In this bulletin:

• President Hamid Karzai Returns to Kabul After His Three-Day Visit to the Province of Kandahar
• Afghan Approval of the Karzai Government and Western Forces, Though Still Strong, Is Declining
• NATO, Afghan troops launch anti-Taliban offensive
• Afghan VP in Tehran to review bilateral ties – IRNA 12.16.06
• Pakistan not to allow soil to be used against Afghanistan
• Study: Bad peace deal on Pak-Afghan border
• Rice wants check on Afghan border
• Pakistan's Work for Peace
• Afghan daily says ties worse since Pakistani minister's recent Kabul visit
• Misunderstanding Afghanistan
• McCain: More US troops would be sent to Afghanistan if needed
• PM rejects call to change Afghan mission
• RCMP to boost Afghan aid `Eager' to expand efforts to improve local police force
• Canadian general says reinforcements in Afghanistan would shorten conflict
• Hillier affirms 'robust' role in Afghanistan
• Liberals shouldn't succumb to the Bloc's politicking on Afghanistan,
• Afghan TV debates obstacles to programme to bring "war criminals" to justice
• Step up aid to Afghanistan
• Pakistan blocks `Taleban law` - 15 Dec 06

President Hamid Karzai Returns to Kabul After His Three-Day Visit to the Province of Kandahar

Date of Release: 14 December 2006 - H.E. Hamid Karzai, President of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan, returned to Kabul this noon after his three-day visit to the province of Kandahar.

During this visit, the President chaired the Policy Action Group meeting, addressed the students and youth of Kandahar at the Ahmad Shah Baba High School, met with Government officials of Kandahar and elders from the provinces of Kandahar, Helmand, Zabul and Uruzgan, visited different shrines, and prayed with the locals.

At the Policy Action Group meeting, the security situation, the implementation of development and reconstruction projects, and the adoption of necessary measures to avoid civilian casualties were discussed in detail.

While addressing students, the President said, “You should look back into your history and know your national heroes.”

The President urged them not to be frightened by terrorist attacks and to continue to go to school and said, “Being martyred for the sake of learning is better than being illiterate and slaves.”

The President urged Afghan parents to send their children to schools and said, “We can tolerate when our children are killed on their way to school, but we can not accept slavery and illiteracy. The Government of Pakistan wants our children to serve as doormen at their hotels in Karachi instead of becoming doctors and engineers.”

“Pakistan is fearful of a stable and prosperous Afghanistan, although I have repeatedly assured President Musharraf that stability and prosperity in Afghanistan is in the best interest of his country.”

The President spoke about Afghanistan’s bitter past and said, “After the collapse of the Soviet Union, the world left Afghanistan at mercy of its neighbors. Our neighbors, Pakistan in particular, destroyed our system and our national institutions. Afghans and Pashtuns are still being killed on both sides of the border, and I tell Pakistan to cease hostilities and animosity against Afghans and Pashtuns.”

“Daughters of Pakistani Mullahs become doctors, teachers and members of parliament, but they kill our daughters and do not allow them to go to schools. This is a cruelty and we can’t tolerate it any longer. If this situation continues, it will re-open old wounds and put the security of the region at risk.”

The President spoke about the pains and sufferings of the Afghan people and said, “Pakistan wants to rule a land where great empires of Genghis Khan, Alexander the Great, Britain and Soviet Union have been brought to their knees. Great empires have not been able to occupy this land, how can Pakistan dream of doing so.”

“You can predict that any moment Pakistan may detonate a bomb somewhere in Afghanistan, but that will never make us surrender. I am asking the Pakistani Government to live with us like brothers, since Afghanistan’s destruction is not in the interest of Pakistan. 

Addressing 1000 elders, the President said, “The implementation of reconstruction projects is only possible when there is security. It is not only the Government’s duty to protect Afghanistan’s security, but it is the people’s duty too.”

“People have a duty to defend their houses, roads, schools and clinics and to collaborate with the security institutions in ensuring a safe environment for the implementation of reconstruction projects.”

“Regretfully, those who build roads, power stations, clinics and schools for the Afghan people are being killed. The Afghan nation defended their country during the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan and defeated the world’s then biggest colonial power. Today, a Canadian girl defends Panjwayee and loses her life for the sake of your security.”

The President emphasized, “It is the duty of Afghans to defend their country, and we must rely on our own power in defending our country.”

The President spoke about foreigners’ malicious intentions and said, “The enemy in disguise come to your country and destroy it, and they want to give the world a bad image of Afghanistan. This act is a clear animosity towards Afghans and Pashtuns because their sons are killed on both sides of the Durrand Line.”

The intentions of those who perpetrate these acts are clear. Pakistan wants to weaken Afghanistan as it did ten years ago. Pakistan must understand that today’s Afghanistan is not yesterday’s Afghanistan; it has an elected Government which enjoys the full support of the Afghan people, and is internationally recognised.

The President spoke about the sources of terrorism and said, “We have made it crystal clear to the international community and Pakistan about where terrorist sanctuaries exist and how to destroy them.”

“In Washington DC, we proposed the holding of the Regional Peace and Prosperity Jirga between Afghanistan and Pakistan, and I hope the Government of Pakistan will take action to make it a success.”

The President stressed that efforts should be made to ensure better coordination between the Afghan and NATO forces and to avoid civilian casualties and said, “I discussed these matters with NATO commanders at yesterday’s Policy Action Group meeting in detail, and they assured me that they will do their utmost to ensure the safety of civilians and better coordination between NATO and Afghan forces.”

“The building of Kandahar’s power station will start next year. The fight against narcotics and corruption is underway. The US embassy has pledged US$ 150 million for construction of Kajaki power station and the paving of Lashkargah-Kajaki road. With the improvement of security situation, more reconstruction projects will be implemented in these provinces.”

Released by the Office of the Spokesman to the President - Islamic Republic of Afghanistan

Afghan Approval of the Karzai Government and Western Forces, Though Still Strong, Is Declining

World Public Opinion 12/15/2006

A Majority Feels Frustrated with the Pace of Reconstruction

The Taliban Remain Very Unpopular, Despite Their Military Resurgence

A majority of Afghans express support for both the government of President Hamid Karzai and the presence of NATO forces. A new poll for WorldPublicOpinion.org finds that this support is declining, however, and that a majority of Afghans express frustration with the pace of reconstruction.

Nonetheless, the Taliban remain overwhelmingly unpopular and few Afghans believe the religious militants are likely to regain power, despite their recent attacks on NATO forces.

Nine out of ten Afghans (90%) rate President Karzai positively. Attitudes toward the foreign troops in Afghanistan are also positive: 75 percent have a favorable view of US forces and 77 percent describe NATO forces as effective.

But the numbers expressing strong approval are declining. The percentage rating Karzai very favorably has dropped 13 points from 68 percent in November/December 2005 to 55 percent in November 2006. Similarly, the percentage having a very favorable view of US troops has dropped 11 points and those saying NATO troops as "very effective" has fallen 14 points to 34 percent from 46 percent in 2005.

Stephen Weber of WorldPublicOpinion.org., said that this erosion of support for the Afghan government seems to reflect frustrations with the slow pace of reconstruction.

"The Taliban is far from winning the hearts and minds of the Afghan people," he said, "but there are signs that the Karzai government and NATO are gradually losing them."

The nationwide survey included interviews with 2,097 Afghans and was carried out Nov. 13-24 by D3 Systems and the Afghan Center for Social and Opinion Research.

Country's Direction and Leadership - The proportion of the Afghan people who think Afghanistan is "going in the right direction" has dropped 21 points over the past year. In December 2005, four out of five Afghans (83%) said their country was headed in the right direction. In November 2006, only three out of five Afghans (62%) express the same optimism.

Asked to assess the central government, 51 percent say they see it as very effective. This is down from 55 percent in 2005. Similarly, an October 2006 poll by ABC/BBC asked about the "present government"—perhaps implying an evaluation of current cabinet members—and found that 64 percent considered their work excellent or good, down from 80 percent the year before.

Afghans' views of President Karzai are positive, with 55 percent giving him a "very favorable" rating. But this view has dropped 13 points, from 68 percent in 2005. These trends are also consistent with the ABC/BBC poll which found that 68 percent rated Karzai's performance as "excellent" or "good," down from 80 percent a year before.

Foreign Military Forces

Both the United States and the U.S. military have a generally positive image in Afghanistan, despite the deterioration over the past year. Three out of four Afghans (75%) rate U.S. Military forces positively overall, but the proportion with "very favorable" opinions has dropped 11 points (39% to 28%) from last year. The percentage with "somewhat favorable" opinions has remained steady at 47 percent.

Attitudes toward the United States are even warmer, with 81 percent regarding it favorably, including 30 percent who see it very favorably. Again, the "very favorable" rating has slipped, falling 10 points from 2005 to 2006 (40% to 30%). The somewhat favorable rating, however, has risen 10 points so that the overall percentage favorable to the United States has remained the same.

Respondents were asked also whether they regarded NATO forces in Afghanistan (known as the International Security Assistance Force or ISAF) as effective. Seventy-seven percent call them effective, including 32 percent who rate the ISAF as "very effective." But the proportion considering the ISAF "very effective" has fallen 14 points (46% to 32%) from last year while that of those rating the forces "somewhat effective" has risen 9 points (36% to 45%). Twenty-two percent think the NATO forces are not effective, up 7 points from 2005.

Frustration with Reconstruction

The Afghan public's declining optimism may reflect their dissatisfaction with the reconstruction of Afghanistan's roads, schools, hospitals and water supplies. A majority of Afghans (58%) think progress made toward rebuilding these basic services has been just fair (35%) or poor (23%). Only 42 percent say the effort so far has been excellent (10%) or good (32%).

Those who feel the pace of reconstruction has been unsatisfactory also tend to express negative views about their country's direction and about the presence of foreign troops. Among those who say progress has been poor, only 54 percent say Afghanistan is headed in the right direction compared to 80 percent of those who call the progress so far excellent. And among those who say progress has been poor, only 62 percent have a favorable view of U.S. troops, compared to 92 percent of those who say progress has been excellent.

Another likely source of frustration in Afghanistan is government corruption. About one in four Afghans (24%) say they or someone in their family has been "personally affected by an act of corruption by government officials" over the past year. Those directly affected by official corruption are less likely than other Afghans to express satisfaction with their country's direction. Only half of those with personal experience of corruption (51%) say Afghanistan is on the right path, compared to a majority (65%) of those who reported no such experiences.

Attitudes about the Taliban, Security

Despite these problems, there is no indication that the Taliban are winning popular support. A near unanimous 92 percent of Afghans view the Taliban unfavorably, a slight increase from 88 percent in 2005.

Only a third of Afghans (33%) think the Taliban have gained ground in the last year while 37 percent say they have lost ground and 28 percent believe there has been no real change in their position. And only 16 percent believe the Taliban are likely to return to power." A large majority says such a Taliban victory is unlikely, including 48 percent who call it "not at all likely."

The poll found little evidence that Taliban insurgents have succeeded in undermining the government's authority. Three-fourths of Afghans (76%) say the central government is the "most powerful authority" in their area, while one-fifth (20%) say local leaders are. The Taliban are chosen as most powerful by only 2 percent. Nearly two-thirds (62%) also see the central government as the "most respected authority" in their area, compared to one third (31%) who selected local leaders. Taliban were chosen as the most respected by only 3 percent.

And despite an upsurge in Taliban attacks over the last year, most Afghans express fairly positive views of security in their area. This may reflect their high tolerance for insecurity, given Afghanistan's history of violence in recent decades, or it may be an expression of their confidence that Taliban forces will not succeed in overthrowing their government.

Fifty-five percent describe security in their area as "good" and 29 percent call it "excellent." These numbers are similar to those in an August 2006 Asia Foundation poll, which found that 49 percent of Afghans believed security in their area was good and 17 percent said it was excellent.

Kandahar: the big push against the Taliban

Daily Mail By MATTHEW HICKLEY on 15th December 2006

Hundreds of British troops in Afghanistan yesterday swept into Kandahar province as part of the biggest operation against the Taliban heartland in months.

A column of 200 vehicles containing 500 soldiers and Royal Marines advanced across the border under cover of darkness from neighbouring Helmand province, where UK forces have been concentrated up until now, with orders to help Canadian troops push back Taliban insurgents gathering for a fresh offensive against the allies.

News of the operation came amid warnings that Afghanistan could sound the "death knell" of Nato, due to the refusal of many of its members to supply desperately needed troops.

Hard-pressed Canadian troops have suffered heavy casualties in recent weeks after launching Operation Medusa, aimed at ousting Taliban fighters from their strongholds in the valleys north of Kandahar city.

For the latest advance, codenamed Operation Bazz Tsuka, Canadian commanders have asked for help from the British amid signs that the insurgents are recovering a foothold in the valleys from which they were beaten back. The British force includes two companies of Royal Marines from 42 Commando, along with a squadron from the Light Dragoons equipped with Scimitar armoured reconnaissance vehicles, backed by around 100 Danish and Estonian troops.

Yesterday they set up a new forward operating base in the desert of the Arghindab River valley, which commanders say is a haven for Taliban guerrillas.

Lieutenant-Colonel Matt Holmes, commander of 42 Commando, said: "We're here on an intelligence-led mission against the Taliban. "You can tell by the size of our presence that we mean business."

It is the first time British ground forces have moved into Kandahar province from Helmand, and the largest UK operation since the summer when hundreds of Paras and other troops from 16 Air Assault Brigade advanced to seize and defend key towns under siege by the Taliban in northern Helmand.

Last night Royal Marines were digging defensive positions in the muddy desert, after camping under ponchos in rainstorms that hit the area as they moved east through the night.

Nato has around 32,000 soldiers trying to achieve security across Afghanistan, with around 8,000 U.S soldiers under separate command.

Former Nato secretary general Lord Carrington warned yesterday that international divisions over Afghanistan were threatening Nato with collapse. He claimed the 50-year-old alliance could be heading for its first defeat as its struggles to defeat the Taliban.

In an interview with The GMTV Sunday Programme, to be broadcast this weekend, he said: "I think it may be the death knell of Nato unless we're very careful. "I mean, when we get a situation in which so many countries in Nato are not prepared to join in.

"Really only the Canadians and the Americans and the British and the Dutch are fighting there. "I think this is very dangerous for Nato. I think we ought to ask ourselves if this doesn't work, what on earth Nato is for?"

Former foreign secretary Lord Owen blamed much of the difficulties on the French president, Jacques Chirac. "Chirac's role in helping to destroy Nato I think is very considerable, in marked contrast to (former president Francois) Mitterrand," he told the programme.

"We can live with the different French view of Nato but I think the way that they are trying to always push European Union instead of Nato is going to get the Americans to just say, 'well, to hell with it'."

NATO, Afghan troops launch anti-Taliban offensive

Updated Fri. Dec. 15 2006 12:44 PM ET CTV.ca News Staff

NATO and Afghan forces are preparing for another major offensive to try and stamp out Taliban activity in the volatile Panjwaii district in Afghanistan's south.

The campaign is being billed as Operation Falcon's Summit, or Baaz Tsuka in the Afghan language.

In a NATO news release the offensive was described as a show of unity and strength between the two forces and proof that the coalition is superior to the Taliban in fighting strength and ability.

"They are hoping that the massing of forces will itself be enough to convince the Taliban not to fight," CTV's Murray Oliver said from Kandahar. "They're hoping that this will allow development agencies to come into the area and for development to begin to progress once security is established."

The majority of Canada's 2,300 troops serving in Afghanistan are stationed in the south but NATO has not confirmed if Canadian troops will be taking part in the offensive, said Oliver.

A similar show of force dubbed Operation Medusa took place in August and September in an attempt to improve stability, crack down on insurgent factions and improve the delivery of aid and development initiatives.

Operation Falcon's Summit has similar goals.

"The main aim of Operation Baaz Tsuka is to work together with tribal elders and district leaders to provide vital assistance and targeted development directly to the people of Zahre and Panjwaii districts,'' said Maj.-Gen. Ton Van Loon, head of Regional Command-South for the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force.

Van Loon said NATO consulted extensively with Afghan tribal leaders and elders, and the operation itself was planned jointly between Afghan security forces and the International Security Assistance Force.

"It seems that part of their strategy is to convince tribal elders to support the process... support development and reject the Taliban," said Oliver.

Recently, a Canadian military spokesman said the Taliban has adjusted its fighting tactics, making it more difficult to continue the momentum from Operation Medusa.

"They've reverted back to classic guerrilla technique," Maj. Todd Scharlach, one of the officers overseeing Canadian military operations, told The Canadian Press.

"It's difficult, absolutely. They are a smart enemy, they know what they have to do and they're trying everything they can to hurt us."

Afghan VP in Tehran to review bilateral ties – IRNA 12.16.06

Afghan First Vice-President Ahmad Zia Masood, heading a politico-economic delegation, arrived in Tehran Saturday to review issues of mutual interest with senior Iranian officials.

Masood was welcomed upon his arrival at Tehran's Mehrabad International Airport by Deputy Foreign Minister for Asia-Pacific Affairs Mehdi Safari.

During his two-day stay hre, the Afghan vice-president will meet with President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Vice-President for Executive Affairs Ali Saeedlou and Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki.

Minister of Public Works Surab Ali Safari, Herat Governor Seyed Hussein Anwari and several economic and political officials are accompanying Masood in this visit.

Pakistan not to allow soil to be used against Afghanistan

IRNA (Islamic Republic News Agency) 16 Dec 06 - President General Pervez Musharraf Friday told Europe's envoy on Afghanistan that Pakistan was determined not to allow its territory to be used by militants and had done all within its means to deal with this issue.

He was talking to Special Representative of the EU in Afghanistan Francesc Vendrell, who called on him, the Foreign Office said.

The president also emphasized the need for the international community to do more to facilitate repatriation of Afghan refugees back to their homeland, a Foreign Office statement said.

During the meeting, the parties held in depth discussions on matters related to regional stability and security, it said. Views were exchanged extensively on the situation in Afghanistan, Pakistan-Afghanistan relations and the government's strategy in the tribal areas.

Vendrell was informed about the absolute necessity for all parties to understand the prevailing environment, recognize that border security was a collective responsibility of Pakistan, Afghanistan and ISAF/NATO and that the militancy problem was essentially an Afghan problem, the statement said.

Vendrell expressed understanding of Pakistan's position, stating that the western world was very much supportive of what the president was doing to stabilize the situation in the region.

He conveyed the EU's interest in facilitating better coordination between Pakistan and Afghanistan.

Study: Bad peace deal on Pak-Afghan border

WASHINGTON, Dec. 14 (UPI) -- A new study of NATO and U.S. counter-insurgency efforts in Afghanistan says peace deals with tribal leaders like those struck in Pakistan are not working.

"They are not a good idea in either place," Anthony Cordesman, of the Center for Strategic and International Studies, told United Press International.

A deal brokered by Afghanistan's President Karzai in October pulled British troops out of several districts of Helmand province -- part of the Taliban's southern Afghan heartland and across the border from Pakistan's restive Baluchistan, where the recent killing of a separatist leader has roiled local sentiment.

The deal, which followed a delegation of local leaders to Karzai in Kabul, was interpreted in some quarters as following the example set by the Pakistani government, which in September inked a similar truce in North Waziristan, one of the semi-autonomous tribal districts on its lawless Afghan border.

But Cordesman, who has just returned from a visit to the region, told UPI that the British had little choice but to accept the Helmand deal because of the "enormous pressure they were under, militarily, on the ground."

"There are not sufficient British troops (on the ground) to secure the southern provinces," he said. "In practice," he said of the deal, "it gives the Taliban enormous freedom to operate ... (it) trades growing Taliban influence for fewer Taliban attacks."

He said the deals in Pakistan had created a "partial sanctuary" for al-Qaida there and a sanctuary for the Taliban and other linked mujahedin groups.

Rice wants check on Afghan border

Daily Times 16 Dec 06 - WASHINGTON: A “more concerted effort” will have to be made to prevent the Pak-Afghan border from becoming a “safe haven” for terrorists, US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has said. In an interview with the editorial board to the Washington Post, Rice said in answer to a question about Afghanistan, “The other problem that they face is that area between Pakistan and Afghanistan is just very rough. It’s been ungoverned forever and we are going to have to make - they are going to have to make and we are going to have to make a more concerted effort to prevent safe haven there.” Rice said, “When Musharraf and Karzai were here, they had a discussion with the president. They’re trying to get the tribals on both sides together. They’re trying a lot of things. But I think that probably - those problems, you know, the lack of an economy, the lack of an infrastructure and the ungoverned areas, are the real challenges.” khalid hasan

Pakistan's Work for Peace

Letter to the Editor Washingtonpost Saturday, December 16, 2006

Regarding Fareed Zakaria's Dec. 4 op-ed, "The Afghan Key: Musharraf":

It is unfortunate that even a well-regarded columnist such as Mr. Zakaria has succumbed to the convenient explanations that seek to shift the blame for failure to bring stability to Afghanistan onto Pakistan.

A September U.N. report noted that the insurgency is being conducted by Afghans inside Afghanistan, with five distinct leadership centers, all within Afghanistan. It identifies the interlinked sources of insecurity in Afghanistan: an absence of good governance, pervasive corruption, Pashtun political alienation, the drug economy, failure to deliver economic and social development, and resurgence of the Taliban. A recent multinational Security Council mission to Afghanistan largely confirmed these findings.

Pakistan has a vital strategic interest in peace in Afghanistan. The Taliban are not the future for Pakistan or Afghanistan.

Some Taliban and al-Qaeda followers did enter Pakistan after Sept. 11, 2001, and many have blended in with the 3 million Afghan refugees in Pakistan. The early repatriation of the Afghan refugees would make moot the allegations of cross-border movement.

Pakistan has deployed 80,000 troops to prevent illegal cross-border movements. In 80 operations conducted against terrorists and militants, we have lost 600 soldiers. Preventing cross-border movement is a responsibility Afghanistan and international forces share. They should match our deployments on the other side.

MUNIR AKRAM - Ambassador and Permanent Representative of Pakistan to the United NationsNew York

Afghan daily says ties worse since Pakistani minister's recent Kabul visit

Text of editorial by Afghan newspaper Daily Afghanistan on 14 December entitled "Pakistan's relations with the Taleban"

Relations between Pakistan and Afghanistan have not been good or even normal over the past five years and officials of these two countries have been involved in a war of words. Some time ago, [Pakistani President] Pervez Musharraf compared Afghan President [Hamed Karzai] to an ostrich and said that the Taleban was an ethnic movement in Afghanistan and their leader, Mullah Omar, was living in Kandahar.

In his recent speech in Kandahar, Mr Karzai sharply criticized Pakistan and accused it of supporting the Taleban and terrorists. He said that unrest in Afghanistan was not because of the Taleban, but because of Pakistan. Pakistan wants Afghanistan to be its slave as in the past but Pakistan should know that Afghanistan has never accepted being enslaved by any foreign power throughout history and has bravely stood out against aggressors and made them leave its soil miserably.

Pakistan should prevent Taleban infiltration onto Afghan soil. Otherwise, Afghanistan will be obliged to destroy nests of terrorists there. It will not allow Afghanistan to be a battlefield for the armed slaves of Pakistan. The world community will support Afghanistan in this. We have tried our best over the last five years to stop Pakistan supporting terrorists, but none of our efforts have yielded effective results.

Pakistan still supports and funds them, provides them with equipment and provokes them against Afghanistan. Such a stance has been taken at a time when the government of Afghanistan is trying to convene a regional peace jerga. A commission has been set up aimed at preparing the ground for this peace jerga to be effective. Pakistan has not set up a similar commission. It has only promised to set up such a commission but has not specified a date.

Pakistani Foreign Minister Khurshid Mahmud Kasuri made a promise on behalf of his government during his recent visit to Afghanistan. Mr Karzai expressed his disappointment because of the ineffectiveness of Kasuri's visit to Afghanistan. He said Afghanistan [presumably Pakistan] had carried out six suicide attacks in Kandahar in the week before Kasuri's visit to Afghanistan.

President Karzai made these remarks at a time when the European Union recently called on the two countries to restore friendly relations and cooperate with each other seriously and effectively in the war on terror. But the new waves of disputes between these two countries have turned hopes into disappointments.

It is worth noting that the officials of NATO countries also proposed mediating between Afghanistan and Pakistan in order to improve ties between the two countries and so that NATO forces could set up an active counterterrorism front in Afghanistan and in the region with the close cooperation of these two countries aimed at ensuring security in Afghanistan, which will improve security in the world.

It was expected that the Pakistani foreign minister's visit to Afghanistan would achieve something towards improving mutual relations, jointly fighting terrorism and convening the regional peace jerga. Unfortunately, this visit did not achieve anything but worsened relations between these two neighbouring countries. There is no doubt that the worsening relations between Afghanistan and Pakistan will not only cause peace and stability in these two countries to deteriorate but will also jeopardize world security and foster terrorism in the region and the world.

As the world community is sensitive to terrorism, it should also be sensitive to the factors behind terrorism and take practical and concrete steps in this field and activate antiterrorism fronts in the region.

Misunderstanding Afghanistan

By Craig Charney and Gary Langer Sunday, December 17, 2006; Washington Post

There is a note of panic in American views of Afghanistan today. "All the indicators for Afghanistan have headed south," the Los Angeles Times editorialized. Outside Kabul, "much of the rest of Afghanistan appears to be failing again," Newsweek reports. Sen. John Kerry warns: We are "losing Afghanistan."

These views reflect the belief that Afghan President Hamid Karzai's government is hemorrhaging support as the Taliban makes a comeback. Karzai is called the "mayor of Kabul," his government lacking authority outside the capital and plagued by corruption. Western troops backing him are said to face widespread hostility.

Yet the full picture in Afghanistan's rugged terrain is more complex. A nationwide ABC News/BBC World Service survey of 1,036 Afghans last month found both good signs and bad.

The Taliban, while active, lacks popular support. Though Karzai's honeymoon is over, he retains majority backing. The Afghan state is relatively weak, but it is present -- and popular -- in most of the country. Unlike Iraq, Afghanistan is a country where the populace favors the U.S. and allied military presence.

There's no upsurge of support for the Taliban. Just 10 percent of Afghans hold a favorable opinion of the Muslim extremists, almost unchanged from 2005 and 2004. Taliban supporters are concentrated in the southeast and east, conservative regions bordering ethnically similar parts of Pakistan, where the Taliban and its al-Qaeda allies have moved their camps and leaders.

This year Taliban forces, flush with trainees, materiel, and bomb designs and tactics learned from al-Qaeda in Iraq, surged into nearby regions -- the southwest, heart of the illegal opium trade; the center-east, which includes Kabul; and the warlord-ridden northwest. Today 64 percent of Afghans report some Taliban activity in their own area. While 58 percent still call security better now than before the Taliban's ouster in 2001, this figure has fallen by 17 points since last year.

The Taliban's reappearance is cause for grave concern -- and not only to Americans. Afghans overwhelmingly prefer Karzai's government to the Taliban, 88 percent to 3 percent. But 57 percent call the Taliban the biggest danger facing the country -- up sharply from 41 percent last year. Its growing presence is broadly unwanted.

Weak state institutions are indeed a key Afghan problem. Where government agencies are strongest, 71 percent of Afghans say things are going in the right direction. Where they are weakest, only 39 percent do. As Gen. Karl Eikenberry, U.S. commander in Kabul, says, the main challenge is not the enemy's strength but the state's weakness.

Yet, even after 33 years of coups and war, reports of the demise of the Afghan state are exaggerated. Seven in 10 Afghans say Karzai's government has a strong presence where they live; even more say this of provincial governments and the police.

While corruption is common -- 55 percent call it a big problem -- the state is functioning and appreciated in key respects. Big majorities trust it to provide security. Seven in 10 Afghans live within two miles of a school and a clinic. Three in five boys are in school, as are two in five girls.

Despite criticism of police corruption and training, the police, too, are making an impact. The Taliban are reported present only half as often where the force is strong as where it is weak. Most Afghans say they'd report crimes to the police.

The foreign soldiers supporting local police and troops are widely appreciated. Three Afghans in four are grateful for the American, British and Canadian troops in their country. An overwhelming majority (88 percent) say the U.S. invasion that overthrew the Taliban was a good thing. And three out of five Afghans want U.S. troops to stay until security is restored (though that's down from 70 percent last year). Approval for U.S. forces and Karzai has to be seen in the context of what came before: They may not be so great, but the Taliban were so bad. Nonetheless, the 77 percent U.S. approval rate in Afghanistan can hardly be described as flat-out failure.

But the negatives cannot be minimized. Worsening security and a moribund economy have hammered the optimism that followed peace, reconstruction and Afghanistan's first democratic elections, in 2004. Last year 77 percent said their country was headed in the right direction; now 55 percent do. Karzai's approval rating has dropped from 83 percent to 68 percent. Reflecting painfully slow growth, acceptance of opium poppy cultivation jumped in the past year.

Afghanistan's problems are real and deepening. They demand major military, reconstruction and diplomatic efforts before dashed expectations turn into active discontent. But the situation is hardly catastrophic. Enough positives remain to serve as a foundation for success. If America is to succeed in Afghanistan, however, we will have to understand it first.

Craig Charney is president of Charney Research, the polling firm that conducted the poll discussed here. Gary Langer is director of polling for ABC News.

McCain: More US troops would be sent to Afghanistan if needed

December 16, 2006 KABUL, Afghanistan (AP) - Washington will send more troops to Afghanistan "if it's necessary," U.S. Senator John McCain said Saturday, while urging European allies to send their troops to the country's restive south.

McCain praised Afghan, U.S., Canadian, British and Dutch forces for bearing "a great deal of the combat responsibilities in recent months," but pushed for more from other key allies of the United States.

Other NATO countries with troops in Afghanistan should remove their "national caveats," which make it "extremely difficult for our NATO commanders to call on them for assistance when needed in combat zones, particularly in the southern part of the country," McCain, a 2008 presidential hopeful, said during a two-day visit in Afghanistan with three other U.S. Congress members.

France, Germany, Italy and Spain said last month at the NATO summit that they would not send troops to fight regularly on the front lines of battles with the resurgent Taliban in the restive south and east.

McCain, who has called for the deployment of more U.S. troops to Iraq, said that more troops could also be sent to Afghanistan.

"If it's necessary, we will (send additional troops), and I'm sure we would be agreeable, but the focus here is more on training the Afghan National Army and the police, as opposed to the increased U.S. troop presence," the Arizona Republican told reporters at a news conference with the other Congress members at the U.S. base Camp Eggers in Kabul.

A U.N. Security Council mission to Afghanistan has called for additional support in the country, while a report from the Iraq Study group said that the U.S. should provide "additional political, economic and military support for Afghanistan."

"Taliban remains a very big threat, and we have a long way go to before they are eradicated," McCain said of the militia that once ruled Afghanistan, and has come back to fight U.S. and other forces supporting President Hamid Karzai.

McCain also joined others in criticizing a controversial peace pact between Pakistan's government and Islamic militants in that country's North Waziristan province, bordering Afghanistan.

The International Crisis Group think tank said the agreement has created a virtual Taliban mini-state where mullahs dispense justice and fighters launch cross-border attacks into Afghanistan.

"We don't like it. The attacks from that area have increased, and we think that unless there is some dramatic change, that we will continue to see those increases," McCain said.

Afghan and Western officials have complained that Pakistan does not do enough to prevent terrorists from training on its soil and then crossing the border to attack in Afghanistan. Pakistan says it is standing up to the problem.

Illinois Republican Representative Mark Kirk said that while there was much debate over how to proceed in Iraq, there was no question about continuing support for the Afghan government.

In addition to Kirk and McCain, the delegation visiting Afghanistan also included Republican senators Susan Collins of Maine and John Thune of South Dakota.

The delegation arrived Friday and was scheduled to visits sites of provincial reconstruction and a training area for the Afghan National Army. They were to continue to Pakistan later Saturday.

PM rejects call to change Afghan mission - Thu Dec 14, 2006

OTTAWA (Reuters) - Prime Minister Stephen Harper on Thursday rejected calls from an opposition party to change the focus of the country's mission in Afghanistan, a move that could increase the chances of an early election.

An opposition party, the Bloc Quebecois, has threatened to introduce a motion of nonconfidence in the minority Conservative government early next year unless the government ensures Canada's 2,500 troops in the war-torn country focus more on rebuilding and less on combat.

"I don't plan to call an election on Afghanistan. I certainly don't plan, once we've sent troops into a dangerous area ... (to) call into question what they're doing," Harper told a news conference.

More than 40 Canadian soldiers have been killed in Afghanistan since 2002, most of them dying this year in suicide blasts or clashes with Taliban militants.

"We've made a commitment to our allies, our troops are working hard, they're in a dangerous situation -- our government's not going to stand back here and play political games ... we have a moral obligation to stand behind these people," Harper said.

The left-leaning New Democrats want the troops to be pulled out while the main opposition Liberal Party -- which, when in government, originally sent troops to Afghanistan -- says the force should be helping the process of reconstruction

RCMP to boost Afghan aid `Eager' to expand efforts to improve local police force - Dec. 16, 2006. BRUCE CAMPION-SMITH OTTAWA BUREAU Toronto Star

OTTAWA—The RCMP is boosting its assistance to help improve the rudimentary Afghan National Police force and says it's "eager" to participate in a new European Union initiative to bolster policing in the troubled country.

At an EU summit in Brussels yesterday, European leaders — under pressure from NATO to do more in Afghanistan — endorsed the idea of dispatching a police mission to train local officers and the judiciary.

"The EU stands ready to intensify its efforts," said a draft statement drawn up at the summit.

An EU fact-finding mission is just back from Kabul and Kandahar, where they talked to Canadian police officers already on the ground, RCMP Supt. Wayne Martin said yesterday.

"We are eager to contribute. We see this as a great addition to the police development team..." he said. "As to any numbers that we may contribute to the EU mission ... I don't know at this time," he said in an interview.

In the meantime though, the RCMP is moving ahead with its own efforts to expand Canada's program to help train the fledgling police force.

By March, an additional five RCMP and municipal police officers will join five already in Afghanistan to help local police officers learn the ropes in Kandahar, Martin said.

The new officers will be from forces in Cape Breton, Niagara region, Medicine Hat, Alta., as well as two from the RCMP.

The Canadian officers are helping their Afghanistan counterparts with weapons training, foot and vehicle patrols, "catastrophic" first aid training as well as providing equipment and winter clothing.

"Bringing more people on board we'll be able to conduct more training initiatives," said Martin, who returned in August from a year-long stint in Kandahar.

"I saw a police force that was in need of help. I saw a country that was in severe need of help. I saw police officers doing patrol in flip-flops during winter ... that's how basic the needs were. They didn't have boots," said Martin, who works with international peacekeeping operations at RCMP headquarters in Ottawa.

A joint report this month by the inspector generals of the U.S. state and defence departments concluded the Afghan police force's readiness to carry out law enforcement duties is "far from adequate." It said officers are paid less than the Taliban militants they are fighting and many are open to bribery.

As well, Ottawa announced it is dispatching an additional Canadian International Development Agency officer to Afghanistan to help the provincial reconstruction team with redevelopment efforts.

While the team has more 300 military personnel, it only has three CIDA officials and one foreign affairs official. Meanwhile, at a briefing yesterday, federal officials defended the work of the provincial reconstruction team that has been oft-criticized for the slow pace of work.

Canadian general says reinforcements in Afghanistan would shorten conflict – Saturday, December 16, 2006

KANDAHAR, Afghanistan (CP) - Canadian troops will make do with the resources at hand in Afghanistan even though reinforcements to the war-torn southern region would shorten the conflict, said the man in charge of all overseas Canadian Forces operations.

"I and we are not going to dwell on this at the tip of the sphere here in Afghanistan. The commanders don't sit here wringing their hands, saying, 'I need more troops,' " Lt.-Gen. Mike Gauthier, commander of the Canadian Expeditionary Forces Command, said in an interview with The Canadian Press.

"They do what they can with what they have and they do it extremely well," said Gauthier, 50, of Longueuil, Que., who was on one of his frequent trips visiting the troops Friday.

Canadian soldiers in southern Afghanistan will see a handful of fresh reinforcements and can count on its long-standing allies for help only under emergency circumstances, NATO leaders decided last month. Several European countries intend to remove their so-called national caveats - restrictions that prevent them from fighting Taliban militants.

But the fact remains that NATO forces could use the extra troops to good purpose, said Gauthier.

"Just about everybody has recognized that, yeah, it would be helpful to have more troops. If we had more troops we could get it done more quickly and more easily than with the number of troops we have now," Gauthier added.

"The south of Afghanistan is tough, the province of Kandahar is tough. There is no absolute figure you can attach to this," he said.

Gauthier said increasing numbers of Afghanistan National Army troops and members of the Afghan National Police are helping but are not ready to take on a greater role in the security of the region.

Current levels are not at a crisis situation, said Gauthier, but it's a fact that coalition forces could be doing a better job with more resources.

"Canadians and others operating in the south are getting the job done. Are they everywhere they need to be? No. but you play the cards you're dealt," he said.

"It's up to the international community to determine how much it wants to invest in Afghanistan."

The issue of extra resources and more troops is something discussed on a regular basis at the diplomatic level, said Canada's ambassador to Afghanistan, David Sproule.

"This is raised at the various forums, the program policy action group. It's raised when I meet with other ambassadors, particularly with those who have troops in Afghanistan," Sproule said.

It's a big decision to transfer resources already invested elsewhere in the country to the south where security is a major issue, said Sproule, and it's something that has to be approved at home as well.

"Any decision made as far as the deployment of soldiers in Afghanistan is obviously a decision governments back home have to make - so it is a political decision," he said. Canada currently has about 2,500 troops deployed in Afghanistan, mostly in the south.

Hillier affirms 'robust' role in Afghanistan

OTTAWA -- The killing of Taliban commanders and suicide bomb-makers is a principal aim of the latest NATO offensive in southern Afghanistan, Canada's top military commander told The Canadian Press yesterday.

"There is still a significant Taliban presence in Kandahar province," Chief of Defence Staff Gen. Rick Hillier said in a wide-ranging interview with the news agency.

"One of the parts of this kind of operation is in particular to neutralize -- or take out -- the leaders who plan, prepare, facilitate; who get the money and get the vehicles for people" to conduct suicide bombings.

NATO and Afghan forces were massing yesterday for a major new offensive against the Taliban in the volatile Panjwaii district of Kandahar province, NATO announced. The offensive, entitled Operation Falcon's Summit -- or Baaz Tsuka in the Afghan language -- was billed in a NATO news release as a show of strength and a demonstration of the coalition's ability to combat and defeat the Taliban.

Hillier would not confirm whether Canada is part of this latest offensive, but says the country does have a "robust" presence in Kandahar province. The latest offensive comes just weeks after Operation Medusa, in which an estimated 600 Taliban were killed

Liberals shouldn't succumb to the Bloc's politicking on Afghanistan, Vancouver Sun EditorialFriday, December 15, 2006

The threat by Bloc Quebecois leader Gilles Duceppe to try to topple the , minority Conservative government over Canadians' role in Afghanistan must be taken seriously. The threat, however, is not so much to the Conservatives, since they know they will be knocked off their tenuous perch at some point in the next 12 months, but to Liberals at whom it is really aimed.

The Bloc knows it can count on the support of the New Democrats for a non-confidence motion that calls for Canadian troops to be pulled out of Afghanistan. But regardless of how excited they get over their standing in the polls, Liberals should not bring the government down over this issue.

First, it is sophistry for Liberal leader Stephane Dion to argue that while, yes, our current mission in Afghanistan was launched by a Liberal government, it is no longer a legitimate role for Canada now that it has been extended under the Conservatives.

More importantly, however, no one has yet shown that the role being performed at great cost by our soldiers is no longer needed. Most Canadians are reasonably concerned about Afghanistan. Our soldiers are dying and it is hard to see much progress from here.

Most would agree with the Bloc that we should be pouring our resources into reconstruction rather than engaging in risky battles with Taliban fighters.

But reconstruction cannot be effectively done in the absence of some semblance of security. Until that security is achieved, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization mission -- the mission approved by the Liberals -- and Canada's part in it is not over.

We don't expect a positive contribution from the Bloc, but until the Liberals can provide a constructive alternative, we expect them to continue to support the mission they launched. Either that or they should be prepared to explain to the families of the soldiers who have already died why their sacrifice is being forgotten for the sake of political advantage.

Afghan TV debates obstacles to programme to bring "war criminals" to justice

Afghan Tolo TV broadcast its regular weekly discussion feature, the "Gozaresh-e Shahonim" (The 6:30 Report) programme at 1400 gmt on 14 December. This programme focused on the action programme to bring to justice those guilty of war crimes in Afghanistan.

The presenter explained the five pillars of the action programme, which are reform of the judiciary; reform of the government administration and purging it of individuals accused of committing human rights abuses; establishing basic structures for bringing criminals to justice; developing mechanisms for victims to tell their stories and documentation on the war and crimes against humanity.

Sima Samar, the head of Afghanistan's independent human rights commission, strongly supported the action programme. "This programme is a result of the joint efforts of the independent human rights commission of Afghanistan, the UN and representatives of the Afghan president. This programme was approved by the cabinet of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan on 12 December last year," she said.

Tom Koenigs, the UN secretary general's representative, spoke about the weaknesses of the judiciary in Afghanistan: "At present, even if we bring the most dangerous war criminals to justice, they will not be sentenced to the punishment they deserve either because of weakness in the judicial system or because the evidence and proof are not clear enough. So what we need to do is to find out the facts first and then step forward and bring criminals to justice," he said.

The broadcast went on to focus on the reactions of various parties to the action programme.

A human right activist said this programme was an attempt to bring justice and stability to Afghanistan. "People welcome and support this programme but the government has not supported it to date otherwise we would have made much greater progress from the year 2004 until now. Also, the international community did not seem to be interested in raising this issue [in the past]," the activist said.

Mohammad Esmail Khan, the minister of energy and water whose name is in the list of war criminals, said he was not ready to be brought to justice by foreigners: "If the people of Afghanistan call us war criminals we are ready to go to court. But we are sure that our nation will not allow foreigners to bring the champions of the freedom of this country to justice," he said.

Abdorrab Rasul Sayyaf, member of the lower house, shared almost the same view as Esmail Khan. He said in part of his interview: "This is not the decision of the people of Afghanistan. It is a plot by a small group who are the enemies of Islam and the enemies of the people of Afghanistan. If they stand against us and show their enmity, let them do what they can." He also added that the mojahedin were not responsible for the genocide and destruction of the country.

Dad Nurani, a journalist, said: "They are really criminals but they are trying to influence public opinion by their manoeuvres and to camouflage their crimes. Their crimes will become more evident the day they are brought to justice."

Tom Koenigs said: "I think this will be challenged by all those who feel that they are involved and think that they might have committed war crimes. It is like this all over the world. But there should be no amnesty for war crimes because if the war criminals understand that they will not be punished for their crimes, we will witness a repetition of such crimes."

Abdol Salam Zahif, formerly the Taleban ambassador to Pakistan, said he believed that raising this issue at such a sensitive time would not benefit Afghanistan. He added that the government currently does not have the ability to bring all war criminals to justice. Besides, crimes are currently being committed in Afghanistan such as bombing the homes of innocent people, entering their houses and violating their rights but the government and human rights bodies do not regard these as crimes.

At the end of the programme the presenter pointed to the concerns of the United Nations and legal bodies about the challenges facing implementation of this programme. According to him, one of the challenges is that a large number of war criminals and violators of human rights hold senior government posts. They can create all sorts of obstacles to this action programme to ensure their survival. He said justice should not be used for political ends, adding that it would be an even greater crime against humanity if this were allowed to happen.

Step up aid to Afghanistan

Newsday, Editorial 12/15/2006 - The goal: Stop the resurgent Taliban. In Afghanistan, the United States and its NATO allies are in danger of losing their fight against a resurgent Taliban and an emboldened al-Qaida. Unless NATO makes a serious commitment to building up its combat forces, delivers much more aid and reconstruction money and comes to an accommodation with powerful drug lords, Kabul's fragile democracy will fail.

Then Afghanistan could once again come under the control of an extremist Islamic theocracy, which would again provide haven for global terrorism. That must not be allowed to happen.

Afghanistan's prospects are dire. A report earlier this week by a leading global policy think tank, the International Crisis Group, warns that a policy of appeasement by Pakistan's government has allowed Islamist militants to regroup and rearm in that nation's western provinces bordering Afghanistan. The report blasts Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf's deals for a separate peace with the tribal leaders of those provinces, which has allowed the Taliban and al-Qaida to increase massively their recruitment and training.

In turn, that has led to a strong surge in cross-border attacks. Battles between NATO forces and Taliban fighters increased from fewer than 1,400 last year to nearly 4,000 so far this year. Yet neither President George W. Bush nor British Prime Minister Tony Blair has been able to convince their NATO allies to increase the meager 32,000 NATO troops deployed in the country. More important major NATO members like Germany and France continue to refuse to allow their troops to engage in combat.

Kabul's weak, corrupt government of President Hamid Karzai doesn't function. The country is virtually ruled by drug lords whose opium crops fuel the nation's economy - and help fund the Taliban and al-Qaida. The drug lords must be lured into cooperating with NATO, with bribes if necessary. Promised aid must be delivered. The goal now can no longer be fostering the dream of democracy, but preventing Afghanistan from falling under Taliban rule once again.

Pakistan blocks `Taleban law` - 15 Dec 06

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan (UPI) -- Pakistan`s Supreme Court has blocked a fresh attempt to enact a Taleban-style law to enforce Islamic morality in North West Frontier Province (NWFP). The court instructed the provincial governor not to sign the bill, which is opposed by President Pervez Musharraf.

North West Frontier Province, which is governed by an alliance of religious parties sympathetic to the Taleban, passed the legislation last month. Last year a similar bill was declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court.

President Musharraf, who says he wants Pakistan to espouse an enlightened, moderate form of Islam, has denounced the bill as fundamental breach of human rights. Correspondents say it is almost unheard of for the same bill passed by a provincial assembly to be challenged twice in the courts by the federal government, BBC Online reports.

The Supreme Court ordered the NWFP governor not to sign the Hisba (Accountability) bill into law until the case had been decided. It said it would take up the matter again in the third week of January, when the NWFP government is to be given a chance to defend the bill.

The ruling came after a petition from President Musharraf, Attorney General Makhdoom Ali Khan said. NWFP Information Minister Asif Iqbal Daudzai, a member of the ruling alliance of religious parties, accused the government of being undemocratic.

'We are really surprised. We drafted the bill in light of the Supreme Court`s directives,' he told Reuters news agency. 'The federal government`s decision to go to the court exposes their claims that they believe in democracy.'

The bill adopted by the NWFP assembly last month was a watered-down version of the legislation rejected by the Supreme Court last year, again after a petition from the president. The key difference between the bills is that the proposed department to be set up to enforce morality will not have its own police force.

It would, however, be able to requisition police 'to promote virtue and prevent vice'. The plan is reminiscent of the infamous Department for the Prevention of Vice and Promotion of Virtue, set up by Afghanistan`s former Taleban rulers. It became a focus of criticism by human rights organisations.

Religious police would patrol the streets in Afghanistan, forcing women to adhere to a strict dress code and men to pray and grow their beards, among other things. Observers say the battle in the courts reflects a struggle between moderates and conservatives over the direction of Pakistan.

Two of the country`s four provinces are governed by the six-party Islamic alliance, the Muttahida Majlis-e Amal (MMA). The BBC`s Barbara Plett in Islamabad says President Musharraf has had a tacit alliance with the Islamic parties but he has become increasingly critical of them.

[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.]