a final list of hopefuls. Ghazni has been allocated 11 provincial council and 19 national assembly seats, with both forums respectively having three and five berths reserved for women.

Saying the list of candidates would be released on July 12, the joint election commission had advised all contestants not to make stump speeches before that date.

Abdul Baqi Heelaman, in the run for a provincial council seat, has already launched his election campaign - pasting walls with posters and distributing photos among constituents.

He admitted it was a sheer violation of rules, but argued the campaign was initiated by his supporters and well-wishers without informing him. Another candidate Haji Abdul Qadeer said he was unaware about the rules and regulations: "I am going to cease electioneering till the prescribed date."

A female contender Arifa Madadi told Pajhwok Afghan News she would abide by rules and would not distribute posters or banners till July 12. She accused male candidates of spurning electoral laws.

Meanwhile, a spokesman for the election commission in Ghazni province told this news agency the candidates would be allowed to start campaigns in August - a month ahead of the elections slated for September 18.

Threats, bombs, fire can't keep her from running - The Chicago Tribune
05/26/2005 By Kim Barker - It's difficult for women in Afghanistan to be candidates, but one is determined to participate

PORAK, Afghanistan -- The fire was small, charring a bit of wood and marking part of the door with smoke. Whoever set it left behind little evidence: a Listerine bottle filled with kerosene on top of a slipper.

But to Zobaida Stanekzai, the fire at her home sent a big message, from someone or some group that did not want her to run in the country's first parliamentary elections.

"They want me to stop my activities," said Stanekzai, who started a school for girls out of her home about 15 years ago. "But I'm very determined. Until I don't have a drop of blood left in my body, I will continue to struggle for my country."

Stanekzai, 52, said she is no stranger to intimidation. She kept her girls school open here in Logar province during the Taliban reign, despite threats. She was one of the women selected to help vote on Afghanistan's new constitution. Last year, when she was an election worker for the presidential election, she says a bomb was planted at her front door. Another was thrown on the mud-and-straw roof of her home.

The fire was set in the early-morning hours of May 8, after Stanekzai started collecting signatures to run for office. It was raining that night, and only one wooden door caught fire, smoldering until the rain finally put it out. The bottle with kerosene was found next to it.

Her story shows how difficult it could be for women to run for election to parliament and the provincial councils, especially outside the capital, Kabul. The deadline to register as a candidate for the Sept. 18 election in 33 of the country's 34 provinces was Monday. But in some provinces not enough women appear to have signed up for the seats reserved for them. In others, the bare minimum number of women announced they would run.

Some villagers believe in Stanekzai, even those from rival ethnic groups. Foreign election workers say it is tough for women throughout Afghanistan to run for office and they have offered to help Stanekzai pursue an election complaint because of the fire.

But the local police do not believe her. They dismiss any charges of past intimidation and do not plan to investigate the recent fire any further. They blame any fire on Stanekzai herself, or maybe on children.

"The thing we found, it looks like it was done by a child," said Maj. Gen. Khan Mohammad, the police commander of Logar province, adding that the region was safe and secure. "Can you believe it has been done by someone who has really tried to burn the door?"

Major security problems

But the province had major problems with security during last year's presidential election, said Carla Duarte, the Logar province electoral officer for the Joint Electoral Management Body. She added that women involved with elections have had many problems in Logar.

"Of course I believe her," Duarte said. "We have so many incidents like that. I don't believe a woman would set a fire or a bomb at her own home." She suggested that police were just trying to erode the credibility of women like Stanekzai as potential candidates.

Registering women candidates has proved to be one of the tougher challenges so far in the upcoming elections, delayed three times for security reasons and complicated logistics. On its Web page, the electoral body has put out a call by the country's only woman governor for more women to run for office. On Saturday, President Hamid Karzai urged women to run for provincial councils.

A set number of seats have been reserved for women in parliament and in the provincial councils. Otherwise, few women likely would be able to win election.

Women candidates in Afghanistan still face many problems. Much of the country is not safe. It is tough for women in remote areas to get to provincial capitals to register. And in more conservative areas, women often are not allowed to leave home, let alone run for office.

Election workers tried to recruit more women by persuading men to let women run. They talked to village elders and visited mosques, said Bronwyn Curran, a spokeswoman for the electoral management body.

Stanekzai is one of 344 women who had signed up to run for parliament as of Monday, compared with 2,549 men. Voters will pick 249 representatives for the lower house and one representative for each province for the upper house.

Only 279 women have signed up to run for the provincial councils, compared with 2,823 men. In eight provinces, not enough women applied to fill the seats reserved for women. In Uruzgan province, not one woman signed up to run for the provincial council. "We would like to see more women run for the provincial councils," Curran said.

All the potential candidates will be reviewed during June and early July to determine who meets the criteria for office. None can be a convicted criminal. None can be linked to an illegal militia. If left unfilled, seats reserved for women will be left open until the next election, Curran said.

Had no doubts - Stanekzai never had a doubt about running for office. Her school in Porak, about 30 miles south of Kabul, teaches 600 students from 17 surrounding villages. Most of the students are girls and young women; 53 are boys who live nearby and have no other school.

On Monday, the country director for a Washington, D.C.-based non-profit group stopped by to visit Stanekzai. He said he wanted to make sure she had all the help she needed.

"It's clearly an election violation," said Ed Morgan of IFES, formerly known as the International Foundation for Election Systems, which is helping train Afghans before the election.

Stanekzai and her teachers rejected the charge that she had anything to do with past attacks on the school. The teachers said they were at the school last year when a bomb was thrown on top of an empty classroom, blowing a hole in the roof.

A Porak village elder said no one had done as much for Logar province as Stanekzai. Mullah Abdul Basir is from the Pashtun ethnic group, unlike Stanekzai, a Tajik. Basir believed someone set her school and home on fire because she is a candidate. "God will be unhappy about these actions," he said. "We take it very seriously. We are still trying to find the people who did this."

Will Suspected War Criminals Stand for Parliament ? IWPR 05/26/2005
By Sayed Yaqub Ibrahimi

An apparent loophole in the election law means some of Afghanistan's worst warlords could run for the legislature

Could Mullah Omar, the former Taleban leader who is currently believed to be in hiding somewhere on the Afghan-Pakistani border, end up as a member of parliament after the September election?

According to legal experts contacted by IWPR, that eventuality, while highly unlikely, is technically possible due to a loophole in Afghanistan's constitution.

Article 85 of the constitution bars convicted criminals from running for office, and it specifically rules out those convicted of crimes against humanity. The problem, experts point out, is that no one has ever been brought to trial for such crimes, let alone convicted.

While Mullah Omar's name doesn't appear on the list of registered candidates, several other leading figures widely believed to have committed crimes against humanity during the years of civil war and the Taleban regime are listed.

"There is an article in the constitution, but it doesn't have any practical effect," said Qayoum Babak, a registered candidate and chief editor of Jahan-e-Now monthly. "Despite this article, even Mullah Omar and Gulbuddin Hekmatyar can run for parliament because they don't have any criminal records in the courts."

Mullah Omar was head of the Taleban government and an ally of Osama Bin Laden. Hekmatyar, who heads the Hizb-e-Islami faction, has also been accused of war crimes, and is presently a fugitive, leading forces allied with the Taleban against the United States-led coalition.

The Joint Electoral Management Body, JEMB, has said that anyone who committed crimes while leading an armed militia faction or who has been convicted of a crime such as drug dealing is ineligible. But while many have been accused, no one has been tried, let alone convicted of such activities.

Babak noted that several candidates in last year's presidential election faced similar accusations yet were allowed to run for office. Dr Abdul Malik Kamwi, a senior official with the Afghan Supreme Court, told IWPR, "For those candidates who were accused by people before the presidential elections, there was no document to prove their crimes in court, so the government didn't condemn anyone at that time."

Alam Khan Azadi, a former commander of the Jamiat-e-Islami faction in Balkh province, is among those who have been accused of war crimes but are still seeking elected office.

"He is a warlord... he led armed men, and he used to torture people," said a local man who spoke on condition of anonymity. "Now he has nominated himself as a candidate."

Many people in the provinces have already complained of coercion by former warlords who are running for parliament. These include General Abdul Rashid Dostum, whose supporters have been accused of taking voters' registration cards by force in order to make sure he meets registration requirements.

A voter in Sar-e-Pul province ,who also requested anonymity for fear of his life, alleged that a local commander had killed his brother two years ago but never brought to trial. Now the man is a parliamentary candidate. "I went to all the judicial and human rights offices asking for an inquiry, but they didn't take any steps," he said.

Candidates cannot be disqualified merely on the basis of accusations, said Abdul Hakim Murad, a member of the JEMB. After the registration period, said Murad, which has been extended beyond the original May 19 deadline, a list of candidates will be posted in their home regions for three days. Anyone with a complaint relating to alleged crimes committed by a candidate may submit it to the board; the individual will then be investigated, and if the complaint is then accepted at a court hearing, the candidate will be disqualified, he added.

"Just as the voting process is free, so the right to criticise and complain is also free," continued Murad. "But we will admit only legal complaints."

In addition, if the ministries of the interior, defence or other security agencies ask for a candidate to be disqualified, the election board will comply, he said. But Habibullah Rafi, a political analyst and a member of the Afghan Sciences Academy, said such safeguards are too little, too late.

"The government and the human rights organisations should have already investigated the entrance of warlords and human rights violators [to the election process] and informed the people about them," he said. "We can expect a parliament formed out of war criminals," warned Rafi. Sayed Yaqub Ibrahimi is an IWPR staff reporter in Kabul.

Karzai’s multiple dilemma - By A. R. Siddiqi DAWN (PAKISTAN) opinion

PRESIDENT Hamid Karzai of Afghanistan returns practically empty handed from his visit to Washington and one-to-one meeting with President George Bush. For once since his induction as head of state in an interim capacity under the Bonn agreement of December 2001 and as elected president after the October 2004 general elections, Mr Karzai does not seem in too happy an equilibrium with the United States, the mainstay of his presidency.

In a rare show of ire on the eve of his Washington visit, Mr Karzai roundly condemned US forces for the ‘abuse’ of Afghan detainees in their custody at the Bagram military base north of Kabul. Besides demanding ‘strong and clear cut action’ against the offenders, he went on to describe the excesses committed by the US soldiers as an act compromising the national sovereignty and pride of the Afghan people.

In a surge of emotion — befitting for a proud Afghan but politically theatrical if meant to salvage his image as an ‘American puppet’ — Mr Karzai many have overplayed his hand. He demanded that the US forces should be placed under the control of his government in their dealings with Afghan civilians.

“No operation inside Afghanistan should take place without consultation with the Afghan government,” he said. This is the last thing the US would expect from a US-backed leader. To Mr Karzai’s request for even nominal control over the US forces, President Bush’s prompt reply was: “Our troops will respond to US commanders (only).” “Consulting” the Afghan government on the operational part of the US forces is little more than a sop.

Mr Karzai’s domestic compulsions to assure the Afghans of his own status and authority as an elected president vis-a-vis the US, simultaneous with his reliance on a foreign military presence for his own and his country’s security, does not make much practical sense.

Barely a couple of weeks before his joining issue with the US on the conduct of its forces, Mr Karzai happened to be in Brussels, where he ‘urged’ Nato and the international community to let their military forces stay in Afghanistan in order to ‘reinforce’ democracy and security.

“My request to you is that you continue to stay with us... if you do not do that you would leave the work half way undone.” It would take Afghanistan “many years” before it could stand on its feet “in real terms.”

The task to immediately engage the foreign military forces in Afghanistan would be to ensure smooth passage of the parliamentary elections scheduled for October. They would, however, continue to stay on for an unspecified period of time.

Nato secretary-general Jaap de Hoop Schieffer, while speaking of the support Nato had already provided to Afghanistan, said that he aimed to “keep up” those forces “under its (Nato’s) command.”

Among Afghan leaders there appears to be considerable lack of consensus on the continued presence of American and foreign forces. On May 8, a Loi Jirga was summoned by Mr Karzai to discuss and achieve consensus on the issue. The jirga did not approve the recommended proposal to leave the issue for the yet to be elected parliament to consider. The security for the jirga, under the strict control of the US forces, led to a boycott by at least two top Afghan leaders, former president Burhanuddin Rabbani and foreign minister Abdullah Abdullah.

What soured Mr Karzai’s US visit further were some widely-circulated press reports blaming his government for failure in controlling the flourishing narcotics trade. The image of Mr Karzai’s Afghanistan as a narco-state is back in the US media with a good deal of force.

What is truly disturbing is that Pakistan is also being dragged into the mess. Quetta and Chaman are named as the principal entry points for the onward traffic of narcotics to Europe and America. This would call for a thorough analysis of the situation and corrective measures against continuance of the clandestine traffic across our borders.

Mr Karzai’s multiple dilemma is highlighted by his desperate attempts to muster support from his co-ethnic Pushtuns to contain the influence and the strength of the Tajik-dominated Northern Alliance. Ever since 2002, he has been making overtures to the maverick Gulbadin Hekmatyar to come and join hands with him. Early this month, Mulla Omar, Amirul Mominin of the Taliban-ruled Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan, was also invited to come as a part of a general amnesty. The ‘amnesty’ is supposed to cover all Afghan detainees in Afghanistan and elsewhere, including Gauntanamo Bay.

The offer was extended by Sibghatullah Mojeddedi, the first interim president after the fall of Dr Najibullah in April 1992. Mojeddedi heads the National Commission for Peace in Afghanistan.

It is to be noted that both Mulla Omar and Hekmatyar are wanted by the Americans for their anti-American activities. The former carries a bounty of $10 million on his head.

Mr Karzai’s loosening hold over the domestic situation came in full view in the outbreak of violence in Jalalabad and Khost earlier in the month, when law-enforcing agencies were conspicuous by their absence.

President Karzai’s multiple dilemma, in sum, emerges from the widening gap between his yearning for ‘national sovereignty without trappings’ and his lack of space to manoeuvre in the presence of foreign military forces and America’s declared intent to stay on for as long as it may to like. — The writer is a retired brigadier of the Pakistan army.

Haji Zaman to be arrested: Governor - P ajhwok Afghan News 05/26/2005
By Janullah Hashimzada & Ezatullah Zawab

KABUL - The Nangarhar government has been given the go-ahead to arrest Haji Zaman Ghamsharik, a former jihadi commander, on his return from Pakistan.

The self-exiled commander, living in Pakistan for the last three years, this week announced his homecoming at a press conference in Peshawar. He also made public intention to contest the upcoming parliamentary polls.

Addressing a press conference on Thursday, Nangarhar Governor Haji Din Mohammad said they had received orders from the Interior Ministry, National Security Department and the Supreme Court to arrest Haji Zaman as soon as he crosses the border.

Talking to Pajhwok Afghan News in Peshawar, Haji Zaman said: "I am not afraid of arrest. I shall go to my country to become part of the ongoing political process."

Haji Zaman is a resident of the Khogiani district in Nangarhar province and has served as commander of 11th military division in the Mujahideen era. He fled the country three years back after being accused of helping Osama bin Ladin in his escape from Afghanistan.

Afghans head to remote mountains in polio battle

KABUL, May 26 (Reuters) - Afghan health workers battling polio will set off into remote mountains next week hoping to reach about two million children who missed an immunization drive because they were cut off by heavy snow. Afghanistan is on the verge of eradicating polio with only one case reported so far this year compared with 27 in 2000.

"The campaign is a vital step in ensuring that no children are missed in the nationwide effort," Edward Carwardine, a spokesman for the U.N. Children's Fund, said on Thursday.

Some health workers will have to ride donkeys to reach children living in mountain villages blanketed in March by the heaviest snow in years. The World Health Organisation is campaigning to halt the spread of the crippling disease around the world by the end of this year.

Afghanistan's immunization drives have been successful but Carwardine said extra effort would be needed to eradicate the disease. "The concern is the campaign approach is not enough," he said. "You really need routine immunization or you're not going to stamp it out permanently."

It was hoped polio immunization would soon be part of a package of minimum health services available to all, he said. Afghanistan had four cases of polio last year.

The viral disease of the brain and spinal cord, which mainly affects children under five, can cause irreversible paralysis in a matter of hours. Some cases are fatal.

An outbreak raging through Yemen had paralysed 108 children and the number of confirmed cases in an outbreak in Indonesia had risen to 14, the WHO said this week.

The WHO has battled setbacks in the last two years since Nigeria's northern state of Kano banned immunisation out of fear it could cause sterility or spread HIV/AIDS. Vaccinations resumed after a 10-month ban.

But the virus spread across Africa, crossed the Red Sea into Saudi Arabia and Yemen, and reached Indonesia -- infecting 16 previously polio-free countries in all.

Iran very anxious to get nuclear bomb, says Musharraf

AFP - Iran is very anxious to obtain a nuclear bomb, Pakistan's President Pervez Musharraf said in an interview published here, while stating his opposition to any preventive attack on the fellow-Muslim nation.

Asked by Germany's Der Spiegel weekly how to prevent Iran from developing a military nuclear program, Musharraf said: "I do not know. They are very anxious to have the bomb." But a preventive war against Tehran would lead to "a disaster considering the current state of the world," the Pakistani leader said on Saturday.

"It would provoke a rebellion in the Muslim world. Why open up new fronts?" he was quoted by the weekly as saying. Musharraf insisted that Pakistan, which already has nuclear weapons, was against proliferation.

Unlike Pakistan, which said it developed its offensive nuclear program because it shares a border with nuclear-armed archrival India, "Iran does not have common borders with Israel," he said. "We were really threatened," Musharraf added.

On Friday, a key UN conference failed to adopt new measures to stem proliferation, with the United States insisting on dealing with Iran's and North Korea's nuclear programs while Iran demanded that its right to peaceful atomic activities be recognized. Iran recently said it planned to resume its uranium enrichment program, despite an undertaking it gave to European Union countries to suspend it.

What Do We Owe the Rest of the World? Los Angeles Times 05/27/2005
By Crispin Sartwell

Delivering a commencement address at Boston University, Afghan President Hamid Karzai said this about U.S. involvement with his country prior to 9/11: "The United States and other countries that had the power, and hence the responsibility, did not see it compatible with their national interests to address the plight of the Afghan people then."

It was that little "hence" that gave me pause. If one is powerful enough to help, is one morally obliged to help? "With great power comes great responsibility" is a classic cliche, indeed the very slogan of Tobey Maguire's Spider-Man.

But great responsibility also brings with it great resentment on the part of those over whom one is responsible, which is rational and inevitable. The fact that you are responsible for your children, for example, is a justification for your power over them. But they cannot throw off your authority — as eventually they must — without throwing off your responsibility for them, including the fact that you pay for their car insurance or their groceries.

This is one reason why so much of the world has a deeply ambivalent relationship with the U.S. at the moment. They need us in order to rise out of poverty. But if they enlist our aid to rise out of poverty, their gratitude is a form of dependence and a source of resentment.

As a general matter, the question of the connection of power to responsibility is something we face all the time, and it is extraordinarily complex. Does being wealthy make acts of charity a moral obligation? Does offering a better life mean the United States should throw open its borders to immigrants? Does the fact that I can afford to contribute money to my daughter's school entail that I instead contribute to schools that serve the poor?

In fact, some school districts will not permit you to contribute to your child's school because funds must be allocated according to certain formulas. This immediately reveals certain complexities: Over whom is my power, and over whom my responsibility? And whatever someone's conception of my responsibilities, should I be forced to discharge them?

The connection of power to responsibility is a theme of international diplomacy, of national policy, of community formation and of personal relationships. It's a theme that cries out for a general and systematic treatment. At the least we might generate some observations.

"The power, and hence the responsibility": One problem is that the "hence" runs the other way as well. If you have responsibility for someone, it follows that you have power over them.

In the context of foreign affairs, charity is a traditional form of oppression. Even at its best, as in the British empire's control of Afghanistan, for example, colonialism was justified by the responsibility conferred by wealth and power — the "white man's burden," as the great British imperialist Rudyard Kipling put it. And by many measures, one supposes that life in Afghanistan improved under British rule.

In a way, the transaction is less damaging if it's less straightforwardly charitable. Karzai seems to understand that as well, because immediately after urging purity of motivation — urging BU's graduates to relieve poverty only for the sake of the poor — he argued that world poverty undermines U.S. prosperity and security.

Sadly, it is not perfectly clear that U.S. prosperity does not depend on world poverty. And I'm not certain that a more prosperous North Korea or Syria would improve our security either.

In fact, nothing about this whole issue — either specifically as it relates to Afghanistan policy or as it plays out in the lives of all of us — is perfectly clear. It is an abysmal thought that charity is wrong and that you should never ease people's suffering lest you render them dependent.

[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.]