In this bulletin:

• President Karzai Will Leave for China
• Pakistani MP remarks irks Afghan govt
• Coalition, Afghan forces kill 26 militants
• 2 Coalition soldiers killed during operations in Afghanista
• House Passes $66 Billion Bill For Iraq And Afghanistan
• Diplomats claim Afghan appointments mark setback
• Support for Afghan Mission Grows in Canada
• U.S. Congress votes unanimously to thank Canada for extending Afghan mission
• UK fears record Afghan heroin output
• Inside the Afghan drug trade
• Partners consulted on reshuffling in police: Ministry
• The Big Question: Why are British troops
• Afghanistan's Cultural Gap Grows Wider
• Afghan journalists living with fear
• NATO Goes Global

President Karzai Will Leave for China

Arg, Kabul – H.E. Hamid Karzai, President of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan, will leave for China to attend the “5 th Summit of Shanghai Co-operation Organisation (SCO)” and to make an official visit to Beijing after the summit.  

The President, as a special guest at the SCO summit, will address the 5 th Summit of Shanghai Co-operation Organisation on a wide range of issues.

On the fringes of the SCO summit, the President will hold meetings with H.E. Vladimir Putin, President of Russia, H.E. Pervez Musharraf, President of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, H.E. Islam Karimov, President of the Republic of Uzbekistan, Emomali Rahmonov, President of the Republic of Tajikistan, H.E. Kurmanbek Bakiyev, President of the Republic of Kyrgyzstan, H.E. Natsagiyn Bagabandi, President of Mongolia and Secretary General of the Shanghai Co-operation Organisation to discuss bilateral relations, economic and social development in the region and the regional cooperation among the SCO member states.

During his official visit to Beijing, the President will meet with H.E. Hu Jintao, President of the People's Republic of China, and other high ranking Chinese officials to discuss bilateral relations and other issues of mutual interest.

The President will address students, teachers and researchers from Beijing University and China’s International Relations Institute on the expansion of relations between Afghanistan and the People’s Republic of China, the fight against terrorism and other regional issues.

The Governments of Afghanistan and China will sign agreements on the expansion of trade ties, the establishing of counseling relations between the Ministries of Foreign Affairs of both countries, the strengthening of cooperation between the Chambers of Commerce and the Investment Support Institutions of both countries, the strengthening of cooperation between China and Afghanistan in the fight against drug trafficking, the strengthening of cooperation between the two countries in the areas of agriculture, customs tariffs and aerial services and the training of Afghanistan’s military personnel.

The President will also visit the wind-powered electricity generation factories, the schemes of solar-generated electricity and dairy manufacturing plants in China’s Shian and Singiang cities bordering Afghanistan.

The President will leave China for Kazakhstan to attend the second conference on “Interaction and Confidence Building Measures in Asia” which will be held in Almata, Kazakhstan.   

The conference on Interaction and Confidence Building Measures in Asia aims to seek ways and means to promote confidence-building and to strengthen good neighborhood and cooperation among the SCO member states.

The President is accompanied to the SCO summit by H.E. Dr. Rangin Dadfar Spanta, Minister of Foreign Affairs, H.E. Dr. Zalmay Rasoul, National Security Advisor, H.E. Dr. Eshaq Naderi, Senior Advisor to the President on Economics and H.E. Jawed Ludin, Chief of Staff to the President.

H.E. Dr. Amin Arsala, Senior Minister and Acting Minister of Commerce, H.E. Dr. Anwarulhaq Ahadi, Minister of Finance, H.E. Obaidullah Ramin, Minister of Agriculture & Irrigation and H.E. Dr. Sayed Makhdom Raheen, Acting Minister of Youth and Culture will also join the President on his official trip to Beijing.

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

Pakistani MP remarks irks Afghan govt

KABUL, June 12 (Pajhwok Afghan News): Ministry of Foreign Affairs has expressed deep concern over the statement of MP of Muttahida Majlis-i-Amal (MMA) on Taliban support.

MMA MP Dr Atta-ur-Rahman said on Saturday in Parliament that they were still supporting Taliban in Afghanistan as they were doing in the past. He said: "We have been supporting the Taliban government and will continue doing so." The MMA MP said this, in response of a government MP, who asked the religious alliance to announce its support for Taliban loud and clear, if it had any sympathy with the dethroned rulers.

A statement issued here by the ministry on Monday dubbed such saying as responsible and clear interference in the internal affairs of Afghanistan, and termed against the international norms, in particular the UN resolutions on war against terror.

The ministry was expecting the government of Pakistan to disapprove such statements, the release said, adding such groups were acting against the will of both the nations.

Such statements were reinforcing the conviction of the people and the government of Afghanistan about the continuing outsiders' interference in the internal affairs of the country.

Coalition, Afghan forces kill 26 militants

Musa Qala (AP) - Coalition and Afghan forces killed 26 suspected militants Wednesday in fighting in eastern mountains, while in southern Afghanistan, more than 11,000 troops prepared for their biggest offensive since the fall of the Taliban five years ago.

Suspected Taliban militants attacked a coalition logistics patrol in Helmand province in southern Afghanistan with rocket-propelled grenades and small arms fire, killing one American soldier and wounding two others, the U.S. military said.

About 100 British troops were quickly air-dropped in to support the patrol and coalition air fire killed or wounded 12 militants in the area, said coalition spokesman Maj. Quentin Innis. Another coalition soldier died in combat in the eastern Kunar region.

Coalition and Afghan forces killed 26 suspected Taliban militants in eastern mountains near the Pakistani border, said Paktika provincial Gov. Akram Khelwak. Helicopter gunships and artillery fire supported troops on the ground, Khelwak said. One Afghan police officer was wounded.

Four civilians were also killed when a rocket hit their home in a separate rebel attack in Paktika, Khelwak said.

The major offensive that starts Thursday will involve 11,000 U.S., British, Canadian and Afghan troops. The push, which aims to squeeze Taliban fighters in four volatile provinces, will focus on southern Uruzgan and northeastern Helmand, where the military says most of the forces are massed.

Dubbed Operation Mountain Thrust, the offensive comes amid Afghan and coalition efforts to curb the fiercest Taliban-led violence since the hard-line Islamic government was toppled for harboring Osama bin Laden following the Sept. 11 attacks.

"This is not just about killing or capturing extremists," U.S. spokesman Col. Tom Collins told reporters in Kabul as he announced the operation.

"We are going to go into these areas, take out the security threat and establish conditions where government forces, government institutions, humanitarian organizations can move into these areas and begin the real work that needs to be done."

The force of more than 11,000 troops is the largest deployed in Afghanistan for one operation since the 2001 invasion. Previous offensives have involved several thousand soldiers.

U.S. troops on Wednesday built walls of sand and guard outposts around the small forward operating base that will support the operation.

Maj. Gen. Benjamin C. Freakley, U.S. operational commander in Afghanistan, had earlier told The Associated Press that coalition and Afghan troops would attack "Taliban enemy sanctuary or safe haven areas" in Kandahar, Helmand, Zabul and Uruzgan provinces.

"Right now ... they'll be in one area, they'll move out of that area, they'll conduct an attack in another area, then move back to a safe haven," he said last week in an interview at Bagram, the U.S. military headquarters north of Kabul.

"This is our approach to put simultaneous pressure on the enemy's networks, to cause their leaders to make mistakes, and to attack those leaders," Freakley told the AP ahead of the operation.

The offensive began May 15 with attacks on Taliban command and control and support networks. According to U.S. military and Afghan figures, about 550 people, mostly militants, have been killed since mid-May in the fiercest fighting since the Taliban's ouster. At least nine coalition troops have been killed in combat during the same time.

That fighting included up to 200 Taliban rebels attacking Musa Qala before fleeing from hundreds of coalition and Afghan forces.

Conditions permitting, Thursday will mark what the military calls the start of major and decisive anti-Taliban operations lasting through the summer. Reconstruction projects also play a major role.

The operation will involve about 2,300 U.S. conventional and special forces, 3,300 British troops, 2,200 Canadians, about 3,500 Afghan soldiers and coalition air support, Freakley said.

Some American forces will rotate out once the operation finishes at the end of the summer, while the British and Canadians will remain.

The offensive, which the military has been planning for 18 months, coincides with a surge in militant attacks in the southern and eastern provinces near the Pakistani border, where Afghan authorities have little or no presence.

Another major offensive, involving 2,500 U.S. and Afghan troops, was launched in April in eastern Kunar province and its reconstruction phase is continuing, Freakley said. But the Taliban is the strongest in the south.

Since the Taliban regime's defeat in late 2001, the militants have gained strength, said another military spokesman, Lt. Col. Paul Fitzpatrick. "I think this summer the Taliban is stronger than they've been in years."

Militants have launched more suicide bombings against coalition troops in recent months, and staged nighttime attacks on government headquarters in small villages. The Taliban campaign, officials said, aims at convincing villagers the government cannot provide security, as well as to test NATO forces moving into the area.

Some of the increased fighting can be attributed to many more troops now being in the south. "A year ago there was one infantry company in Helmand. Now there (are) 3,300 British," Freakley said. "The enemy was doing whatever they wanted. Now we're going into areas we haven't been in before, and now there's a backlash."

Maj. Geoff Catlett, an operational planner for the offensive, said coalition and Afghan forces would pressure Taliban militants in western Uruzgan and northeast Helmand.

Just north, the Hazara people — a rival tribe to the ethnic Pashtuns, from which the Taliban draws its fighters — will provide a "tribal backstop" for the coalition, he said.

Mountain Thrust aims at establishing a permanent Afghan army presence in the south, providing security for aid groups and boosting Afghan troop development, said Col. Michael Coss, chief of military operations at Bagram.

Another goal is to set the conditions for NATO's International Security Assistance Force, which takes command in Afghanistan from the U.S.-led coalition in late July or early August. The NATO force will have 6,000 troops stationed permanently in the south, double what the coalition has had in recent years.

2 Coalition soldiers killed during operations in Afghanistan

KABUL, June 14 (Xinhua) -- Two U.S.-led Coalition soldiers were killed while conducting combat operations on Tuesday in two separate incidents in Afghanistan, said the military on Wednesday.

One Coalition soldier was killed in southern province of Helmand defending a combat logistics patrol from attacking Taliban militants. A second Coalition Soldier was killed while engaging insurgentsin eastern province of Kunar, said the Coalition forces in a news release.

Meanwhile, 14 suspected Taliban rebels were killed in the latest clashes between the Coalition forces and Taliban militants,according to a spokesman for the international forces in southern Afghanistan.

In a bid to wipe out Taliban-linked militants, the Coalition forces and Afghan National Security forces have been conducting continuous offensive operations in southern and southeastern Afghan provinces.

More than 400 people have lost their lives in the bloody battles in the war-torn country over the past one month. Enditem

House Passes $66 Billion Bill For Iraq And Afghanistan - June 13, 2006

Washington, D.C. (AHN) - The U.S. House of Representatives has passed a measure appropriating an additional $66 billion for military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The money comes within a $94.5 billion request from the Bush Administration, with funds for hurricane relief for the Gulf Coast, avian flu precautions, and border security. The bill, which easily passed with a 351-67 vote, was met with approval by much of the House.

House Majority Leader John Boehner (R-OH) explains, "This bill ensures we give (U.S. troops) all of the equipment and resources necessary to successfully fight and win the Global War on Terror."

According to Forbes, when combined with earlier bills, the House-Senate compromise brings the tally for the three-year-old war in Iraq to about $320 billion. Operations in Afghanistan have now reached about $89 billion, according to the Congressional Research Service.

Diplomats claim Afghan appointments mark setback - June 14, 2006 PakTribune

Kabul: Hamid Karzai, the president, approved a list of 86 senior police officers earlier this week but side-stepped the recommendations of a police reform committee and ignored the results of an examination designed to rank officers according to merit.

"I don’t think it is beneficial to the professionalisation of the police," said Tom Koenigs, the special representative of the Secretary General of the United Nations in Afghanistan.

At the last minute 11 men who had not passed the examinations were added to the list of appointments by the president, replacing better qualified candidates.

"It means the bankruptcy of our investment in this country. The west has spent billions on the reform of the police and army but everything is up to the whims of a president who doesn’t feel strong enough to challenge the old guard," said another western official in Kabul, who spoke on the condition of anonymity.

The 11th hour changes brought in two men who are barely literate, another who was thrown off the ballot of the September legislative elections for his links with armed groups, and others known to have links with the drugs trade or poor records on human rights.

With the state of the police force in the spotlight following this month’s riots in Kabul - in which some policemen shed their uniforms to join the looters as violence spiralled - the new appointments sent a poor signal for prospects of further reform.

The frustrations of ordinary Afghans "go with an unprofessional if not corrupt police and government officials who don’t perform as they should. This is not reform, it is more of the same, and all the problems we have had with the police will continue and frustration will grow," said Mr Koenigs.

Zarar Ahmad Moqbil, interior minister, said earlier this week that police commanders who had fought in the jihad against the Russians had "a right" to be in the police.

He added that the 11 people who had not passed their police exams would be appointed for a probationary period. "There will be an evaluation period of four months and we can see those who don’t perform adequately," he said.

Across southern Afghanistan, where Nato will take command in coming weeks, and in parts of the east, where US-led soldiers continue to battle the Taliban, appointments have been in line with professional criteria.

Ronald E. Neumann, US ambassador, said earlier this week the new police line-up had removed a number of individuals who deserved to be dismissed. However, in the north and west, the changes to the line-up are likely to be destabilising, western diplomats said.

Support for Afghan Mission Grows in Canada - June 14, 2006

(Angus Reid Global Scan) – More Canadian adults are in favour of their country’s military presence in Afghanistan, according to a poll by The Strategic Counsel released by CTV and the Globe and Mail. 48 per cent of respondents support the decision to send Canadian troops to the region, up eight points since May.

Afghanistan has been the main battleground in the war on terrorism. The conflict began in October 2001, after the Taliban regime refused to hand over Osama bin Laden, prime suspect in the 9/11 terrorist attacks in New York and Washington. Al-Qaeda operatives hijacked and crashed four airplanes on Sept. 11, 2001, killing nearly 3,000 people.

Canadians renewed the House of Commons in January. The Conservative party—led by Stephen Harper—received 36.3 per cent of the vote, and secured 124 seats in the 308-member lower house. Since February, Harper leads a minority administration after more than 12 years of government by the Liberal party.

In May, the House of extended Canada’s mission in Afghanistan until February 2009. At least 377 soldiers—including 16 Canadians—have died in the war on terrorism, either in support of the U.S.-led Operation Enduring Freedom or as part of the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) led by the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO).

The mission in Afghanistan has affected the Liberal party’s leadership race. Academic Michael Ignatieff explained his rationale for voting in favour of the extension, saying, "I had to make a choice to stand with the mission, stand with the troops." Former Ontario premier Bob Rae declared, "The suggestion being made by Mr. Harper, particularly, that if you vote against the resolution, you are not supportive of Canadian troops who are overseas—that is a most unfair conclusion to draw and a most unfair thing to say."

The Liberal party will elect a new leader in December. Aside from Ignatieff and Rae, eight other party members—including former environment minister Stéphane Dion and former Ontario education minister Gerard Kennedy—are running.

Overall, would you say you support or oppose the decision to send Canadian troops to Afghanistan?

Source: The Strategic Counsel / CTV / The Globe and Mail
Methodology: Telephone interviews with 1,000 Canadian adults, conducted on Jun. 7 and Jun. 8, 2006. Margin of error is 3.1 per cent.

U.S. Congress votes unanimously to thank Canada for extending Afghan mission
Canadian Press - Wednesday, June 14, 2006

WASHINGTON (CP) - The U.S. House of Representatives has passed a resolution commending Canada for its commitment to Afghanistan.

Indiana Republican Dan Burton introduced the resolution saying he wanted U.S. legislators to recognize Canada's vote last month to extend the Afghan mission by two years into 2009. The resolution passed by a vote of 409 to 0.

Burton says Canada's decision signals its commitment to the global war on terror and its friendship with the United States. Burton says the vote is a small token of appreciation to Canada, which he says is facing its own growing threat of terrorists inspired by al-Qaida.

UK fears record Afghan heroin output

Declan Walsh in Kabul Tuesday June 13, 2006 (The Guardian)

The Afghanistan province being patrolled by British troops will produce at least one third of the world's heroin this year, according to drug experts who are forecasting a harvest that is both a record for the country and embarrassing for the western funded war on narcotics.

British officials are bracing themselves for the result of an annual UN poppy survey due later this summer. Early indications show an increase on Helmand's 1999 record of 45,000 hectares (112,500 acres) and a near-doubling of last year's crop.

"It's going to be massive," said one British drugs official. "My guess is it's going to be the biggest ever." UN, American and Afghan officials agreed.

"It could be over 50,000 hectares, or over 50% of the total [Aghan] crop," said General Muhammad Daud, the deputy interior minister for counter-narcotics. Helmand's bumper harvest highlights the dramatic failure of western counter-narcotics efforts that have cost at least $2bn (about £1.09bn) since 2001. It could undo progress made last year, when poppy cultivation dropped 21% after President Hamid Karzai's call for a "jihad" on drugs. And it spells particularly bad news for Britain, which is leading the anti-narcotics campaign and has deployed 3,300 soldiers to the large and lawless province.

As Afghanistan accounts for almost 90% of the world's heroin supply, that would mean Helmand supplies about one-third. Drug experts say the province is as central to Afghanistan's illegal economy as California is to America's legal one.

"If you took Helmand out of the picture, Afghanistan would fall from the world's top poppy grower to second or third place," said one US official. British and American officials cannot resort to the tactics of the Taliban, which slashed poppy cultivation to 8,000 hectares in 2001 by threatening to shoot farmers. But western efforts using less violent methods, such as encouraging farmers to grow legal crops, have proved fruitless.

The smuggling kingpins who control the £1.5bn trade have become rich, powerful and apparently untouchable. Although several hundred low-level couriers have been arrested, not one "big fish" has been tried in Afghanistan - a critical failing according to analysts. "Until Karzai arrests and jails one big dealer, people will not believe the central government is behind this drive," said a former American anti-narcotics contractor.

The most damaging allegations swirl around the minister charged with counter-narcotics, Gen Daud. Several western officials allege Gen Daud, a former Tajik warlord, has historical and family links to smuggling. Gen Daud denies the allegations as "politicking" and blames the British embassy for trying to slur his reputation.

"It is very shameful for a big country with such a good reputation to make allegations like this. They should first investigate, and if they have any proof bring it forward," he said at his office.

As proof of his modest wealth, Gen Daud said the government paid his rent, his children walked to school and one of his brothers worked as a taxi driver in Saudi Arabia.

Sour relations with the drugs minister are not the only problem facing British officials in tackling this year's bumper crop. American congressmen are ratcheting up pressure to start poppy eradication using pesticide-spraying planes, a controversial tactic. Aerial spraying has been used extensively against coca plantations in Colombia but is trenchantly opposed by British and Afghans officials, who say it would be disastrous in Afghanistan. "It could drive farmers into the hands of the insurgents," said one.

But an American official predicted that without a dramatic drop in next year's crop, spraying could lead to a UK-US rift by 2008. "Spraying will continue to be a cloud on the horizon and it will get darker," he said.

In Helmand British commanders insists the 3,300 soldiers will avoid tackling drugs in favour of providing security and development funds. "We have to put the things in place that will make it no longer necessary to grow poppy," said a senior officer.

But drug experts say it will be impossible to avoid the drugs war. Britain's main enemy, the Taliban, has developed close links to drug smugglers, sometimes providing them with weapons and vehicles. On Sunday a British soldier, named as Captain Jim Philippson, became the first combat fatality in Helmand after a battle with suspected Taliban forces.

Inside the Afghan drug trade - The Christian Science Monitor - 6/13/2006 By Scott Baldauf

KABUL - The Afghan police chief doesn't realize his voice is being taped. So pardon him if he brags about his life as a drug trafficker.

In a friendly conversation recorded in his home last summer, he tells of his quarrels with another drug-dealing police commander in the country's northern Takhar Province; about driving through a rival's police checkpoint with 500 kilos of heroin in his car; and his adventures in rescuing three heroin-smuggling friends from the clutches of Tajik policemen. It's just another part of the job, he says.

"If my adventure were filmed, it would be a very exciting movie," chuckles the commander, referred to hereafter as "Ahmed Noor." On the tape, he laughs. "The UN should give me an award."

But on one point the former mujahideen commander is certain: "Even if all the world were to come to Afghanistan, they will not be able to stop smuggling."

In relative terms, Mr. Noor is a small player in an illegal business that generates $2.7 billion a year, more than half the value of the country's legal economy. Afghan officials and foreign diplomats increasingly call this central Asian country a "narco-state," as top officials find it more profitable to flout laws than enforce them.

Very few major Afghan officials have been removed for involvement in drug trafficking, in part because of the lack of evidence, and in part because the country has only recently created special tribunals to handle major drug cases.

For this reason, the Monitor launched its own investigation in a province known for trafficking, to see how prevalent the drug trade is among police chiefs and what evidence could be found. Sending an investigative unit with a hidden minidisk recorder to the northern province of Takhar – where Afghanistan's medium and low-grade heroin is trafficked into Tajikistan, and on toward Europe – the Monitor recorded four police commanders.

All of the names in this story have been changed. The Monitor deemed it too dangerous for our investigators to confront each of these commanders with the taped evidence, and too unfair to their reputations to release their names without giving them a chance to defend themselves. But the statements in these tapes – gathered by investigators who have excellent reputations collecting testimony for the Afghan Independent Human Rights Commission, among others – provide a rare inside view of how drug corruption has trickled down to the front lines in the country's faltering war on drugs.

“Commander Dost" is commander of a border police unit that patrols a large swath of the border with Tajikistan. In his taped conversation, Dost reveals how widespread the drug trade has become, as police commanders compete with each other to dominate the drug trade in Takhar Province.

"For one year I did the smuggling," he says, on the lawn of his home. "It was not hidden from anybody. It was obvious to everybody. I put my RPG (rocket-propelled grenade launcher) on my shoulder.... I became a dangerous smuggler."

But increasingly, Dost finds himself being run out of the drug business by a group of more powerful police commanders. These commanders have been shutting out all other competitors in the drug trafficking business, says Commander Dost.

A few years back, one of these commanders sent eight men to ambush Commander Dost. "Fortunately I had 25 of my [tribesmen] with me," says Dost. "I used the RPG and fired at the enemy in front of us, and behind us. Finally I made about $70,000 for myself from the drug money."

But at one point, he was captured with $370,000 worth of heroin, and had to sell everything he had – including his Swiss Rado watches and most of his heavy weapons – in order to pay back the owners of that drug. In another instance, Dost was captured by his chief competitor, another police commander.

The commander "caught me once with 56 kg of drugs. He asked me, 'Will you do it again?' and I told him that I would never do that again. Right after I promised him that I would not do that again, I came home and took another 100 kilos of drug and put it in my Russian jeep and took it to sell."

"These persecutors do it themselves, like 300 kilos to 400 kilos each time," Dost complains. These days, "all the smuggling is now in the hands" of these commanders, "and no one can do anything without [their] permission. Except me. When I do it, I tell my boys, 'Anybody who wants to stop you, you should kill them.' "

Commander Nasir - "Commander Nasir" is the police commander of a border district in Takhar Province. Like Commander Dost, Nasir is a relatively small player in the drug trade, but he gives an inside picture of how some of the bigger police commanders – both in Afghanistan and in neighboring Tajikistan – punish drug-trafficking competitors to burnish their law-enforcement credentials, or take bribes from those willing to pay for favorable treatment.

"One day I counted how much I had given" a top police commander, says Nasir, who was a longtime commander during the Russian war, fighting alongside Northern Alliance commander Ahmed Shah Masood. From drug sales and fees, "it was $680,000, just in cash." Nasir pauses. "$680,000! A lot of money, isn't it? But believe me, he [the commander] never had any intention to do anything good for me in return, ever."

Nasir says all the big smuggling these days is being conducted by relatives of this top commander, some of whom are police commanders in Takhar. One relative "takes $50 per kilo to carry it from this side to that side of the border near Tajikistan. And if he catches somebody else smuggling, he takes $5,000 to $10,000 each time."

Nasir says he has stopped taking drugs across the border himself, because he is too well known, but he continues to send his men to do the job instead. Instead of paying his men immediately after a successful mission, now he pays them a week later, so that competing police commanders don't discover his smuggling until it's over.

"When I was a big smuggler, I had relations with the Tajik officers on the other side of the border. But my competitor has relations with the Russian KGB," he says. "[His] people have damaged my business a lot. Once I lost $500,000 of heroin, another time $600,000, another time $700,000, another time $900,000, another time $1.1 million because of [his] people." Nasir laughs. "My opponents have knocked out my 32 teeth."

But as bad as things are with the powerful commander – and after an assassination attempt by the top commander against Nasir, relations are pretty bad – Nasir says he wants to be practical and keep the peace, for now.

"I have a lot of proof and evidence against [the commander]," he says, "but I want to keep my relations good with him."

Ahmed Noor - "Ahmed Noor" is the police commander of a market town along the Afghan-Tajik border in Takhar Province. In the tape, Mr. Noor admits that he's involved in drug trafficking, and gives an up-to-date breakdown of how much profit corrupt police officials make per kilo in the drug trade. But Noor notes with chagrin that other, more powerful commanders are making much more money than he is.

Mentioning one police commander by name, Noor says, "[He] is not happy with $20,000 a night from drug money," he says. "He charged $40 per kilo to transport it to the other side of the border. [He] himself is at home, resting and watching movies, and he plays cards with friends."

This commander moves more than 600 kilos every night, and at $40 a kilo, that's a hefty profit, Noor says. "Believe me, I know he did this six times a week."

But while big players like this commander are able to move large quantities of heroin through Takhar Province, and even through Noor's own district, Noor says that this powerful commander won't share this business with other commanders.

Once, Noor says, this commander warned Noor to stop trafficking in drugs. Noor refused. So the commander started setting up checkpoints to try to catch Noor in the act of smuggling. At one such checkpoint, Noor was driving the car himself, and rather than stop at the checkpoint, he floored the accelerator and attempted to run over an armed soldier blocking the road.

"I had 500 kilos of drugs with me, and I was not going to give up that easily," he says. "So I drove fast to run over the soldier. The soldier runs away and shoots in the air. After I unloaded the car at the border, I came back to the commander of the checkpoint, and asked him why his soldier wanted to stop me. [The checkpoint commander] told me it was the order of [the top commander]. So I warned [the checkpoint commander] and told him that the drug money goes to [the commander's] pocket, but why he is stopping other people's cars. I told him, 'the next time you try to stop me, I will shoot your head to pieces with bullets.' "

Noor admits that the drug business is getting more difficult, and his business partners are becoming less trustworthy. "One day, I took 60 kilos of drugs to the other side of the border to Dushanbe, but the Tajik smuggler took it and did not pay me," he says. "No one can do anything to Tajik smugglers on their soil."

Noor blames the incident on his own sense of trust. "I believed one of my Afghan friends, who told me that this Tajik guy pays better than the others. I believed him."

Commander Bilal - "Commander Bilal" is a senior administrator in the provincial Takhar police force, and a former police commander of a border district along the Tajik border. In his tape, Bilal complains that police discipline is breaking down, and the trafficking has become so fractured that even low-level cops are starting to skim profits. More important, he reveals that drug corruption has infiltrated deep within the Ministry of Interior, the chief law- enforcement organization, as top officials take bribes to appoint corrupt drug dealers into top police positions.

On paper, Bilal is one of the most powerful police commanders in his province, with many district commanders under him. But in reality, with district commanders deeply involved in the drug trade, few of the police officials in Takhar pay attention to him. Things were better, Bilal says, when he was a district police commander.

But even then, it wasn't so good. As a trafficking point, his border town was highly overrated.

"What have they seen [about that town]?" he asks. "There is only one bridge, and anyone you send – even your brother – will not bring any smuggler to you. If some one is caught there and brought to me, I will get $10,000 from him [in bribes]. But that poor soldier standing there will accept $200 from the smuggler [to let him pass through] instead of bringing him to me. I can't stand there myself on the bridge, because it is shameful."

In any case, Bilal says his relations with the drug smugglers was never very warm. "I don't know why, but the smugglers did not trust us," says Bilal. He thinks for a moment, and then continues. One of his colleagues in the police department in the border town, "was playing games with the smugglers. [This commander] is the kind of person who cut a deal with smugglers, takes money from them, and further on up the road, stops and seizes their drugs, too. That was the reason the smugglers did not trust us. "

Bilal says almost all the police commanders in Takhar have paid officials at the Ministry of Interior to get their jobs, and nowadays, commanders have to pay increasing amounts just to keep their jobs.

"Every three months the commanders are pushed a little bit or they are told that they may be replaced. Then everybody rushes toward the ministry with $10,000."

But Bilal says he likes his job. It's not the responsibilities that he likes the most, though. It's the access to the drug trade. "It is a good position," he says. "I pay $1,000 and get $20,000 in profit." "It has some advantages," he says.

Top Afghan officials privately admit that perhaps 80 percent of the personnel at the Ministry of Interior, Afghanistan's chief law-enforcement agency – from local police chiefs up to the top bureaucrats – may be benefiting from the drug trade. At a press conference announcing his resignation last fall, Interior Minister Ali Jalali said that the ministry had a list of 100 top officials who were being watched for evidence of drug trafficking. The result is a government that is either incapable or unwilling to prevent a trade that is rapidly undermining the country's rule of law and the Afghan people's faith in their leadership.

"The wrong elements can be a sapling in our society, and if we act now, we can remove it with less damage," says Habibullah Qaderi, Afghan minister for counternarcotics, a government agency that is separate from the Ministry of Interior. "But if it becomes a tree, there will be more destruction when you remove it."

Already the corrupt sapling is becoming a tree, Mr. Qaderi says, adding that Afghanistan cannot afford to wait for the proof of guilt. "If we had removed these people one by one, the country would have been much much better." The Afghan people need to trust that their government is working in the national interest. "People have to be close with their government. The day there is a distance, that becomes very dangerous."

A note on how we reported this story
The Monitor used a reporting device in this story that it normally avoids: The key interviews, all taped, were with sources who did not realize they were speaking to the press. This presents a risk to fairness and privacy, in that the interviewees might speak more casually and loosely than they would if they knew they were speaking to a reporter. We decided to go forward for several reasons. The subjects in these interviews are all public officials, not private citizens, discussing what should be public business. The issue of drug trafficking, illegal in Afghanistan as nearly everywhere else, is critically important to the future of that country and others. We could find no other safe way to collect direct evidence of this official corruption. But because we could not directly confront these police chiefs without endangering the lives of reporters or interpreters, we decided to withhold their names.

– The editors

Partners consulted on reshuffling in police: Ministry

KABUL, June 12 (Pajhwok Afghan News): The Interior Ministry on Monday rejected as 'unjustifiable' remarks by some representatives of the international community complaining that the ministry did not consult them regarding the recent reshuffle in police ranks.

A statement issued from the Interior Ministry on Monday said officials of countries from the world community involved in the police reform process had already been consulted. 

The statement refered to media reports quoting some Western diplomats who complained that they were not consulted before bringing changes and reshuffling the police officers. 

"The Ministry of Interior believes that implementation of police reform is a joint effort by the government of Afghanistan and our international partners. Germany, the United States of America and the United Nations are particularly involved in this process whose representatives have been consulted all along in the implementation of police reforms," said the statement.

The Big Question: Why are British troops - back in Afghanistan five years after the war? By Tom Coghlan in Kabul The Independent (UK) 13 June 2006

What are British troops doing in Afghanistan?

About 3,300 British troops have been sent to the southern Afghan province of Helmand for what the Government says will be a three-year, £1bn deployment. Britain is stepping into the breach, with Canada and Holland, as the biggest partners in a new Nato-led mission that is seen as the last chance to turn around an increasingly dire situation where a resurgent Taliban, local warlords and a powerful drugs mafia have supplanted such government control as existed in many areas.

Isn't Afghanistan supposed to be a success story?

There have been great achievements since 2001. Presidential and parliamentary elections were adjudged successful; six million children including many girls banned from education by the Taliban are back at school, 4.5 million refugees have returned home, while economic growth has been strong. But for two years there have also been signs that beneath the veneer of progress in the big cities, large parts of the rest of the country are sliding back towards the anarchy that afflicted Afghanistan during the 1990s and gave rise to the Taliban.

To complicate matters Afghanistan's only significant export is heroin. This illicit $2.7bn (£1.46bn) industry warps the entire economy, fuelling corruption, bankrolling the criminal mafia and, increasingly, the Taliban, and giving a huge number of the population a vested interest in maintaining the instability.

What is the British plan to turn this around?

The British are looking to the experience gained from decades of fighting counter-insurgencies around the globe. In Helmand this means a four-stage strategy based on the premise that if they are offered security and economic opportunity, the majority will swing behind the Afghan government and their foreign backers. British forces will first seek to establish a safe zone in Helmand and destroy any Taliban within that. Once security is established the British Department for International Development plan to deluge the area with millions of pounds worth of "quick impact" projects designed to produce rapid improvement in the lives of the local people. Simultaneously, the military will hope to train local security forces to begin to take over from them and begin longer term infrastructural development with other non-government organisations moving in. The final stage sees British troops moving to new areas, creating a series of widening circles of peace and prosperity that will eventually join up.

What problems do they face?

The British commanders aren't pretending it will be easy, or quick, and the numbers of soldiers involved are desperately economic for the control of an area 250 miles by 250 miles. Nor do they enjoy the sort of luxury in equipment, particularly transport helicopters, that their American predecessors enjoyed. That makes the job more difficult and more dangerous.

As the death of a British soldier on Sunday showed, the Taliban remain a force in the south. They have succeeded in killing ever larger numbers of foreign soldiers since 2001. With the adoption of tactics perfected by insurgents in Iraq, specifically the use of suicide bombers and massive roadside bombs, they killed more than a hundred foreign soldiers last year.

As well as fighting the Taliban, British soldiers will have to win the battle for hearts and minds. This will be far from simple in one of the most conservative, opaque and dizzyingly complex tribal societies on earth. And the British will be hindered as much as helped by their supposed Afghan allies. The corrupt Afghan National Police are regarded as little more than bandits with uniforms by much of the populace while many provincial and central government officials they will work with are linked to the drugs mafia, local warlords, the Taliban or all three.

Which way will the locals swing?

The majority of the Pashtuns in the south are not deeply committed to the Taliban's ideology, which is propagated through madrasa religious schools which arelargely on the Pakistani side of the border.

It is, though, a profoundly conservative tribal society with a strong streak of xenophobia running through it, and central government has never had significant influence in the region. Gun-wielding foreign soldiers will be tolerated for a while, but only if they are bringing clear tangible benefits in terms of security and economic benefits. This, the American forces failed to do, particularly during the early days after the fall of the Taliban when they alienated much public opinion by aggressive search operations that were anathema to the Pashtun social code; though they are doing a better job in the eastern areas that they control these days.

British commanders believe that a more sensitive approach to local custom, combined with the prospect of peace and imminent prosperity will do the trick. The Taliban's increasingly active propaganda machine seeks to counter that by portraying the British as infidels who have come to pillage Afghanistan for their own ends, strip the impoverished opium farmer of his livelihood and impose immoral Western values. It also stresses the historical enmity Britain has with Afghanistan after three imperial invasion attempts; Afghans are great students of history and all know they beat the British every time.

What about drugs?

With drugs the mainstay of the Helmand economy (it single-handedly supplies 20 per cent of the world's heroin) British commanders cannot afford to alienate the populace by being associated with poppy eradication. However, it is equally clear that there are increasingly close ties between the Taliban and the drugs mafia, while drug money is at the root of many of the central government's problems. If the British are successful in seeing off the Taliban and introducing some sort of economic stability the drug smugglers and then finally the poppy farmers will be on the target list; not least because Britain is officially supposed to head the international effort against narcotics in Afghanistan.

For the small poppy farmer, the British hope that economic alternatives and peace will be a worthwhile alternative to a life of insecurity and poppy cultivation. However, with poppy a miracle crop that combines great reliability with a return 10 times that of any alternative, that calculation is far from certain.

We are in, so when do we get out?

The British deployment is set to last three years. However, few believe that the situation can be stabilised in that time. British officers talk more in terms of a decade to effect irreversible change for the better while entirely solving Afghanistan's opium production problem will probably take two decades.

Will Britain succeed in Helmand province?

Yes

* Their plan stresses peace and economic prosperity, the two things Afghans say they want most.

* British forces bring a wealth of experience in subtle counter-insurgency work and a joined-up civil military approach.

* By not targeting poppy cultivation the British effort maximises the chances of winning widespread popular backing.

No...

* The British force in Helmand is too small for the job it is being asked to do and badly under-equipped.

* Britain faces a population terrified of Taliban retribution and suspicious of Western motives.

* British troops must rely on allies who are unreliable at best, and in some cases a major part of the problem they have been sent to solve.

Afghanistan's Cultural Gap Grows Wider - NPR (USA) / by Ivan Watson - Morning Edition, June 12, 2006

Eighty years ago, King Amanullah Khan of Afghanistan embarked on a series of radical reforms, highlighted by his move to emancipate women. At one public event, his wife, Queen Soraya, removed her veil. The incident horrified the country's conservative clerics, and helped fuel an insurgency in the countryside which eventually overthrew the king.

Since then, the culture clash between modernizers and traditionalists, and between urban and rural society, has been a constant source of tension which has contributed to rebellions in the provinces against the various central governments. Today, the culture gap between the cities and the villages is as big as ever, and growing.

In Kabul, modern buildings have sprouted up, alongside private TV channels, shopping malls, Chinese, Thai and Italian restaurants. Many young, urban Afghans have embraced international fashion, while consuming music and movies from Europe and Asia. Meanwhile, in the city center, many Afghan women have discarded the all-concealing blue burka, opting instead to dress in headscarves and bright robes.

Drive 10 minutes from the city, however, and step back in time. Villages of mud-brick dwellings still have no electricity or running water. Women are discouraged from setting foot out into the street, and many locals are furious at the developments in Kabul. Religious conservatives say the cities are importing foreign, un-Islamic culture. They have a point: Afghanistan is officially an Islamic republic, where ancient tribal customs are closely intertwined with religion.

Government officials are concerned, worried that the globalization of Kabul will hurt the legitimacy of the government of Hamid Karzai. The internationally backed government is struggling to put down a Taliban insurgency in the south and east of the country. Taliban commanders frequently call Karzai's government corrupt and un-Islamic. Afghan and foreign observers say the more "globalized" Kabul becomes, the more it will help the Taliban.

Afghan journalists living with fear

Photographers and reporters endure government threats, assaults, abductions - GEOFFREY YORK / The Globe & Mail (Canada) / June 13, 2006

KABUL -- As a cameraman in the Afghan parliament, Omid Yakmanish thought he had a routine job, until he was attacked and threatened with death.

It began when he filmed a parliamentary brawl and an attempted attack on a female MP last month. His footage was an embarrassment to many politicians, and the reaction was swift and violent.

First he was confronted and slapped by an MP who had once been a senior Taliban official. A day later came the death threat. "Slaughtering a sheep is difficult for me, but killing you would be easy," the MP told him.

Then came another threat, this time from an anonymous caller on his cellphone. "We know where you live," the caller said. "We could do anything against you."

For the next 10 days, Mr. Yakmanish went into hiding. He became one of the growing number of Afghan journalists who have faced severe pressure from the Afghan authorities, including threats, intimidation, even imprisonment and murder.

Last year alone, there were more than 40 attacks on journalistic freedom in Afghanistan, including two murders and several cases of abduction, assault and imprisonment, according to the Afghan Independent Journalists Association.

"In the rest of the world, journalists have rights," Mr. Yakmanish said in an interview. "But in Afghanistan, I was slapped and threatened. I expected it would be discussed the next day in parliament, but nobody said a word about it."

The attack can be seen on his video record of the incident. A hostile crowd of MPs rushed toward the female parliamentarian, Malalai Joya, after she criticized some of the Muslim fighters who battled the Soviet army in the 1980s. As the cameraman filmed the bottle-throwing confrontation, an MP turned angrily to him and said: "Why is he filming? Kick him out." Then he was slapped twice by another MP, the ex-Taliban official, and pushed out of the chamber.

After the death threat the next day, Mr. Yakmanish went to the national prosecutor's office to file a complaint. But no action was taken. "We don't have much freedom," he said. "Journalists in Afghanistan are restricted. We cannot broadcast freely."

Mr. Yakmanish's television station, Tolo TV, is the most popular channel in Kabul and is often the target of threats. Several of its journalists have quit the station or fled abroad. Another was jailed by intelligence agents after interviewing a Taliban official this spring.

In some ways, the media have flourished since the ousting of the Taliban regime in 2001. Hundreds of newspapers and broadcasting outlets have opened, and standards are more liberal.

But warlords and government officials are often unhappy with the media outlets, especially when they expose cases of corruption or war crimes, and they make it known.

Last fall, two journalists were kidnapped while they were covering a candidate in the parliamentary election. Two other journalists were beaten and detained by security agents for "illegally taking photos of prohibited places" while covering Afghan President Hamid Karzai at an event for International Literacy Day. And the editor of a women's-rights magazine was sentenced to two years in jail for "blasphemy" because of an article discussing whether Muslim women can leave Islam.

"Threats against journalists in Afghanistan have become alarmingly routine," said Ann Cooper, executive director of the New York-based Committee to Protect Journalists, in a statement last year. "Journalists should not face harassment or threats for simply doing their jobs, holding officials accountable for their actions and investigating alleged corruption."

For the fledgling Afghan media, some of the hardest cases to cover are the suspected war crimes of political leaders who remain influential today. The warlords have never been prosecuted, and many journalists are afraid to report on their wartime activities.

"If we try to report about war criminals, we are told that we are damaging national unity," said Masood Qiam, host of an investigative-news program on Tolo TV. "It's a very hot and sensitive subject. Some issues are too dangerous to report."

He recalls how his own staff received threats of violence when he broadcast a report on suspected corruption in the sale of villas that had belonged to Afghanistan's royal family.

"These kinds of threats are very common," he said. "After 30 years of war, it's common now for people to threaten to injure you, or to break your teeth. I expect more of these threats in the future."

NATO Goes Global - A Cold War alliance adapts to the war on terror.

BY MELANIE KIRKPATRICK Tuesday, June 13, 2006

BRUSSELS--The World Cup has opened in Germany, and NATO is there, out in force. No, war hasn't broken out between soccer rivals France and Germany. The trans-Atlantic defense alliance is present at the invitation of Germany, which is worried about the threat of a terrorist attack. NATO planes are patrolling the skies during the monthlong tournament, just as they did during the pope's visit to Poland last month and at the Olympics in Italy in February. Post-9/11 such deployments--more than 30 to date--are part of the alliance's contribution to the defense against global terrorism.

NATO's mission in the age of terror was the subject of a chat last week with Secretary-General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer at NATO's rambling headquarters here. The lanky Dutchman sprawled on a sofa in his office for an interview with Matthew Kaminski, editor of the Journal Europe's editorial page, and me. If there's a word that can sum up our conversation, it's "global." Mr. Scheffer, who has led NATO for two years, is thinking far beyond the borders of the alliance's 26 member countries.

"If you look at the threats and challenges coming to NATO," he says, "these are of a global nature. Terrorism is of a global nature. Weapons of mass destruction proliferation is a global threat. Failed and failing states are happening on a global scale. . . . NATO needs global partners to face those challenges." As if to prove his point, on an easel in a corner of his office a large map of Afghanistan nearly obscures the map of Europe behind it.

Afghanistan is NATO's first mission outside Europe and a crucial test of the alliance's relevance in a post-Cold War world. Defense ministers meeting in Brussels voted Thursday to proceed with a plan to increase alliance forces in Afghanistan to 17,000 from 9,000 and to expand into the violence-plagued south. "We are going into complicated territory in the south," Mr. Scheffer says. "Taliban heartland. The Taliban is testing us--playing on public opinion in the nations committing forces." He doesn't demur when I mention that a retired U.S. general told me he believes insurgents had deliberately targeted the four Canadians who were killed in April with the aim of getting Ottawa to withdraw its troops.

Do the allies have the stomach for a fight? "I'm convinced there is the resolve," he says. Consider what would happen "if we were to lose Afghanistan again to the Taliban. . . . That country would be the net exporter of terrorism to the world once again. Where would the consequences of that terrorism land? On U.S. doorsteps and on European doorsteps."

At the same time, Mr. Scheffer is quick to concede that he's had little success in persuading member nations to spend more on defense. Only seven countries meet NATO's informal requirement that member states spend at least 2% of GDP on defense--and two of those, Turkey and Greece, target much of their spending for a possible conflict with each other. "The situation is bad," Mr. Scheffer says. "I have no other word for it."

In an age of far-flung deployments, airlift--NATO has next to none--is a particularly tough problem. "We need to be able to get [NATO] forces where we need them. That means we need strategic lift, heavy transport aircraft. Those are in short supply." NATO has plenty of helicopters, but no easy way to transport them to Afghanistan.

NATO currently depends on the Yanks and the Brits to take its troops and equipment where they need to be, or it leases planes from the Ukrainians or the Russians. Mr. Scheffer supports a U.S. proposal to encourage some NATO allies to form a consortium to purchase eight C-17s at $225 million apiece. He displays a model of a C-17 in his office, and--like the professional diplomat he is--he also displays an A400-M, an Airbus plane that won't come on the market until 2012. "In my ideal world," he says, NATO would buy a combination of the American and European planes. Translation: Let's spread the arms money around.

Mr. Scheffer stresses the need to work more closely with non-NATO countries. In Afghanistan, NATO leads a coalition of 37 nations, including Australia and New Zealand, whose defense ministers attended last week's ministerial meeting for the first time (as did the Afghan defense minister). In the Mediterranean, two Russian warships are joining NATO in a maritime counterterrorism operation; other partners include Tunisia, Algeria, Morocco and Israel. The sec-gen speaks enthusiastically about the officer training academy NATO wants to open in the Middle East. It already trains soldiers in Iraq, a mission Mr. Scheffer hopes to expand.

NATO is even tackling the touchy issue of missile defense. It just completed a 10,000-page initial study concluding that a missile defense is both necessary and viable. "Where that might lead to is of course another matter," he says. "But [NATO] should not shy from debate."

All these subjects are on the agenda for the NATO heads of state meeting in Riga, Latvia, in November. The last meeting--Prague in 2002-- was the "transformation" summit, when NATO signed on to the proposition that it needed an expeditionary force capable of responding quickly in the world's hotspots. That 25,000-soldier rapid response force should be up and running by Riga. The Afghanistan mission and the potential acquisition of airlift are also signs of progress. NATO isn't fully "transformed" yet, but it's getting there. Under Mr. Scheffer's leadership, Riga may become known as the "global" summit.

Ms. Kirkpatrick is a deputy editor of The Wall Street Journal's editorial page.

[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.]