In this bulletin:

• Eight Taliban fighters killed in southern Afghanistan
• bomber attacks Canadians
• Death of soldier condoled
• Corporal remembered for his courage, sense of duty
• Afghan mission: 10 years
• Gen. Hillier speaks to The Globe on Afghanistan
• Cost of Afghan mission
• Wake up! This is our war too
• Armed Forces needed
• India's Work In Afghanistan
• Short visit but a long haul
• Afghanistan: Who Instigated The Pol-e Charkhi Prison Riot And Why?
• UNHCR to assist repatriation of 150,000 refugees from Iran
• Nasrullah Kakar shot dead in Quetta

Eight Taliban fighters killed in southern Afghanistan
By DPA Mar 3, 2006, 19:00 GMT

Kabul - Eight Taliban loyalists were killed on Friday after the insurgents ambushed a group of Afghan police in Afghanistan\'s southern province of Helmand, officials said.

According to Muhaiuddin, the spokesman for the provincial governor, ten Taliban fighters were also arrested Friday morning during the armed clash that lasted for at least one hour, adding that the incident occurred in the Sangin district of the province.

'The Taliban fighters were killed in return fire,' he said. Muhaiuddin also said that four Afghan police were injured during the clash. Qari Yousif Ahmadi, who claims to be the spokesman for the ousted Taliban regime, confirmed the armed clash, but said that only two Taliban fighters were killed.

Thousands of US-led coalition forces are currently hunting the remnants of the Taliban and their allies from the al-Qaeda terrorist network, mainly in the south and southeastern region of the war-torn country. Meanwhile, five coalition service members were wounded Friday in a suspected car bomb attack in Afghanistan\'s southern province of Kandahar, US-led coalition forces and local police said.

The coalition forces were travelling in an armoured vehicle to the Kandahar Provincial Reconstruction Team (PRT) site at around 10:30 a.m. when the attack occurred, according to a statement issued by the US-led coalition.

'All four service members received on-scene medical care and were evacuated to the military hospital at Kandahar Airfield for further treatment. One service member was listed in serious but stable condition. Information on the condition of the other four service members was not available,\' the statement said.

The site was secured by a reaction force from Kandahar Airfield, joined by Afghan National Army soldiers. The circumstances of the attack were being investigated.

According to local police in Kandahar, a suicide car bomber hit the Canadian military vehicle, killing himself and injuring several others. The Taliban, through its spokesman Ahmadi, claimed responsibility for the attack and said that an insurgent from Kandahar carried it out.

The attack took place a day after one Canadian soldier was killed and seven others were injured when their armoured vehicle rolled over in the same province. More than 2,000 Canadian troops are currently serving as part of a NATO-led peacekeeping force and US-led coalition forces in southern Afghanistan.

Bomber attacks Canadians - Canadian Press and Associated Press 3.3.06

Kandahar — Five Canadian soldiers were injured in a suicide attack near Kandahar on Friday, the Canadian military said. One of the Canadians was seriously injured while four were slightly hurt in the blast, the military said.

It was the second serious incident in as many days involving Canadian troops in the region. Soldiers at the provincial reconstruction team base inside Kandahar city said they had been warned there were suicide attackers in the city looking for targets.

The explosion, triggered by a suicide bomber in a passenger vehicle, could be heard from the base, kilometres from the scene. A plume of smoke could be seen rising on the horizon.

Some of the tires of the vehicle were blown off and the vehicle sustained other damage. A quick reaction team was sent immediately from the PRT to tend to the injured any defuse any leftover explosives.

An Associated Press reporter at the scene saw the wrecked car used for the attack. The Canadian vehicle sustained flat tires and other damage. Jumat Gul, an Afghan army soldier at the scene, said the attacker was in a Toyota Corolla that hit the armoured vehicle when the explosives detonated.

Qari Mohammed Yousaf, who claims to speak for the Taliban militia, said the group was behind the attack. In a telephone call to the Associated Press, he said the bomber was an Afghan from Kandahar province, a former Taliban stronghold.

Purported spokesmen contact media claiming attacks for the Taliban, but their exact ties to its leadership are unclear and the information is sometimes unreliable.

The attacker had the name of an outlawed Pakistani Islamic militant group, Lashkar-e-Jhangvi, written on his vest, and from documents retrieved from his body, appeared to be an Afghan, said General Rehmatullah Raufi, the Afghan army commander for southern Afghanistan.

Canadian soldiers are visibly shaken by often daily tragedies and near-misses since they recently began to take over control of the Kandahar mission from the United States. Corporal Paul Davis, 28, was killed Thursday when the 21-tonne armoured vehicle he was riding in collided with a taxi, swerved into a ditch and overturned.

Seven people were injured, two critically. Four were taken by helicopter to Kandahar Airfield — including Cpl. Davis, who later died. Medics drove the three other injured soldiers and an injured Afghan interpreter to Camp Nathan Smith, where a Canadian medical team was waiting.

The most seriously injured Canadian, Private Miguel Chavez, was flown to a U.S. hospital in Landstuhl, Germany on Friday. The 2,200 Canadian troops in southern Afghanistan are led by Canadian Brigadier-General David Fraser, who took command of a multinational brigade in the Kandahar region this week.

Gen. Fraser and others have warned that Canadian troops will face dangerous conditions in Kandahar, a region that has seen a rapid increase in the number of suicide attacks and roadside bombs over the last several months.

Ten Canadians have died in Afghanistan since 2002, including Davis. Four soldiers were killed by friendly fire, two by anti-tank mines, one at the hand of a suicide bomber, one in another road accident, and a senior Canadian diplomat was killed in January in a suicide bomb attack. As well, at least 11 people have been injured in three military vehicle accidents.

Death of soldier condoled

Ottawa – the Afghan Ambassador to Canada conveyed his condolences to Mrs. Melanie Davis, wife of Corporal Paul J. Davis of Bridgewater, N.S., who died in a vehicle accident near Kandahar city on Thursday.

In a phone conversation, Amb. Omar samad said, “Afghans are saddened that a young and good-hearted Canadian who believed in this mission lost his life as a result of this accident.” He added, “during this difficult period, our thoughts are with his family, colleagues and friends.”

The Ambassador also expressed his wish for a speedy recovery for the other six occupants of the armoured vehicle, who were injured during the accident.

Embassy of Afghanistan

March 3, 2006

Corporal remembered for his courage, sense of duty

Updated Thu. Mar. 2 2006 - CTV.ca News Staff

Cpl. Paul Davis, who was killed in an accident early Thursday near Kandahar, was offered a promotion that would have kept him at home and out of harm's way in Afghanistan.

But the grieving father of the 28-year-old soldier said his son showed courage in choosing the more dangerous assignment. "He had the sense of duty of comradeship with the people he'd been training with, and felt he wanted to go with them," Jim Davis told CTV Atlantic in an interview from his home in Bridgewater, N.S. on Thursday.

Cpl. Davis, a married father of two, was on a routine patrol when the LAV-III (light-armoured vehicle) ran off the road and flipped over. Six other soldiers and a local Afghan interpreter were injured in the accident. Two of the soldiers remain in critical condition.

"My prayers are with the other parents of those boys who are struggling with their lives right now," said Jim Davis. "I would also like you to know that I am an extremely proud dad. I'm very proud of my son Paul. I believed in what he was doing 100 per cent and to his friends in Afghanistan, if they're listening to me, I want them to know I'm 100 per cent behind all of them."

He added that he does not believe his son felt unsafe in the vehicles, despite criticisms that they are prone to tipping over. "There's a lot of talk about Canadian military not having the latest equipment, but when I talked to Paul he said no, that's not necessarily true. They were confident in the equipment they had."

Davis said his son was a strong believer in what troops are accomplishing in Afghanistan, and said he worries that a mounting death toll will shake Canada's resolve to continue its mission there.

"I fear a huge debate on why we're in Afghanistan would endanger the lives of our soldiers because it entices or encourages the insurgents to keep up the battle," he said.

Meanwhile, friends and loved ones filed into the Davis home on Thursday to offer their support to the family. The last time Davis spent time with them was over the Christmas break, before he was sent off to the mission in Afghanistan on Jan. 23.

The corporal's stepmother, Sharon Davis, said she is devastated -- but said she recognizes that loss is a reality of war. "And we need to support the effort because if it isn't stopped it will just get worse -- and our shores are not safe," she said.

It's a message Prime Minister Stephen Harper has been trying to hammer home to Canadians. At a news conference on Wednesday, he pledged unwavering support to the Canadian Forces in Afghanistan and issued a stern rebuke to Liberal MPs who have questioned Canada's role in the war-torn nation. Harper followed that on Thursday by joining 1,500 troops at an Ottawa Senators hockey game for Canadian Forces appreciation night -- where the sacrifice of Cpl. Davis was honoured.

Before the game, Canada's chief of defence staff, Gen. Rick Hillier, accepted a Senators jersey in appreciation and saluted his troops.

"They do everything we ask of them as a country. They do without regard to their lives and we saw the impact of that and what that could mean today when we lost Corporal Paul Davis in an accident in Afghanistan," said Hillier.

Back in Bridgewater, Jim Davis smiled and choked back tears as he reminisced about his son, who loved to play hockey as a child and was nicknamed "Smiley" by his teammates. "He used to get a lot of penalties," he joked.

The last image he remembers of Paul was seeing him and his fellow soldiers off at the military strip of the Winnipeg airport. "They were all looking forward to it, nervous of course. The image I have in my mind right now is the last glance I got from Paul when I said goodbye to him, just as he was about to board the plane. He was smiling."

With a report by CTV's David Akin and CTV Atlantic's Marc Patrone

Afghan mission: 10 years

Canada's top soldier Rick Hillier says rebuilding shattered nation will take decade or more - COLIN FREEZE 3.3.06 Globe and Mail

TORONTO — Canada needs to be in Afghanistan for the long haul, according to General Rick Hillier, who says the mission is part of an international reconstruction effort that will take at least a decade — and probably a lot longer.

"It was turned from a relatively advanced country back to the Stone Age ," the Chief of Defence Staff told The Globe and Mail's editorial board yesterday. "You're not going to have any success rebuilding that country in three or four or five years.

"From NATO's perspective, they look at this as a 10-year mission, right? Minimum. There's going to be a huge demand for Canada to contribute over the longer period of time."

A growing insurgency in Afghanistan has many Canadians questioning Ottawa's decision to station its troops around Kandahar. The redeployment has had an ominous start. Yesterday, a 28-year-old corporal was killed and six other Canadian soldiers injured when their light-armoured vehicle crashed outside the city.

Ten Canadians have been killed in Afghanistan since 2002, most of them in accidents. More casualties are anticipated, especially now that 2,300 troops have set up shop in the country's most lawless region. "The reality is we're in the theatre and there will be some accidents," the Chief of Defence Staff said.

While he said he could not estimate how many soldiers will die, he stressed that the Canadian public needs to gird itself for a long mission, one that will probably involve development work beyond the military's current mandate to post troops there until 2007.

There is no need to discuss an exit strategy, Gen. Hillier said, adding that such talk would only buoy the spirits of an enemy that makes up in zealotry what it lacks in hardware.

"That communicates a message to the Taliban, and the terrorists who want to wait out activities, that they could," he said. "There's a saying that the Taliban used to use: 'You may have the watches, but we have the time.'"

The plain-spoken general made headlines last year for his macho pledge that his forces would kill terrorist "scumbags." But he also has a thoughtful side, which leads him describe his mission in more far-reaching terms.

Canada is "there to help Afghans rebuild their families and communities and become part of something stable, and get on with life," Gen. Hillier told The Globe. He added that terms like "war" and "peacekeeping" are outdated, at least when it comes to describing the long list of jobs his soldiers will be doing.

Decades of civil war and occupation have laid waste to Afghanistan, where warlords and ethnic groups have frequently fought among themselves in the periods when Soviet, U.S. or Arab fighters have not staked any claims to the country. A U.S.-led coalition ousted the fundamentalist Taliban regime in 2001, just months after Afghan-trained al-Qaeda terrorists killed 3,000 people in U.S. cities.

With Western help, a democratically elected Afghan central government is forming, but remains fragile as it lacks strong security forces needed to fight insurgents.

Canada can help create conditions that will curb Afghanistan's high infant-mortality rate, Gen. Hillier said, and help increase the average annual income of $300 to the point where farmers are less tempted to cultivate opium. But any development is contingent on security, the general said, and that's why the Canadian military's most crucial job is to help Afghans police themselves.

"We're doing an entire spectrum of operations, from straightforward negotiation and dealing with folks, to training police, training the army, to helping work with the international community. ... Right through to firefights with the Taliban, to ensure they are not going to be able to stop the progress."

No insurgent forces were involved in yesterday's collision, which took place on a routine patrol a few kilometres west of Kandahar. The Department of National Defence said that a light-armoured vehicle (known as LAV III) struck a taxi on a newly paved highway, causing the army vehicle to flip over. The force sheered the gun turret and rear axle from the 21-tonne vehicle.

The soldiers were all from the Princess Patricia's Canadian Light Infantry. An interpreter with the soldiers was also hurt. The most seriously injured were airlifted to hospital.

The military identified the gunner killed in the crash as Corporal Paul Davis of Nova Scotia. His father in Bridgewater said his son died doing what he loved.

"When he decided to go to Afghanistan, that really impressed me because he loved his family and his two children but he had the sense of duty, and comradeship with the other people he had been training with," Jim Davis said.

Cpl. Davis was a 10-year-veteran, who had served with the Canadian Forces mission in Bosnia. He recently had spurned a promotion that would have taken him out of Afghanistan. "He said, 'I turned that down, Dad, because I want to be with the chaps,'-" his father said.

Two soldiers were seriously injured in the collision: Master-Corporal Timothy Wilson of Grande Prairie, Alta., and Private Miguel Chavez, who was born in El Salvador.

The road conditions in Afghanistan are notoriously dangerous, and the accident happened on Highway 1, which links the capital Kabul to Kandahar. Much of the highway has been recently paved, but the upgrade has actually led to an increase in fatal road accidents, as drivers travel at a higher speed. With reports from Tim Albone in Kandahar and Canadian Press

Gen. Hillier speaks to The Globe on Afghanistan

Globe and Mail Update - The following is an edited transcript of a discussion Thursday between Chief of the Defence Staff General Rick Hillier and The Globe and Mail editorial board.

OVERVIEW - "We have come out of a decade of darkness. We have been disowned, abandoned, divorced by the population of Canada.

Canadians need to take ownership and be engaged [with the military]. There won't be public support to transform the military unless we have the support of the pouplation. And we can't get the support for the missions unless people see the necessity of doing these kinds of things which will help recruitment. We are transforming the military.

We are conducting operations all over the world in 19 countries. And at home. Canadians don't see this part. We do commmunity events, we respond to natural disasters.

Internationally, most of our operations are small. We have 15 people in the Congo, supporting the UN mission. They are very effective. We get back kudos. They say, can you send me 10 more? In Africa, we are in Darfur, helping bring stability and security. We have 65 people there."

LOGISTICS OF AFGHAN MISSION - "When I was in Afghanistan, the first thing the president [Hamid Karzai] said was: 'My greatest threat is our lack of capacity to handle our own threats.' Part of the reason was because those very visionary and extremely intelligent leaders I saw — starting with Karzai — had zero capability to turn their vision to a strategy to a policy to a plan.

There was no bureaucracy, no public service. They were either dead or living in the West because of the 25 years of brutality. Kabul, and the northeast, north-central, and northwest have made enormous strides . . .

The real need is in the south, to make sure it does not again become a fertile ground for terrorists to breed and recover and recruit and reconstitute and resource themselves and then project their violence.

I'm there to help Afghans rebuild their families and communities and become part of something more stable and get on with life. It takes a while to build an army. It takes us a while to build a new unit, and we're an army in longstanding. They're starting from a clean sheet of paper."

ON THE NEW CANADIAN FORCES - "People try to put us in a niche: You're not conducting peacekeeping or you are conducting war-fighting operations or you are conducting combat. Here's what we're doing, because the terms are not necessarily helpful.

We're doing the entire spectrum of operations, from straightforward negotiation and dealing with folks to training police, training the army, to helping work with the international community, right through to firefights with the Taliban, to ensure they're not going to be able to stop the progress. So to describe that as war is actually, it's really 1940, 1950s terminology."

ON AFGHANISTAN - "You're living with people who desperately want you there — and the Afghans do. I mean, they say: 'The only thing between us and chaos again is you.'

You're living with people who are benign or neutral or slightly hostile, and you're living with a small group of people who actually want to kill you.

That's a completely differnet dynamic than what we trained, prepared, structured for over 50, 60 years of the Cold War, when — we aim for the North German plain, countering that armoured thrust in the Warsaw Pact — everything we've done in structure . . . was all designed for that fight . . .

Everything we're doing in transformation is designed to shape out our structrue, training, equipment, organization, leadership, how we approach things, how we work with people."

PARLIAMENTARY DEBATE? - "The great thing about being a chief of defence staff is I don't have to feel anyway about that or make a comment on it. We have a saying in the army . . . we defend democracy, we don't practice it.

Polls, shmolls, geez, after a while you start to get a little tired of them because you can get any spectrum you want depending on the question you ask. In my heart of hearts, I believe this: Canadians in vast numbers support our men and women in uniform."

THE ARMY HAS FUNDAMENTALLY CHANGED ALREADY - "What is occurring now is a crystallization of the kind of operations that have taken place the last 15 years, since the Cold War.

If anyone thinks that what we were doing in the Balkans in the early to mid 1990s was peacekeeping, they simply do not understand whatsoever what you had to do on the ground."

CANDID TALK ABOUT MISSIONS - "The Canadian Forces have actually been in a survival mode for the last decade and our ability since the Somalia affair — and that crystallized a whole bunch of other things — when our population, in the view of many soldiers and sailors and airmen and airwomen, disowned us, divorced themselves from us, led us into a situation where our survival was the only priority which we had.

So now we're out of that. And one of the aims is to make sure that never occurs again. But I also throw the ball back in the other court. Canadians disowned their Canadian Forces in one respect back in the early to mid 1990s. And have never been engaged in the way they needed to shape it going forward. So it's a responsibility I throw back into normal Canadians' laps and say: 'It's your armed forces, you get engaged.'

We do live in a very nice, luxurious, safe, stable, fat and easy country, right? It's easy to get myopic and navel-gazing and think the rest of the world is like us. We're part of 1 per cent of the world that's like this. Canadians need to wake up to the fact that we are viewed by the rest of the world as luxurious, decadently so perhaps."

CASUALTIES - "We've taken casualties on every mission we've been on . . . You simply cannot sit down and formulate any percentage that you might or might not expect in terms of casualties. So what you do is shape and learn and reduce the risk to the lowest level . . . but you cannot project."

ROAD ACCIDENTS IN AFGHANISTAN - "There's an operational driving that occurs here when you get from Point A to Point B — it's not just that you get up to 30 km/h and stay there and slow down. Because if you do, you become predictable and more easily targetted.

We've done a lot of training and work to get them ready, but there is always that last piece of acclimatization which you have to do and that's probably caused one or two of the accidents we've had. To describe many of the routes that we are on as roads is kind indeed.

You are on a side of mountain somewhere and you are trying to get through a flock of sheep or pass a donkey train or in the middle of a camel train, and on your left-hand side it's 2000 feet down and you're in the middle of something that's maybe as wide as your vehicle, eroded by water, and they call that a road.

You know, my heart was in my throat 80 per cent of the time in when I was in a vehicle in Afghanistan. The chain of command wears my bootmarks down their back on this, we're talking about men's and women's lives here. But the reality is we are in that theatre and there will be some accidents."

LIGHT ARMOURED VEHCILE LOGISTICS — BELTED? - "In a LAV . . . what you will have is your driver who is buttoned down, your commander who will have his head and eyes out in all probability, he can slide down and be buttoned down, and in the back you will have a minimum of two up, possibly a third, covering the quarters at the rear with their weapons and their observations, ready to respond. And a third guy, actually probably a third and fourth on each side, looking at the upcoming sides for any indication of something that's abnormal.

We had cases where a LAV coming along with guys in the back fired rounds at a vehicle that came up real close — we have warning signs, warning actions that communicate this a lot. But we still get people — these could be Montreal drivers, I've got to tell you — skyrocketting up and ignoring all these warnings. Occassionally LAV troops fire shots into motors of such vehciles."

THE ACCIDENT THURSDAY THAT KILLED A CANADIAN SOLDIER - "We still don't have all the details on this accident. The commanders and the chain of command are onto it. But the reality is we lost a soldier." "I get a call a 2:30 in the morning and nobody every calls me with good news, right? When the phone rings [at that time], it's an event."

KANDAHAR REGION - "Parts of the region have really been left free and easy, so now there's very much an international presence in those places. So automatically you get events. The Pakistanis have really conducted a lot of significant operations along their border. (Waziristan, Khyber Pass)

The ground there is actually incredibly difficult — 18,000-foot mountains, no infrastructure . . . to think you could actually shut down that border in any effectively way is but to dream.

"As a result they [the insurgentsw] have hidden away into the highlands in the north part of Kandahar . . . so as a result they are there now and they are conducting operations."

Coalition forces have been going into those areas "and are coming face-to-face with them." "As a result of those two things, you are seeing a greater amount of activity. You are not seeing the Taliban being left alone . . .

What we do is, we train those Afghan units and we go with them and support them as they go into those areas . . . so our job is to support the Afghan army national battaliions."

IS IT A CLASSIC GUERRILLA WAR? - "Hard to say. The Taliban, obviously, have some longstaying power . . . eventually you reach a crossover point, where instead of these guys needing to be contained by the police and army, supported by military forces from the West, they actually have the capability to train and build to this level at the same time the Taliban has been worn down. So now you have the upperhand.

There has certainly been a correlation between common criminals in the drug trade, the drug traffickers themselves, and the Taliban/terrorists. There is no question there is a money link that goes from one to the other.

All that crap about the Taliban saying one of the good things they did was suppress opium production, that was bull. What they did was constrain the growth to increase the price and make more money from it."

IS PAKISTAN DOING ENOUGH? - "I'd never be satisfied they are doing everything they can, I'd never be satisfied they are doing enough. Some people say the answer to a more stable Afghanistan is a actually found in Pakistan. But they've done a lot, you got to give them full kudos, they continue to do a lot."

TREATMENT OF PRISONERS - "We hand them to the Afghan national police or the Afghan national army . . . We're trying to build a country, you've got to help build their rule of law, a justice system . . . Surely this is one of the basic precepts of how we do it."

EXIT STRATEGY? - "One of the most frustrating things of all when you are in Afghanistan . . . is to have various countries come in, or their organizations, and immediately start talking about exit strategy. That communicates a message to the Taliban and the terrorists . . .

There's a saying that the Taliban used to use: 'You may have the watches but we have the time.' But we probably help them believe that saying. You've got a country that's been actually devastated, brutalized, destroyed by 25 years of war. It was turned from a relatively advanced country back to the Stone Age. And it was done by the process of that destruction.

You are not going to have any success rebuilding that country in three or four or five years. So people who think in those terms don't understand the scale and scope of what's been done in that country. From NATO's perspective, they look at this as a 10-year mission. Right? Minimum.

There is going to be a huge demand on Canada to contribute over the longer period of time, on the developmental parts, diplomatic efforts. And there will be continued pressure, from NATO, from the United Nations . . . and not least there will be huge pressure from the Afghans. They say the only thing between us and chaos is you."

So the mission from every perspective in the international communtiy is going to be longer term. Canada will decide in coming months what it is going to do in the longer term.

But the pressure on Canada to be engaged in a significant way — whether it's only military, of course, is not necessarily guaranteed — there will be significant pressure.

PRIORITIES

• "Helping the fledgling state forces take down the threat."
• Train that police force, build that police force, train that army, build that army."
• Build that government structure. The lack of capacity to govern the country is huge."
• Infrastructure development"

"Three to five years out from now, you'll start to see the dynamic change dramatically [as the international community becomes less needed.] Afghanistan will need support for a long time. 25 years of war, and it really did destroy the place, its quite incredible."

Go into Kabul, you say: 'Oh My God, this is terriible, the place was destroyed.' You go out of Kabul and you come back and say: 'God Almighty, why are we wasting our time and money here? We're already there. Let's get into other places, Kandahar."

DRUG TRAFFICKERS - "There's no single easy solution to that one. You can't just go in and eradicate everything, you would make hostile to you a good chuck of the population who are surviving growing the crops . . . But you've got to build economic activity in lieu of that one. The Afghans themselves are placed, with support from us, to do that . . .

At some point in time, you've got to move the per-capita income from $300 a year to somewhere around in plus of $1,000. The United Nations drug programs say a country that is above $1,000 a year in income is not an exporter of drugs."

BUREAUCRATIC MONEY BATTLES - "Actually I don't think I have anything to deal with. I have no fight. I have no dog in that hunt, so to speak.

The Conservervative Party of Canada's election platform said they are going to increase the regular force to 75,000 . . . That is their platform, their commitment, and their responsibility to deliver. My job is to implement when those investments come.

I come at this from the moral high ground: Here is what the country of Canada has been asking from the men and women in uniform over this past decade, and looking forward they are going to have nothing less, probably much more. Here is what we are going to need to be able to do that. And we really do need that.

This is not about Hillier. This is about men and women in uniform who risk their lives for our country. I am the individual who pins memorial Silver Crosses on young widows and mothers, so I have a remit to each one of them . . . and I intend on meeting that remit."

POLLS - "If we're not in Afghanistan and the international community is not there, the Taliban will overwhelm the fledgling government we're going to need to be there — the 'we' being the international community.

If the Taliban do overwhelm the fledgling government because the international community abandons them, as they were abandoned in 1992 by the international commmunity, the Taliban will be back in, will control the southern part of Afghanistan, will give support to al-Qaeda and other ideologically similar groups . . . . and allow them recruit, prepare and plan around the world and hide, and project their violence around the world, that will directly affect Canada.

We're on a target list. That's been well-communicated by al-Qaeda . . . [abandoning Afghanistan] it's kind of like that view that if you give Czechoslovakia to the Germans, they'll stop everything in 1938, when actually their goals are much greater than that."

WAR ON TERROR - "I go by what the soldiers see and feel and say. Protect the weak and vulnerable. They actually believe in that, and that's why they're there. Maybe you can get security to a level where you don't risk getting killed every time you go shopping for food or maybe you can get security to a level where medical clinics can be built . . . so children don't die before the age of five in a 25 per cent range.

There are those who would say it's an American mission, un-Canadian, and we're there to hunt down for the Americans people on their list. What I say is 80 to 90 per cent of the information that we use and analyze and coalesce and use to focus our operations, 80 to 90 per cent of it comes directly from the Afghans . . .

Over the last days and weeks, the number of people that have come and said: 'There's an explosive device over here' or 'There's a small cache of explosives over here', or 'There's a vehicle parked down here' — that happened in one case — that's got something different about it, and we search and find a nubmer of explosives in it, the number of people that have come forward is quite incredible on a increasing basis.

That reflects the fact that they need us there, they want us there, and what we're doing is seen by them as exactly what they need."

OVERSTAYING THE WELCOME? - "What you want to do is make sure the moment never comes. The minute they no longer need us, we've got to be out of there. I don't think that will be an issue, truthfully . . .

We have to be very careful in the perception we create. And that includes taking some risk initially and being out amongst that population. You cannot do your job in an armoured fighting vehicle going at high speed to an area, weaving in and out with your helmet on, your sunglasses on, you're quickly seen as a best an irritant, bringing no or little value, and you go from benign hostility to hostility to where people will actualy attack you.

You gotta have your sunglasses off and look 'em in the eye, so they see you as people and see you as people who are there to help them.

[We'll leave] the minute that they can stand on their feet with minimal assistance. But we want to do that without talking [now] about exit strategies."

Cost of Afghan mission - $2B and rising: Tally includes only a fraction of new costs in Kandahar; Forces could be there for years - David Pugliese,The Ottawa Citizen Friday, March 03, 2006

Canadian taxpayers have spent more than $2 billion on the country's ongoing military mission to Afghanistan, with the cost of the latest deployment to Kandahar largely still to come.

So far, the Canadian Forces commitment to Afghanistan, which started ramping up in late 2001, has cost $1.7 billion, according to figures provided by the Department of National Defence. But that overall figure, which represents what the department calls "incremental costs," does not include the wages of military personnel or wear and tear on aging equipment used overseas.

It also doesn't include the purchase of major new equipment for the mission. So far the Canadian Forces has spent or set aside another $330 million for emergency equipment purchases for Afghanistan, ranging from new armoured vehicles to surveillance drones.

In addition, Afghanistan has also become Canada's single largest recipient of bilateral aid. According to figures provided by the Canadian International Development Agency, Canada will have provided $616 million in aid to Afghanistan by 2009. In the years immediately preceding the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on the U.S., Canada had given about $10 million in annual aid to Afghanistan.

Over the last four years, Afghanistan has become the major focus of Canadian defence and foreign affairs policy. More than 7,000 military personnel have served in that country so far.

Details of the costs come as Canadian casualties mount in Afghanistan. But Prime Minister Stephen Harper reiterated his strong support for the mission yesterday, saying it is important to global security.

The $2-billion-plus pricetag, however, could only be the tip of the iceberg on the actual cost of the Afghanistan mission.

The full costs of the deployments won't be released by the Defence Department until this fall. Estimates of the cost of keeping 2,300 troops in Afghanistan over the next year are also not being released at this time.

The Foreign Affairs Department would not provide the amount it has spent on Afghanistan, but an official noted that a large number of resources and personnel are involved in the file.

Liberal Senator Colin Kenny said the Canadian public deserves to be fully informed as to what the Afghan mission is expected to ultimately cost, both financially and in the number of casualties to troops. He also questioned the effectiveness of the money being spent on aid to Afghanistan.

"You can't get figures from CIDA for the current year," said Mr. Kenny, the former chairman of the Senate defence committee. "More than that, you can't get figures that break it out on what we're spending in terms of aid in Kandahar."

Mr. Kenny noted that most of the aid is being funnelled through United Nations organizations. "There's no way on God's green earth we'll be able to measure if those programs are worth a damn," he added.

CIDA said that its officials who deal with Afghanistan were tied up in meetings yesterday and could not immediately respond to the senator's concerns.

The $1.7 billion the Canadian Forces has spent so far includes estimates of the cost of the latest Afghan mission to Kandahar, Operation Archer, but only up until the end of the month, because the government's fiscal year ends March 31. So far that operation has cost $286 million.

Canadian troops will be operating in Kandahar until at least next February but military officials have suggested in the past that the commitment to Afghanistan will continue for years. On Tuesday, Canadian Brig.-Gen. David Fraser assumed command of the multinational brigade responsible for southern Afghanistan. The brigade includes 6,000 soldiers from Canada, Britain, the United States, the Netherlands, Australia, Denmark, Romania and Estonia.

The new equipment purchased by the military for Afghanistan could be of use in other missions. Some of it had already been on the military's wish list but not planned for acquisition until after 2010. Because of the Afghan mission, the purchase of that gear was fast-tracked.

The figures provided by the Defence Department also do not account for the wear and tear on Forces equipment. But in the U.S., congressional budget experts have determined that the war in Iraq is using military equipment at five to 10 times the peacetime training rate. Pentagon officials have asked for billions of dollars in emergency funds to replace wornout gear.

While Canada's military effort is nowhere near that of the U.S. in Iraq, it is considerable nonetheless. For example, by last March, Canadian Hercules transport planes had flown 5,000 hours in support of Operation Athena, an earlier mission to Afghanistan.

The office of the Auditor General, the watchdog of the government purse, has never done an audit of the Afghan mission. A spokeswoman for the Auditor General's office declined to say whether there were any plans to do so.

Wake up! This is our war too - We must accept reality: Our Afghan mission is very much in our national interests and in the interests of democracy, says historian J.L. GRANATSTEIN – The Globe and Mail

On Friday, The Globe and Mail published the results of a Strategic Counsel opinion poll on Canada's role in Afghanistan. When asked, if they were a member of Parliament, whether they would vote to send troops there, 27 per cent said yes and 62 per cent said no.

Those in favour were then asked if they would change their minds if the deployment might result in significant casualties. Thirty-one per cent said they would. In other words, only a very small number of Canadians wholeheartedly support Canada's mission in Kandahar, where 2,300 of our soldiers will almost certainly face roadside bombs, rocket and grenade attacks, and suicide bombers.

But what if Strategic Counsel's question had been phrased differently? "If you were a member of Parliament, would you vote to send Canadian peacekeepers to Afghanistan?" I suspect the results would have been very different, primarily because the word "peacekeeping" triggers a series of powerful memories and positive images in the Canadian mind: Lester Pearson's Nobel Peace Prize; a Canadian soldier in a blue helmet interposed between warring factions; the peacekeeping monument in Ottawa, and the widely believed mantra that, while Americans make war, we Canadians keep the peace.

Canadians are fixated on peacekeeping. We believe that Mike Pearson invented it, that Canadians are the best in the world at it, and that if we do peacekeeping, ideally for the United Nations, then we will not need large numbers of troops or much expensive equipment.

The idea of peacekeeping as our metier has certainly shaped Canadian defence policy, and not for the better. The billions of dollars that Liberals and Conservatives have belatedly pledged to rebuild the Canadian Forces will take years to make a difference and to undo four decades of neglect.

Let me be clear: Canadian peacekeeping was a useful role for this country to play. Canadians did important work after the Suez crisis of 1956, in Cyprus, on the Golan Heights, and on the Iran-Iraq border after the 1988 peace between those two nations. The problem is that peacekeeping has largely disappeared, replaced in the new world disorder by much more robust operations run by the UN or other organizations.

The Afghanistan deployment, soon to be controlled by NATO, is just such an operation. We might call it peace support or peace enforcement. Our grandfathers would have called it war.

Afghanistan is not the first such operation nor will it be the last. The operations in the former Yugoslavia that began in the early 1990s were about as far from traditional peacekeeping as could be imagined. Canadians fought pitched battles in Croatia, for example, and waged war in Kosovo sometimes under the UN flag and sometimes under NATO's. And if the UN can get its act together, troops might some day be dispatched to Darfur to stop the Sudanese government's role in sponsoring genocide. That humanitarian operation, too, will almost certainly be much more akin to war than to traditional blue-helmet peacekeeping.

Friday's poll, however, suggests that Canadians might prefer to stay home. If so, Canadians need to consider what they want their military to do in the 21st century. The war on terror is a reality and Canadians are targets, no matter how we try to convince ourselves that the world loves us. It doesn't. Our superpower neighbour, the nation to which 87 per cent of our exports go and on which our security depends, has been attacked and is still under threat, but somehow Canadians have not grasped that they are involved. We are. The Canadian troops in Kandahar are working to prop up a democratically elected government that is under attack from fundamentalist Taliban and al-Qaeda terrorists. Participation in that operation is in Canada's national interests, and it is very much in the interests of democracy.

But why did those who responded to the Strategic Counsel poll not grasp this? The reason, I believe, is that Canadians see Afghanistan as an American war, a direct response to the al-Qaeda terror attacks of 9/11. That may have been correct in 2002, when the aim was to drive the Taliban government that sheltered al-Qaeda from power.

Today, the goal is to assist an elected government in establishing itself in the face of attacks from Taliban remnants. Unfortunately, that difference doesn't appear to matter to Canadians. Afghanistan is still the Americans' war, George W. Bush's war, and, automatically, large majorities of Canadians believe it must be wrong.

Canadian anti-Americanism is at a record peak in 2006, and this strong feeling colours every question. (The Americans have noticed, too. During our recent election, The Washington Post's Anna Morgan, shocked by the tone of the campaign she discovered here, reported that "the United States and all its evils" were a "familiar demon" being employed "to heat Canadian voters to a frenzy.") A mature nation cherishes its history and builds on it. But a mature nation also understands reality and faces it and acts to protect and advance its national interests. Peacekeeping is a cherished part of our past and, even if it has dwindled in utility, it might once again become important. But the reality now is one of terror attacks on the democracies and those struggling to build free societies.

Canada's national interests demand that we employ the Canadian Forces to help the new democracies and protect the old. It is long past time for the Canadian public to recognize what is at stake and to support their government and their soldiers in advancing their country's -- and the world's -- interests.

Historian J. L. Granatstein is chair of the Advisory Council of the Canadian Defence and Foreign Affairs Institute.

Armed Forces needed - Must never be caught in a situation where we are unable to defend our national interests and citizens Mar. 1, 2006, Toronto Star

Reduce Armed Forces - Letter, Feb. 27. Toronto Star

In regard to Bilal Abdullah's letter, when he states the size of the Armed Forces should be scaled down to one-fifth of its present size, he is greatly mistaken. The Canadian Armed Forces has a long and proud tradition of peacekeeping and disaster relief. To this end, the military should be purchasing troop deployment planes such as the C-17 Globemaster, rather than renting Russian troop carriers to get our DART team to needy zones. The forces should also be increasing the size of their elite troops such as Joint Task Force 2 and reinstating the Airborne Division. It should also be purchasing helicopters to replace the antiquated Sea Kings.

Canada's peacekeeping tradition is well-known and recognized throughout the world. Canada does not blindly follow any nation, including the United States, into unwarranted acts of aggression. Canada has remained out of the illegal war in Iraq, but has justly acted in Afghanistan based on a UN mandate, as well as a mandate from the Canadian people.

Abdullah would do well to remember, as many of Canada's heroic vets could tell him, the price of freedom is eternal vigilance and we must never be caught in a situation where we are unable to defend our national interests as well as our citizens. In order to do this, Canada needs a strong and proud Canadian Armed Forces. Jeremy Debling, Richmond Hill

Letter to the Editor: Canadian troops in Afghanistan (Toronto Star)

Subsequent to the gradual collapse of the communist regime in Afghanistan, the country lacked a strong central government, which turned into a golden opportunity for criminals and terrorists around the world to escape to Afghanistan and to live their lives without the constant threat of fear hovering over them. Afghanistan became a safe haven for terrorists and a threat to the security of the entire world.

The ignorance of the international community resulted in the loss of 3,000 innocent lives on Sept. 11. The innocent Afghan citizens were taken hostage by the international terrorist organization and were deprived of fundamental human rights, such as an education, freedom of listening to music, television etc.

Now that the terrorist network has been defeated by the international troops in Afghanistan, the world, including Canada, has become much safer. However, there still remains a great deal to be done. The Al Qaeda network remains active, the cultivation of opium has not been eradicated, and the Afghan government is not strong enough to cope with such difficulties.

At this critical time, it is imperative for the international community to complete the job, since failure to do so will once again allow Afghanistan to fall into the hands of terrorists and the security of the countries around the world — including Canada — will be highly at risk.

Canada has always fulfilled its noble duty around the world, since our Canadian troops are currently in Afghanistan. It is extremely naive to believe that terrorists pose no threat to Canadian security. Many innocent Canadian lives were also lost on Sept. 11. Our troops need to remain in Afghanistan until the terrorist network has utterly vanished.

Terrorists have no religion, no country and, importantly, no heart. Their notions are against civilization and humanity and, therefore, every human being is a target. They desire to terrorize the world and we should not and must not allow them to succeed.

Khoja Tamin Sediqui, President, Canadian-Afghan Support Program, Pickering

India's Work In Afghanistan – VOA 3.2.06

President George W. Bush says the United States is "encouraging India to work directly with other nations that will benefit from India's experience of building a multiethnic democracy that respects the rights of religious minorities." Mr. Bush says Afghanistan is one of those nations:

"India's work in Afghanistan is a good example of India's commitment to emerging democracies. India has pledged five-hundred-sixty-five million dollars to help the Afghan people repair the infrastructure and get back on their feet."

India is helping Afghanistan build roads, hospitals, and government buildings. Indian-donated Tata buses are a key part of Kabul's public transportation system. India is making important contributions to Afghan education, including rebuilding Habibia High School in Kabul. President Bush says India is helping Afghanistan establish democratic institutions:

"Recently, India announced it would provide an additional fifty million dollars to help Afghans complete their national assembly building. India has trained national assembly staff, and it's developing a similar program for the assembly's elected leaders."

David Mulford is the U.S. Ambassador to India. In a recent article in The Times of India newspaper, Mr. Mulford said, "India's role in supporting the Afghan people on this path to democracy has been critical, providing needed supplies and training to ensure the successful conduct of the 2004 and 2005 election." Mr. Mulford said that "the United States remains firmly committed to building a stable and peaceful environment for the Afghan people to live their lives free of terrorism."

Masood Khalili served until recently as Afghanistan's ambassador to India. He recently told an Indian online newspaper that Afghans are grateful for the U.S. presence. "Al Qaida was there [and] the Taleban was there. It was hell in Afghanistan," he said. "Was it in our interest that they [the Americans] help the Afghan people? Yes," said Mr. Khalili.

President Bush says India and the U.S. have a stake in freeing Afghanistan from terror: "The people of America and India understand that a key part of defeating the terrorists is to replace their ideology of hatred with an ideology of hope."

That is why, says Mr. Bush, the U.S. and India "will continue to work together to advance the cause of liberty." The preceding was an editorial reflecting the views of the United States Government.

Short visit but a long haul - The Guardian, UK 03/02/2006

George Bush's flying visit to Afghanistan yesterday took him to the first place outside the US where the world really changed after the 9/11 attacks. A failed state that was criminally neglected after the end of the Soviet occupation, was ruled by the reactionary fundamentalists of the Taliban, and gave shelter to Osama bin Laden, fell easily to an unbeatable superpower which manipulated local allies to win the war. Building something better on the ruins was always going to be harder than that swift military victory.

The president's impressions during his four-hour stay were limited to Bagram air base and a flight via armed helicopter over dusty plains and mud-brick homes to the presidential palace and the new US embassy in Kabul. "It is possible to replace tyrants with a free society in which men and women are respected, in which young girls can go to school and realise their full potential, in which people are able to realise their dreams," said Mr Bush. His words about the progress made in the last four years were not empty, though they skirted over some very grave problems.

Compared with the disaster in Iraq, Afghanistan is a success story: over 4.5 million refugees have returned home. Presidential elections in October 2004 were followed by parliamentary ones last September. The Pushtun leader Hamid Karzai is a dignified figure with shrewd political instincts which he has used to co-opt or neutralise powerful warlords and others who impeded or undermined him.

Still, there are worries. The under-five mortality rate in Afghanistan is the fourth highest in the world. More than 3 million people need feeding by the UN. Just 13% of Afghans have access to safe water and 12% to adequate sanitation; only 6% have access to mains electricity.

Economists do see signs of recovery but the overall situation is extremely fragile. Security is threatened by Taliban insurgents and al-Qaida militants who have been increasing attacks in recent months, especially in the south and east, where the US-led Operation Enduring Freedom continues to hunt Osama bin Laden. Mr Bush's pledge that the al-Qaida leader and the Taliban's Mullah Omar will be caught smacked of braggadocio. Insistence from Pakistan - the president's last stop on his South Asian tour - that it is doing all it can to stop cross-border incursions was unconvincing. But Mr Bush might usefully have regretted the collateral damage to innocent Pakistani villagers caused by US air strikes.

Another significant difference with Iraq is that the US is not alone or supported only by a dwindling number of allies. Nato, which until recently was floundering for a purpose in the post-cold-war world, was left out of the war for Afghanistan and split over Iraq, has found a challenging new mission. Its 9,000-strong force is about to expand to 15,000. All 26 allies and 10 other non-members are helping the Karzai government to extend its authority.

Afghanistan's biggest single problem is narcotics. Opium poppy cultivation fell by 20% in 2005 but the heroin yield was up by 7% and is set to rise again this year. Opium still generates over half the country's GDP and is one of the greatest threats to the establishment of the rule of law and effective governance. Drugs traffickers need to be tried and jailed in secure conditions and not bribe their way out of trouble.

January's London conference on Afghanistan produced a "compact" that sets out a multi-billion dollar blueprint for partnership between Kabul and the international community to bolster security, economic development and counter-narcotics efforts. That was due acknowledgement, by the US and others, that nation-building has to be a long-term commitment. The world failed Afghanistan for too many years and Afghanistan then caused great damage to the world. Even the shortest presidential visit is enough, so long as it helps ensure that that vital point is not forgotten.

Afghanistan: Who Instigated The Pol-e Charkhi Prison Riot And Why?
Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty - March 2, 2006

Five days after it began, the crisis at Kabul's Pol-e Charkhi prison ended on March 1. Tensions now appear to have subsided, but questions linger.

One that has now been answered is how many people were killed when prisoners seized a wing of the high-security prison and during the subsequent standoff with Afghan security forces. Early reports indicated that five died and over 20 were injured, but the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) has told RFE/RL that the current death toll is six. That figure may rise, though, as two of the 22 injured are in a critical condition.

Broader questions -- such as who instigated the riots and why -- have not been independently corroborated. But what the standoff will do is to return attention to the government's reconciliation program aimed at ending the neo-Taliban insurgency and the impact on future dealings with captured militants.

A Troubled History

That problems should arise at Pol-e Charkhi was in itself perhaps not a surprise, as twice in a little over a year there had been serious incidents at the prison. In December 2004, foreign prisoners attacked guards with razor blades. A subsequent shoot-out left one Iraqi and three Pakistani prisoners and four Afghan police dead.

Then, this January, seven prisoners escaped from Pol-e Charkhi, apparently by mingling with visitors. Some reports indicated they had links to the neo-Taliban or Al-Qaeda; the prison's governor, General Abdul Salam Bakhshi denied that, calling them unimportant prisoners.

It was a measure introduced to prevent a further prison break -- the introduction of orange uniforms to make prisoners distinguishable from visitors -- that, according to Deputy Justice Minister Mohammad Qasim Hashimzai, triggered the riots on February 26. Hashimzai says the prisoners attacked their guards after refusing to wear the uniforms.

It is not clear who caused the deaths and injuries. When asked by RFE/RL whether the casualties were the result of the force used by the prison authorities, Olivier Moeckli of the ICRC said that "of course" there were "a few assaults against prisoners," adding that the use of force was restricted "mainly" to the first evening.

It is also not known why, on February 28, some prisoners resumed their violence after the chief negotiator, Sebghatullah Mojaddedi, had persuaded prisoners to allow the wounded and dead to be taken from the prison. Deputy Justice Minister Hashimzai speculated that the prisoners were receiving instructions from outside via mobile phones. It is not clear how prisoners at Pol-e Charkhi could have obtained phones.

The authorities themselves have been unambiguous about whom they believe instigated the uprising. The commander of Kabul police department's rapid reaction police force, General Mahbub Amiri, on February 28 said it was "clear" that "some Taliban and Al-Qaeda prisoners wanted to create chaos and escape." That was a view echoed by Hashimzai, who said that around 350 Taliban and Al-Qaeda inmates had been among the roughly 1,000 prisoners reportedly involved in the riot. The rioters are said to have shouted slogans against the United States and Afghan President Hamid Karzai.

The Reconciliation Program And Neo-Taliban Prisoners

While Mojaddedi did not go into details about who spearheaded the riots at Pol-e Charkhi, his presence as the head of the government's negotiating team could be viewed as a clue that the prisoners' leaders were in some way linked with the neo-Taliban. Mojaddedi, who is the speaker of the Council of Elders, the upper house of the National Assembly, also serves as the chairman of the Commission for National Reconciliation, which is trying to end the neo-Taliban insurgency by inviting militants to make peace with the government. (Mojaddedi was not the only name to be put forward by the prisoners; some wanted a pro-Karzai deputy and others the speaker of the People's Council of the National Assembly, Mohammad Yunos Qanuni, to act as negotiators.)

The prison does not hold the most of the more dangerous known Al-Qaeda members. Those remain in U.S. custody at the Bagram air base north of Kabul. The Afghan government is, though, increasingly taking charge of captured neo-Taliban combatants.

Among the prisoners' complaints were poor living conditions. In a report published in 2005, a UN-appointed independent expert mandated to review the human rights situation in Afghanistan, M. Cherif Bassiouni, described the conditions at Pol-e Charkhi prison as "sub-standard." Bassiouni complained that prisoners are "inappropriately shackled" in overcrowded cells, and also about "inadequate sanitation, open electrical wiring, and broken and missing windows during freezing temperatures."

Following the riots, though, the prisoners have now had to be moved to a wing of the prison where conditions are worse, says the ICRC's Olivier Moeckli. "The ICRC had worked and assisted the authorities in repairing the wings where the prisoners were held," he said. "Now they are in a wing where quite heavy work needs to be done."

Some of the grievances were "reasonable," Mojaddedi said. Controversially, he included in that list complaints "against prosecutors, judges, and the prison officials and about being jailed for no reason."

By legitimizing some of the grievances of the prisoners against prosecutors and judges and effectively stating that some of the prisoners have been incarcerated for no reason, the Commission for National Reconciliation opens the door for suspected anti-government militants to claim clemency through the reconciliation program even after they are captured in action. The danger is that this could prolong the insurgency.

Given the dismal state of the judicial system and prisons in Afghanistan, both Mojaddedi and the prisoners may, of course, have a legitimate point to make.

What the Pol-e Charkhi crisis should do is to bring the attention of the Kabul government and its international backers to the urgent need to turbo-charge the process of revamping Afghanistan's judicial system from top to bottom.

UNHCR to assist repatriation of 150,000 refugees from Iran

ISLAMABAD, March 3 (Pajhwok Afghan News): The United Nations will assist around 150,000 Afghan refugees to voluntarily return to their homeland this year from Iran, host to one of the largest refugee populations in the world.

The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) said on Friday if the number of voluntary returns increased, it would adjust its programmes accordingly. Based on returns in 2005, the refugee agency is budgeting to help the Afghans repatriate to their country.

"The main challenge is to be able to merge desires and aspirations of Afghans to go back with the very difficult conditions in Afghanistan and the ability for many to establish sustainable living conditions and livelihoods upon their return," said UNHCR country representative in Tehran Sten Bronee.

In a press release issued here, Bronee said it was also crucial to sustain the understanding and appreciation both within Iran and Afghanistan for the predicament of the Afghans in making the difficult choice.

Since the UN refugee agency began its voluntary repatriation programme for Afghanistan in 2002, more than 3.5 million refugees have returned to their homeland - the vast majority from Pakistan and Iran - the two largest host countries to the Afghan diaspora. More than 1.4 million Afghans have returned to their homeland from Iran, with 844,000 of them receiving assistance from UNHCR.

In 2002, the refugee agency in Iran assisted 260,000 to return; followed by 142,000 in 2003, 378,000 in 2004, and 64,000 in 2005. This decrease in return numbers is seen as natural following several consecutive years of high return rates, according to the agency.

As part of that assistance effort, returnees register at one of 10 voluntary repatriation centres (VRCs) located throughout Iran - including the cities of Mashhad, Qom, Esfahan, Kerman, Shiraz, Yazd, Arak, Zabol, Zahedan, and Tehran, as well as a dispatching station in Khravan. In Iran, they are provided with an assistance package, including a small monetary grant to facilitate their return.

Despite the programme's successes, many challenges remain in Iran, where according to the government just over 900,000 registered Afghans still live.

"Another challenge is to ensure the international community remains focused on the need for the continued support for Afghan refugees who decide to return voluntarily and for those who remain in the host countries. It is equally essential that the host countries in the region receive continued support for maintaining the refugees pending their return," Bronee observed.

On the other side, after a winter break of three months, the UNHCR office resumed its voluntary repatriation assistance programme for Afghan refugees in Pakistan. The programme is now in its last operational year under the exiting tripartite agreement between Islamabad, Kabul and UNHCR that expires in December 2006.

"The start of the repatriation season is slow, as some 15 Afghan families comprising about 75 individuals have left Pakistan over the last two days, including five families that returned on Wednesday. But this is quite usual," said Vivian Tan, a UNHCR spokeswoman in Islamabad.

In 2002 the UN refugee agency launched its voluntary repatriation assistance programme from Pakistan and Iran following the collapse of the Taliban regime in Afghanistan in late 2001. According to UNHCR, over 2.7 million Afghan refugees have returned from Pakistan since the start of the repatriation programme. More than 440,000 Afghans returned in 2005. A significant number also cross into Afghanistan without UNHCR assistance, but there are no records of the number of spontaneous repatriations.

In February, Islamabad announced it would close three large Afghan refugee settlements, including two in southern Balochistan province and one in North West Frontier Province (NWFP), giving the residents the option of repatriation through UNHCR's programmes or relocation to other camps before the end of April.

The UN refugee agency expects about 400,000 Afghans to return home in 2006. For those Afghans left in Pakistan beyond 2006, future arrangements are still under discussion with the governments involved, according to UNHCR.

Nasrullah Kakar shot dead in Quetta

QUETTA, March 1 (Pajhwok Afghan News): Unidentified gunmen shot dead a pro-government leader Nasrullah Khan Kakar in this provincial capital of Balochistan Wednesday morning when he was on way to his office.

Kakar was gunned down when he was on way from his village Kachlak to Quetta, said Dilawar Kakar, another leader of Nasrullah's Pakistan Workers' Party (PWP) and his close confidant. Speaking to Pajhwok Afghan News, Dilawar said, Nasrullah died on the spot while the assailants managed to escape.

Spokesman for the provincial government Raziq Bugti told this news agency no arrest had been made thus far. He said investigations were underway.

Nasrullah Kakar had close links with fugitive mujahideen leader Gulbadin Hekmatyar. He also remained chief of the Islamic Youth Force. He closely remained involved with pro-Islamic parties during the era of jihad in Afghanistan.

After the end of jihad, Kakar dissolved his youth force and constituted a new group in the name of Pakistan Workers Party. In the recent crisis in Balochistan, he had adopted a pro-government stand and opposed the Baloch nationalists. His body was shifted to his ancestral village Kachlak, where he will be laid to rest. Bashir Ahmad Nadim

[Disclaimer: The content of this news bulletin does not necessarily reflect the view or policy of theAfghan 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.]