In this bulletin :

• NATO could cover all Afghanistan by August-general
• President Karzai Meets with Belgium Foreign Minister
• Norway’s defence minister visits Afghanistan
• Suicide attacker against ANA explodes himself in S. Afghanistan
• Afghans investigate 3 children deaths for bird flu link
• Afghan Police Chief Accused of Killing 16
• More doubts over Pakistani deaths
• 29 Pakistanis expelled from Afghanistan for not possessing passports
• Pak-Afghan border areas under complete control of Pakistani forces: GOC Miran Shah
• China hands over completed hospital building to Afghanistan
• ADB to help Afghanistan enhance private sector
• Qanuni criticises delay in submission of cabinet details
• Afghan convert 'would be killed'
• Afghan Christian's Case Endangered Country's Relations, UN Says
• Afghan clerics say West meddled in convert case
• Why Afghanistan should not have dismissed the apostasy case
• Don’t pull troops, local Afghan émigrés warn
• Afghanistan needs us
• Learn From the Past in Afghanistan
• Afghanistan's hair-rising highway
• Afghanistan Struggles to Rebuild Tourism Industry
• Changing geostrategic landscape
• Khyber Agency fighting

NATO could cover all Afghanistan by August-general - Friday March 31

MONS, Belgium (Reuters) - NATO is capable of taking over peacekeeping duties across all of Afghanistan as early as August if member nations want, the alliance's top commander of operations said on Friday.

NATO Supreme Allied Commander Europe General James Jones said he expected the NATO-led ISAF force to cover three-quarters of the country by July and reaffirmed plans under which a final expansion transferring U.S. troops already there to ISAF.

"If everything goes well, it is possible -- if the alliance wants it -- to achieve stage three in July and stage four in August," he told a news briefing, using NATO terms for the planned expansion of ISAF to the south and then to the east.

"The United States would have to agree to that. It is a procedural question. The forces are there," he added.

No formal timetable has been set for ISAF's move eastwards but NATO officials had spoken of it happening much later than August. The most ambitious target mooted had been October.

NATO took over ISAF in 2003, two years after U.S.-led forces ousted Afghanistan's Taliban ex-rulers. It currently operates in the capital Kabul, north and west.

Jones said the transfer to ISAF of some of the U.S. troops already stationed in east Afghanistan as part of a U.S.-led coalition would raise ISAF's total strength to between 23,000 and 25,000 from a current total of around 17,000.

The United States would continue to have separate forces in Afghanistan who would then focus on the hunt for Taliban and al Qaeda remnants seen as behind the insurgency there.

NATO's planned move to the south already unnerved public opinion in several European NATO countries this year after a spate of suicide attacks by insurgents on foreign troops.

The plan to transfer thousands of U.S. troops in the east to ISAF has the potential to stir U.S. domestic opinion, marking what could turn out to be the largest deployment of U.S. ground troops under non-U.S. command.

"It is an expression of confidence in the alliance," Jones, a U.S. general, said of the U.S. readiness to go ahead with such a move. "It is a little bit of a departure," he added.

President Karzai Meets with Belgium Foreign Minister - Date of Release: 30 March 2006

Arg, Kabul – H.E. Hamid Karzai, President of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan, met with H.E. Karel De Gucht, Minister of Foreign Affairs of Belgium at the Gulkhana palace this evening.

During the meeting, the President and Foreign Minister Gucht discussed bilateral relations, the fight against narcotics, the situation of Afghan refugees in Belgium and the prospect of Afghanistan becoming a member of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE).

Foreign Minister Gucht expressed his willingness to help Afghanistan become a member of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE). Foreign Minister Gucht suggested to the President to send a delegation to Belgium to assess the situation of Afghan refugees in Belgium.

Foreign Minister Gucht who holds the rotating presidency of the OSCE proposed a plan to assist Afghanistan with border control to stop drug smuggling. The Government of Belgium offered to assist Afghanistan with advanced packaging technology so that Afghanistan agricultural products will meet both local and international standards.

On drugs, the President said, “Providing the Afghan farmers with alternative crops is the key to fighting narcotics.”

The President welcomed the prospect of Afghanistan becoming a member of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) and thanked Foreign Minister Gucht for his offer of assistance in this regard.

The President, on behalf of the people of Afghanistan, thanked the people and Government of Belgium for their generous assistance to the reconstruction of Afghanistan in past four years.

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

Norway’s defence minister visits Afghanistan - Daily Times - 31 Mar

OSLO: Norway’s defence minister was visiting Afghanistan this week to meet Norwegian peacekeepers and Afghan officials, her ministry said on Thursday. Anne-Grete Stroem-Erichsen left on Wednesday evening for the four-day visit, which includes a meeting with Afghan counterpart Abdul Rahim Wardak in Kabul.

Norway, a Nordic country of 4.6 million that is a NATO member, has about 300 troops in Afghanistan.

The defence minister’s agenda includes a visit to a Norwegian contingent in the northern city of Maymana. Those peacekeepers were attacked by a mob armed with assault rifles and grenades in February. Five Norwegians suffered minor injuries in the attack, and three protesters were killed.

Stroem-Erichsen is also scheduled to visit Norwegian units at field hospital in Mazar-e-Sharif, an F-16 fighter contingent in Kabul, as well as staff officers assigned to the peacekeeping force.

Norway pulled its last officers out of Iraq late last year, and has said NATO-led operations in Afghanistan will now be a key area of commitment. AP

Suicide attacker against ANA explodes himself in S. Afghanistan

KABUL, March 31 (Xinhua) -- A suicide attacker targeting Afghan National Army (ANA) convoy exploded himself Friday morning in Afghan southern province of Kandahar, a local official said.

"This morning at about 11:30 a.m. (7:00 a.m. GMT) in Maram village of Arghandab district a suicide attacker crushed to ANA convoy and exploded himself." Rahmatullah Raofi, the regional core commander of south Afghanistan told Xinhua.

It's al-Qaida who carried out this suicide attack, he added.

Fortunately except the attacker there is no casualty in Afghan soldier side or civilian side.

Suspected bomb attacker exploded and killed himself Thursday afternoon in Afghan northern province of Balkh province.

"This afternoon in Babayatgar area, a person with bomb on his body exploded himself before arriving the western gate of Mazar-e-Sharif city. Fortunately there is no other casualty except the suspected attacker," Shir Durani, the spokesperson of the provincial police department told Xinhua.

Taliban loyalists who vowed to destabilize the war-torn country and oust Afghanistan's government have recruited suicide bombers, Taliban sources said.

According to their frontline commanders, some 600 have registered their names to conduct suicide attacks in the country.

"We have recruited 600 suicide bombers to target foreign and government troops and we also fixed 2,000 U.S. dollars bounty for the head of any foreign soldier, and any one was able to kill a foreign soldier will receive the prize," Taliban's commander Mullah Razayar Nawrozi said in the southern Helmand province last week. Enditem

Afghans investigate 3 children deaths for bird flu link – Reuters 03/30/2006

KABUL - Afghan health authorities are investigating the death of three children on suspicion they might have had died of bird flu, a Public Health Ministry official said on Thursday .

The H5N1 virus was confirmed in chickens in the Afghan capital and an eastern province this month and is assumed to have spread to five other provinces. The three children died in the central province of Ghor, which has not reported any suspected cases of avian flu in chickens.

It wasn't immediately clear when the three died and other details of the case were sketchy. But ministry adviser Abdullah Fahim said three children from the same place had recently died in the remote, mountainous province, and there had also been reports of dead wild birds in the vicinity.

An aid group working in the area, World Vision, had reported the deaths to the health department, he said. "There are three confirmed cases of children dying because of respiratory infection but the cause is not known. It's just a suspicion," Fahim said. The children had been buried and no samples had been taken.

Fahim said he did not believe the children had died of bird flu, as there had been no reports of the virus in chickens in the province. They might have died of pneumonia, a common affliction in the mountains at this time of year, he said.

The H5N1 avian influenza virus has spread in birds at an alarming rate in recent months, sweeping through parts of Europe, down into Africa and flaring anew in Asia.

It is difficult for humans to catch but has infected 186 people in eight countries and killed 105, according to the latest World Health Organization figures. Experts fear the virus could evolve into a form passed easily from human to human, causing a pandemic that could kill millions.

There have been no human cases in Afghanistan but there is concern that, with veterinary and health sectors still recovering from decades of conflict, the country could struggle to contain an outbreak.

Health and agriculture officials were going to investigate the case in remote Dahor village, to determine if the children had been in close contact with birds, and to check on the reports of dead birds in the area, Fahim said. Poultry production is small in Afghanistan but many families have a few chickens in the yard.

Afghan Police Chief Accused of Killing 16 - By RAHIM FAIEZ, AP

KANDAHAR, Afghanistan - Afghan authorities have detained a border police commander accused in the killings of 16 Pakistanis, a provincial governor said Friday.

Abdul Razzak, a police commander for the Spin Boldak border district, also has been removed from his post pending an investigation, Asadullah Khalid, governor of the southern province of Kandahar, told The Associated Press.

He would not say whether Razzak was fired, referring further questions to the Interior Ministry in Kabul, where spokesman Yousuf Stanezai refused to make any comment Friday.

Afghan authorities are investigating the killings, reported March 21, amid conflicting claims that the victims were Taliban fighters entering     Afghanistan from Pakistan or Pakistani tribesmen traveling to a religious festival in northern Afghanistan.

Pakistan formally protest the killings, demanding punishment for those responsible. The killings deepened a rift in Pakistan-Afghan relations over allegations Taliban and al-Qaida forces are launching cross-border attacks inside Afghanistan.

Razzak had claimed the victims were Taliban fighters killed by his soldiers during a two-hour battle near Spinboldak, and included a mid-level Taliban commander who for months had allegedly led cross-border raids from secret bases on the Pakistani side of the frontier.

However, Saqib Aziz, a Pakistani government official in the neighboring town of Chaman, alleged the victims were Pakistanis from the Noorzai tribe and killed because of a blood feud with Razzak's clan.

More doubts over Pakistani deaths – BBC

Afghan officials have told the BBC that 16 Pakistanis killed in Afghanistan last week were shot dead on the orders of a local commander. The Afghan foreign ministry has been maintaining they were Taleban fighters, a charge dismissed by Pakistan.

But unnamed Afghan officials in the capital, Kabul, say the men were abducted there before being taken near to the Pakistan border and killed. They say the motive was a tribal feud dating back several years.

The deaths of the 16 Pakistanis last week triggered anger in Pakistan and led to the Afghan ambassador to Islamabad being summoned to the Pakistan foreign ministry for an official protest.

At the time, Afghan frontier security commander Abdul Razak said the Pakistanis had been killed in a clash near the border town of Spin Boldak. That account was contradicted at the time by a senior provincial official who said the victims had been killed in cold blood.

Commander Razak is under police detention while an investigation into the incident is carried out. Officials in the central government have now told the BBC that the 16 Pakistanis were in Kabul when their troubles began, as guests of a man with strong links to the fighters of the Northern Alliance.

They say the man handed the Pakistanis over to Commander Razak in exchange for money and that they were then taken to near Spin Boldak in a number of Land Cruisers. The officials say the men, who had their hands tied, were all shot dead from distance of roughly one metre.

The officials say Commander Razak wanted the men dead because some had been involved in the killing of his brother some years ago on the other side of the border with Pakistan.

29 Pakistanis expelled from Afghanistan for not possessing passports

PESHAWAR: Afghan government has expelled 29 Pakistanis associated with groceries and electronics goods related professions from Afghanistan on the charges of not possessing passports and started raids against Pakistani nationals living there without passports.

Sources told Online Thursday that following the exchange of tough statements between Pakistan and Afghanistan, government of Pakistan geared up the process of repatriation of Afghan nationals living in Pakistan. In reply, Afghan government also directed Afghan police to carry out raids on Pakistanis living in Afghanistan without passports.

Consequent upon the steps taken by Afghan government, 29 Pakistanis were also expelled from Afghanistan who were living therein without passports. These Pakistani nationals are Khaista, Noor Muhammad, Bashir Ahmad, Gul Muhammad, Danish Singh, Muhammad Alim, Mohabbat Ullah, Khial Khan, Naseem Khan, Gul Zareef, Abbas, Rizwan, Muhammad Jan, Muhammad Rasool, Abbas Khan, Qurban, Dil Nawaz, Iqbal, Azam Gul, Abdullah Jan, Sabir Muhammad, Shahid Khan, Ibrar, Naseer ul Haq, Ubaid Ullah, Qasim, Shah Nawaz, Shahmir and Darray Khan. They were associated with the professions related to selling of poultry fowls, edibles and electronics. They were expelled via Toorkham border.

Pak-Afghan border areas under complete control of Pakistani forces: GOC Miran Shah

MIRAN SHAH: General Officer Commanding Miran Shah Maj Gen Akram Sahi has said army has taken full control of Pak-Afghan border areas and foreign militants have been flushed out from Miran Shah and the surrounding areas.

Talking to a private T.V channel Thursday Maj Gen Akram Sahi said situation is normal in the area. Some people were engaged in hooliganism in the name of Taliban in the area. Therefore, the whole tribal area has been declared arms free area, he added. He told that Pakistan army was holding full control of Pak-Afghan borders and no one could cross over the border illegally from either side. The steps taken in this respect are proving effective, he added.

He underscored that Pakistan army is an institution which renders sacrifices and every one from the rank of general to sepoy is ready to lay down one’s life for the integrity and sovereignty of the country. (The Nation)

China hands over completed hospital building to Afghanistan

KABUL, March 30 (Xinhua) -- China handed over the completed office building of the Jamhuriat Hospital (Republic Hospital) to the Afghan government in Afghan capital Kabul on Thursday.

At the hand-over ceremony, as well as the opening ceremony of the construction of the temporary medical house, Chinese Ambassador to Afghanistan Liu Jian said "the completion of the office building is a good beginning, and the temporary medical building will provide the place for treatment before the construction of the main medical building."

Afghan Public Health Minister Mohammad Amin Fatimi thanked China for the help to the Afghan medical course, saying the 20-million-U.S. dollar hospital "will become the most developed and well-equipped hospital in Afghanistan after the completion."

The Jamhuriat Hospital is the China-sponsored hospital to help the medical reconstruction of the post-war Afghanistan. It took one and half years' hard work by Chinese companies and Afghan people to complete the construction of the office building. The construction of the 10-floor main medical building with about 350 medical beds will begin very soon.

During the decades of war, medical facilities in Afghanistan have been destroyed and a lot of Afghan doctors fled to other countries. Now about 77 percent of Afghans can get the medical treatment from the government. According to the Public Health Minister, five percent more Afghans will be covered by the national medical system this year, and in the next four years, all Afghan people will enjoy the national medical system.

ADB to help Afghanistan enhance private sector

The Asian Development Bank (ADB) will provide 1 million U.S. dollars of grant to Afghanistan to help it enhance the role of private sector in economic growth and poverty reduction, said ADB on Thursday.

One of the key challenges facing Afghanistan is establishing a supportive environment for the country's large and mainly informal private sector, which is estimated to control as much as 89 percent of the country's gross domestic product and employs about 1.7 million people, said ADB.

However, the private sector contributes just six percent of the economy's gross domestic capital formation while accounting for 92 percent of consumption, said ADB.

"This in part reflects a lack of general awareness of potential business opportunities and limited business development skills, it also reflects the absence of incentives for the private sector to formalize its activities," says Eugenue Zhukov, an ADB Principal Economist.

The program will support reforms that will lead to private sector growth in the country by directly addressing the key issues that constrain investment and entrepreneurship, such as a lack of an enabling legal and regulatory framework, unfair business practices and limited access to much needed business development services and financing.

The Afghan government will contribute about 60,000 U.S. dollars to the project's total cost of 1.06 million U.S. dollars. The Ministry of Finance is the executing agency for the program, which is due for completion in July 2006.

"Experience from other countries show that transparent and appropriate legal and regulatory structures, well-functioning markets, and access to credit will play a vital role in promoting private sector-led growth," said Elaine Glennie, an ADB Senior Financial Governance Specialist. Source: Xinhua

Qanuni criticises delay in submission of cabinet details

KABUL, Mar 29 (Pajhwok Afghan News): Members of the Wolesi Jirga Wednesday lashed out at the government for its slowing down in handing over a detailed list of the proposed cabinet ministers to the lower house. 

Speaker of the lower house Yunus Qanuni said that they were not granted full-fledged information about the suggested ministers after elapsing one week of its announcement. He said they had been given information about eight ministers of the total 25-member cabinet.

Biographies, citizenship documents, qualificational certificates and professional experience details of all ministers and Supreme Court members have to be submitted to the parliament before it may use vote of confidence. "We hope we will be granted all the required documents at the earliest to initiate vote of trust," said Qanuni.

The parliament meeting today did not focus, as expected, on the cabinet, rather the issue of the Christian convert was discussed. Makia Monir

Afghan convert 'would be killed' – BBC

An Afghan man who could have faced the death penalty for becoming a Christian has said he would probably have been killed had he remained in Afghanistan. Speaking to journalists in Italy, where he has been given asylum, Abdul Rahman, 41, thanked Pope Benedict XVI for leading the campaign to have him freed.

He said he never wanted to return to Afghanistan and was concerned for the safety of his family there. Afghan MPs have condemned his release and said he should have not have left. Mr Rahman was freed on Monday after being deemed mentally unfit to stand trial on a charge of apostasy.

Conversion, or apostasy, is a crime under Afghanistan's Islamic law. Mr Rahman spoke to journalists soon after Italy formally granted him asylum on the grounds of religious persecution.

"In Kabul they would have killed me, I'm sure of it," he said. "If you are not a Muslim in an Islamic country like mine they kill you, there are no doubts." He said he was "happy" to be in Italy and thanked the pope for "having acted on my behalf".

Mr Rahman is now under protection at a secret location in Italy, the interior ministry has said. There had been an international outcry at the prospect of the Christian convert being executed for his religious beliefs.

The Pope wrote to Afghan President Hamid Karzai last week, saying that dropping the case "would bestow great honour upon the Afghan people and would raise a chorus of admiration in the international community".

Politicians in Afghanistan opposed Mr Rahman's release from trial as "contrary to the laws in place in Afghanistan", and condemned Western "interference" on his behalf.

The case has highlighted ambiguities in Afghanistan's constitution over the interpretation of religious issues. Mr Rahman, who converted 16 years ago while working as an aid worker for an international Christian group, was arrested after police discovered him with a Bible.

An ethnic Tajik originally from the Panjshir Valley, north of Kabul, Mr Rahman returned to Afghanistan a few years ago. It is thought that he was denounced by relatives after returning to seek custody of his two daughters.

Afghan Christian's Case Endangered Country's Relations, UN Says

March 31 (Bloomberg) -- Afghanistan's relations with the international community were put at risk by the case of an Afghan citizen who faced a possible death penalty for converting from Islam to Christianity, the United Nations said.

The UN ``saw a grave danger for Afghanistan's relations with many of its most committed international supporters,'' Tom Koenigs, the UN's special representative in Afghanistan, said in a statement yesterday to UN workers in the country. ``We saw an individual's rights to a fair trial, to freedom of religion, to free expression, and to life and health, being in jeopardy.''

Abdul Rahman, 41, left Afghanistan earlier this week after he was freed from prison when the Afghan government declared him mentally unfit to stand trial, the Associated Press reported. He was granted asylum by the Italian government.

Rahman's case prompted international appeals to the Afghan government from Italy, the U.S., the U.K., Germany, Australia and Canada, which all have soldiers in Afghanistan. The case is the first of its kind in Afghanistan since the U.S.-led war on terrorism in 2001 ousted the Taliban regime, which imposed a strict interpretation of Islamic religious law, known as Sharia.

The UN made its position clear because religious freedom is something that applies equally to followers of all beliefs, Koenigs said. The UN would be duty bound to ensure that rights were upheld if an individual faced punishment in a Christian country for converting to Islam, he said.

Several clerics in Afghanistan had called for Rahman's execution and the case sparked some protests in the country.

``In the case of Afghanistan, this means upholding the principles of the constitution, based on Islam, which safeguards human rights,'' Koenigs said. ``We are aware too that a minority of Muslims and Christians are using this case to promote their own political agendas.''

Rahman was arrested earlier this month when his family reported his conversion to the police, Agence France-Presse cited Afghan Supreme Court Judge Ansarullah Mawlavizada as saying on March 19. Sharia law provides for capital punishment for any Muslim who converts to another religion and refuses to revert to Islam, AFP reported, citing the judge.

Rahman converted to Christianity 16 years ago while he was in Pakistan and lived in Germany for several years before returning to Afghanistan in 2002, AFP said. Afghanistan's constitution says Islam is the state religion. It also says that followers of other religions are free to exercise their faith.

Afghan clerics say West meddled in convert case

Reuters - Afghan clerics blamed meddling foreigners on Friday for the release of a Christian convert who they said should be executed for abandoning Islam.

The convert, Abdur Rahman, was spirited out of Afghanistan to asylum in Italy on Wednesday, a day after he was released from jail following a storm of protest in the United States and other Western countries over his treatment.

"Why does the international community interfere in our internal affairs? Why do they interfere in our judicial affairs?" cleric Mohammad Sediq asked his congregation at Friday prayers in the northern city of Mazar-i-Sharif. "It undermines Islam and our constitution," he said.

Rahman, 40, was jailed this month for converting to Christianity and could have faced trial under Islamic sharia law that stipulates death as punishment for apostasy.

The United States led a chorus of Western demands for his release and the United Nations helped the government resolve the case and secure Rahman's asylum in Italy.

But many conservatives in Afghanistan had insisted Rahman be tried under Islamic law. The Afghan parliament had said his release had been illegal and he should not be allowed to leave the country. "We know the convert was released by the top people," Sediq said, referring to the government. "However, foreign hands were also involved."

"This was only the start of such plots in Afghanistan. Lots of other converts will reveal themselves as they think they won't be followed up by the authorities."

Another prayer leader in Mazar-i-Sharif, Qari Abdul Hakim, said Rahman's release was a blow to Islam and he should have been hanged in public. "This was a plot hatched by foreign countries," said Hakim, adding that Italy should send Rahman back.

"Do we interfere in foreign countries' affairs? Of course we don't. Therefore, they must stop this and we ask the Afghan attorney-general to resume Rahman's case and put him on trail.

Clerics in the eastern town of Ghazni also criticized foreign interference with one saying the West had launched a new crusade. "The West has began a crusade, an indirect one, by pressuring Afghanistan to release him," said cleric Sayed Ghulam Sakhi Asghari, who is a member of a government-appointed clerical council.

As he spoke worshippers chanted "Allahu akbar" (God is Greatest). Some said: "Death to the apostate, death to the traitors." "If the West wants to stop aid for us for executing Rahman, so be it. We don't want their help, we want Islamic law to be implemented," Asghari said.

A group of clerics in the southeastern town of Khost issued a statement denouncing what they called Italian interference and demanded Rahman be sent back and executed.

Rahman's exact whereabouts in Italy are being kept secret but on Thursday he gave a recorded television interview at a police station, with cameras only showing his back.

He thanked Italy and the Pope for leading an international campaign for his release. He said he felt persecuted in his country and feared for the safety of his family in Kabul. Italian media also reported him as saying he never wanted to return to Afghanistan.

Why Afghanistan should not have dismissed the apostasy case - By Jay Tolson Posted 3/30/06

Abdul Rahman will not be executed for abandoning his Muslim faith and embracing Christianity. Citing problems with the evidence, Afghanistan's Supreme Court has dismissed the case against the 41-year-old convert. Whether cynical or deft, the decision takes much of the heat off President Hamid Karzai, caught between popular demands for the apostate's execution at home and equally strong appeals for his release from western leaders abroad.

But what probably spells relief for Karzai and Rahman—assuming no fatwa-heeding Muslim kills the latter in his new home in Italy—may prove as much a setback for the new democratic regime of Afghanistan as for the ongoing global effort of Muslim reformers to make the case for a tolerant, broad-minded Islam.

Most immediately, the Rahman case would have brought to a head questions about the compatibility of Islamic law, or sharia, with the more universal principles of human rights (namely religious tolerance), both of which the Afghanistan Constitution claims to respect. Dismissing the case on technical grounds means Kabul has only put off its rendezvous with an inevitable constitutional dilemma. (Think, by analogy, of the U.S. Supreme Court sidestepping something so fundamental to the nation's constitutional arrangements as Marbury v. Madison.

At the same time, the dismissal robs the larger Muslim world of a golden opportunity for religious moderates to challenge an Islam-wide crisis of authority that allows extreme, literalist interpretations of Islamic law to go unchallenged. That is no small matter. Embraced not only by Wahhabi puritans and militant Islamist groups like the Muslim Brotherhood, those extremist interpretations also influence the law of the land in many predominantly Muslim nations. Although only a few states—Sudan, Saudi Arabia, Iran, and, possibly, Afghanistan—endorse capital punishment for apostasy, many other Muslim nations, including Jordan and Egypt, have subjected apostates to lesser punishments that include imprisonment and exile, according to Georgetown University historian Yvonne Haddad. Even Muslim nations that officially embrace religious tolerance, like Pakistan, often turn a blind eye to widespread and unofficial persecution of apostates., a crude village justice carried out by supporters of a narrow construction of sharia

Within Muslim intellectual circles, there is considerable disagreement over whether the brunt of the Islamic legal tradition stands behind religious tolerance or for punishment for apostasy. On one hand, many argue, Koranic passages supporting tolerance outnumber those inveighing against apostasy. And even the latter (in addition to sayings called hadith attributed to the Prophet and his earliest followers) are associated with the martial phase of the Prophet's career and are often understood as applying to acts of treason rather than to abandonment of the faith. Nevertheless, precisely because many of the punitive Koranic passages and hadith come later, puritanical jurists within almost every major Islamic legal tradition have at some point argued that they supersede (or "abrogate") the calls for tolerance. As UCLA legal scholar Khaled Abou El Fadl points out in his book The Great Theft: Wrestling Islam From the Extremists, "puritans habitually declare any part of the Qur'an that is inconsistent with their worldview to have been abrogated."

The urgent question is why the puritanical interpretation of sharia, which sees the holy law as a set of literal prescriptions taken selectively from the various sources, has come to prevail in recent decades. Much less is heard about a deeper, richer Islamic legal understanding, one that views sharia, the path of God, as something that mere humans can only approximate in their efforts to apply the few fundamental precepts of the faith to the laws of this world. The latter understanding accepts the fallibility of human interpretations and embraces the rich and varied Islamic juridical traditions. The former rejects most of those traditions, apart from the views of a few strict puritannical jurists.

The flattening and narrowing of Islamic law in the modern period, Abou El Fadl and others say, date from the colonial period, when the learned scholars (the ulema) began to see the authority of their judgments and teachings diminish. Then came scores of reformers from within the Muslim world—some progressive, some reactionary but all trying to make Islam applicable to modern society and governance. Often suppressed or harassed by secular nationalist leaders, Islamist reformers were driven underground or into exile. But some of the most reactionary Islamists also began to receive support from the wealthiest Islamic establishment in the world: the Wahhabis of Saudi Arabia. The sad irony of this outcome is that the most rigid views of Islamic law, views often rooted in tribal customs and practice, have come to dominate what began as a broad attempt to reform and modernize Islam.

Since September 11, the West and many moderate Muslims have been waiting for a forceful corrective to the Wahhabi-sponsored puritanical interpretations of the Muslim creed. And, to be sure, in the wake of the short-lived Rahman case, a few Muslim organizations and activists have registered their abhorrence of the apostasy charge. Yet few, if any, have clearly called for a long-overdue discussion of the meaning of sharia within the Islamic world. In Abou El Fadl's view, that discussion should have come even earlier, when the Afghanistan Constitution was being put together. But in their haste and sometimes their arrogance, Abou El Fadl says, western advisers feared "opening up the Pandora's box of Islamic arguments." More's the pity, he adds, "because what was needed in the writing of the constitution was a fuller discussion of what sharia means, not just paying lip service to Islam. All that was done was to postpone the issues."

And the real tragedy of the Rahman affair is that those same issues may escape close scrutiny once again.

Don’t pull troops, local Afghan émigrés warn - By terry glavin

Publish Date: 30-Mar-2006

With Prime Minister Stephen Harper recasting the Afghanistan mission he inherited from his Liberal predecessors as an act of revenge for the Canadians who died in the 9/11 attack in New York, and with Canada’s “antiwar” left showing disturbing signs of senility, Canada’s Afghan émigré community is becoming increasingly worried about where all this is leading.

“I’m very afraid that we are going to make the same mistake again, like when everyone forgot about Afghanistan until 9/11,” Vancouver’s Abdul Rahim Parwani told the Georgia Straight. “Now, in some areas, the security situation is already worsening, and the Taliban is reorganizing.”

Parwani, 42, was editor of the Kabul literary journal Tarjuma, which lasted until the Taliban, a theocratic-fascist movement with strong ties to Pakistani Islamists, seized power in Afghanistan in 1996. Parwani fled to India. Except for a stint working in that country, he has lived in Vancouver for six years. He is currently director of the weekly Ariana television program on Vancouver’s M Channel.

“That’s what I’m afraid of, that we will do this mistake again, that we will forget. And when we have placards on the street that say, `Troops out of Afghanistan’, then maybe one day they will have to go into the streets with placards that say, `Terrorists out of Canada’,” Parwani said. “Canada is my country, too, now. Canadians have to understand that this is the better way.”

By “the better way”, Parwani was referring to Canada’s many efforts in Afghanistan, which include clearing landmines that still kill about 100 people a month, guarding girls’ schools that Islamists are still burning down, setting up “micro-banks” to help women with small business loans, demobilizing militias, training police officers, and so on. All this would come to an end if Canada’s “antiwar” campaigners get their way and foreign troops were withdrawn.

Ferooz Sekandarpoor, with the Vancouver Institute for Afghan Studies, considers himself “antiwar”, but unlike so many of Canada’s “troops out” protesters, Sekandarpoor is capable of distinguishing between necessary humanitarian intervention and imperialist occupation. “Canada and all the other countries that are helping Afghanistan right now are not invaders. They are saviours,” he said. “I could be one of those people shouting ‘no war’, but we have got to help people. That is what the UN is for. Think about Rwanda. There was a terrible genocide there, and now we regret that.”

With Harper sounding increasingly like a White House press secretary and Canada’s Liberals embroiled in the early throes of a leadership race, the time couldn’t be better for a principled, internationalist position to finally emerge from Canada’s left. Instead, what’s on offer is mainly an incoherent echo of American counterculture slogans from the Vietnam era.

During a recent visit to Vancouver, Afghanistan’s ambassador to Canada, Omar Samad, told the Straight he can’t understand why “antiwar” groups have refused his offers of a dialogue. “But maybe it’s political. Or| ideological. I can’t explain it,” he said. “But to look at Afghanistan only through the prism of the United States is wrong.”

New Democratic party leader Jack Layton isn’t helping much. Demanding a parliamentary debate is all well and good if you’ve got something to say, but sometimes it’s as though Layton simply hasn’t been paying attention.

On March 26, Layton told reporters the decision to deploy Canadian troops from Kabul to the southern part of Afghanistan was only made “in the middle of the election”.

In fact, it was last May that former defence minister Bill Graham announced that Canada would head up the Provincial Reconstruction Team in Kandahar, one of about two dozen such teams in Afghanistan. Canadian soldiers were first deployed to Kandahar in 2002, and the Kandahar PRT was up and running by last August.

The good news in all of this is that the job of NDP defence critic has fallen to Dawn Black, the eminently capable and progressive New Westminster MP who regained the riding in the January 23 election. In an interview, Black, who has worked in democracy-training efforts in Bosnia and Cambodia, agreed that the NDP’s position on Afghanistan is still evolving. But she was clear on this much: “I think there is a real role for Canada to play and that Canada is playing.”

Canada has contributed generously to NATO’s International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan, which enjoys United Nations’ backing along with the gratitude of the Afghan government and the overwhelming majority of the Afghan people. The Canadian Forces’ effort in Kandahar is temporarily assigned to the separate U.S.–led coalition, which continues to enjoy popular support in Afghanistan despite its ham-fistedness and is intended to revert to NATO control in the coming weeks.

It hasn’t been easy for the NDP to find its voice on the subject. Canadians are legitimately worried about the direction the Harper government might take the mission in Afghanistan, Black said.

The difficulty in enunciating a robust, progressive, and humanitarian approach is complicated by Canadians’ uneasiness about close cooperation with American military forces, Black said, and Harper isn’t helping by parroting U.S. President George W. Bush all the time. “I find that chilling,” she said. “Very chilling.”

So what is the NDP position? For now, it’s this: “I think that Canada has a role to play, but it has to be a Canadian role and it has to reflect Canadian values.” That’s a good start. The Chronicles Web log can be found at transmontanus.blogspot.com/.

Afghanistan needs us - JASON HAWRELIAK (Mar 30, 2006) The Record

Lenny Everson's March 22 letter, Get Canadian Soldiers Out Of Afghanistan, suggests we withdraw our troops from Afghanistan and "hole up in a defensive bunker for the next nine months."

Everson seriously misjudges the issue. Our Canadian troops provide desperately needed humanitarian and security assistance to the grateful Afghans, duties difficult to perform while "holed up in a bunker."

The strong among us are morally obliged to protect the weak, the fortunate to help the unfortunate: to neglect these obligations out of fear of casualties is immoral. Yes, there are drug lords and terrorist groups in Afghanistan, but that is precisely why a strong military presence is needed. To send humanitarian workers without security forces is dangerous and foolish.

Rebuilding the country will be costly, yet is our responsibility as a member of multinational organizations such as the United Nations and NATO. Were Everson one of the peaceful majority of Afghans, would he want the world to ignore his suffering?

Jason Hawreliak - Waterloo

Learn From the Past in Afghanistan - Friday, March 31, 2006; Page A18

The March 21 op-ed column "Off Course in Afghanistan," by Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), was a timely warning regarding the U.S. decision to replace 2,500 troops with NATO troops in one of the most strife-torn parts of Afghanistan. The United States also is cutting development assistance from more than $1 billion last year to about $620 million this year.

Perceptions matter in Afghanistan, and so does history. Afghan friends and foes bitterly recall what they consider the U.S. abandonment once forces from the Soviet Union withdrew in 1989. At that critical moment mujaheddin commander Abdul Haq told me, "If American stays and helps to rebuild my country, we will regard you as friends for generations. If you now leave, we will see you as having conspired with the Soviets in the destruction of our country."

We must not repeat our mistake.

EDMUND McWILLIAMS - Falls Church - The writer, a retired Foreign Service officer, served as U.S. special envoy to Afghanistan in 1988 and 1989.

Afghanistan's hair-rising highway - BBC News Wednesday, 29 March 2006

The road connecting the capital, Kabul, with the southern city of Kandahar is one of Afghanistan's key highways. The BBC's Bilal Sarwary took a taxi ride down the 250-mile (400km) highway, rebuilt by the Americans, and found the journey perilous in more ways than one. I had to travel back to Kabul from Kandahar so I went to the main taxi stand in Kandahar to find a ride.

Taxi driver Abdul Bari was playing loud Pashto music and joking with his friends as I approached the group and politely asked them if there was somebody who could take me to Kabul. He was quick to get up.

"I will take you and I will get you there before any one else. But I want 3,500 Afghanis ($70)," he said. It seemed a fair bargain so I agreed. Like all taxi drivers around the world, Afghan cabbies are also very keen to engage you in conversation - whether you like it or not.

As it turned out my driver had a particularly colourful past. As a young man, he had fought the Soviets. Many of his family members were jailed, some even killed.

But he became disillusioned with the anti-communist mujahideen when they began abusing their power following the defeat of the Soviet troops. He fled to Pakistan and began supporting the Taleban "because they were the good guys".  Soon after, he returned to Kandahar and bought himself a taxi.

"I've been driving on this road for the past 10 years," says Abdul Bari. As we started driving towards Kabul the complaints began. Apparently driving down this highway was particularly hazardous.

"You know the police take money from me, the Taleban come out and start breaking my music cassettes," he said. I inquired why the police asked him for money. "Just wait and see for yourself," he said. As we tried to get out of Kandahar we were stopped at the first police checkpoint in Daman district. A uniformed policeman approached us and asked Abdul for 100 Afghanis ($2), claiming he had not been paid his salary.

But once paid the policeman was very polite and thanked the driver. "Our government has robbers and thieves to guard us," Abdul told me angrily.

As we drove past Zabul the topic changed to the Taleban. According to Abdul Bari, they come out at different times "mostly early morning and late afternoon". The driver was quick to emphasise they did not ask for money or take belongings.

"They will break the cassettes... Start beating the passengers. We intervene and beg the Taleban not to harm them," he said. Sometimes robbers wearing police uniforms come out on to the road, he says. "The first thing they ask for are mobile phones. They don't take mine but they once told me if I ever had a foreigner I should call them," he said. By now we were hurtling down the highway at 140kph.

I had never driven at such a high speed in my life. I always wanted to, but Afghanistan's roads were never good enough. I asked Abdul why he had not put on his seat belt. His answer was quite shocking. "I will die whenever God decides - nothing will keep me alive if my number is up.

"Only the stupid foreigners put their seat belts on all the time, they are so scared," he added, sniggering. I just could not convince him to put his seat belt on.

We hardly saw any traffic police on the way. The only place you would see them was at the site of an accident. There are a few every day. The drivers try to drive really fast and race each other. Most accident victims die because they cannot make it to the hospitals in time and there are none on the road.

As we talked about problems and security fears. I suddenly noticed a group of four cars had been stopped along with our taxi by police from a nearby checkpoint. Apparently an attack had been launched on the police post from the mountains which surrounded the road.

The police returned fire using a heavy machine gun. In a few minutes they told everyone they could leave. I was shocked but it appeared very normal to everyone else.

As we passed Zabul we reached Shah Joy, an area where the Taleban is strong and their members can often be seen driving on motorcycles. We stopped for lunch at a local restaurant. As I went inside, I saw a group of men on motorcycles driving around the car holding walkie-talkies.

"Taleban," Abdul said quietly. "They come and check the cars and passengers and then they radio their friends. They are looking for foreigners and anyone working for the Afghan government."

During the five-hour drive to Kabul I did not see a single house or village along the road. I could see goats and sheep, but hardly any people. Burned and destroyed buildings could be seen - it was clear security in the south was still a big problem.

As we said goodbye in Kabul Abdul Bari told me he dreamed of driving along this road without being asked for bribes. "I voted for [President Hamid] Karzai to make things right. I will not vote for him again unless he notices the problems of the poor like me," he warned.

Afghanistan Struggles to Rebuild Tourism Industry - By Benjamin Sand
Kabul 30 March 2006

After more than three decades of war and civil unrest, Afghanistan remains one of the world's poorest and most dangerous countries. But this month, officials in Kabul have initiated a new five-year campaign to revitalize the country's tourism industry.

Nasrullah Stanekzai is Afghanistan's deputy minister of tourism. It is, he acknowledges, not always the easiest job and certainly not the most popular.

The first tourism minister installed after the end of the old Taleban government was beaten to death in 2002. The second was killed last year when his car was hit by a rocket-propelled grenade. There is, Stanekzai says, still a lot to do before Afghanistan is really tourist-friendly.

"We have some challenges for the tourism, first I think is the security, second we haven't capacity for the hospitality," the minister said. "We haven't yet the tourism culture, we haven't capacity for services for tourism."

But he says, slowly things are getting better. Just a few months ago Kabul celebrated the opening of its first five-star hotel, the chic Kabul Serena.

The $30 million project was paid for by the Aga Khan Fund for Economic Development, which hopes the hotel will help revitalize Kabul's economy. Chicken Street, a dusty stretch of small stores and outdoor vendors is Kabul's best-known shopping area.

In 2004 a suicide bomber attacked the street, killing an American woman and an 11-year-old girl. Today, shop owners such as Karim Azam say tourists are beginning to trickle back.

"As long as we have better security tourists will come. They used to come, lots of people would come. If they come we already have our stuff that shows Afghan culture," he said.

Stanekzai's office is helping kick off a five-year campaign to revitalize the tourism industry. He says Afghanistan boasts world class tourist sites, including what is left of giant third-century Buddhist statues. The strict Islamist Taleban government destroyed the famed statues in 2001.

With Indian and Japanese funding, Stanekzai says, a new visitors' center is being built near the remains of the statues, and four other national parks are being established elsewhere in the country.

The country's other attractions include the 12th-century Minaret of Jam, which is on the UNESCO world heritage list, several fourth-century Buddhist ruins, and in Herat, 11th-century building complexes that are rich in Islamic art. And, in the past, many tourists came just to enjoy the country's stunning natural beauty, including the Hindu Kush mountains.

To get the tourism campaign rolling, Stanekzai says his office is coordinating a cultural festival in India. Many of the country's visitors come from India and Pakistan.

He says the exhibition, which opens this month in New Delhi, will have a little bit of everything. "Afghan food festival, a fashion show, dance, Afghan national music and also handicrafts and films," he explains.

Ideally, he would like to see Afghanistan recapture some of the tourist traffic it enjoyed during the 1960s and '70s. In those days, before the Soviet Union invaded, hundreds of thousands of tourists visited Afghanistan every year.

At one point, according to the ministry's old data, tourism generated more than $40 million for local businesses. Last year, 2,000 tourists came. But even that is a step in the right direction, up from around 500 the year before.

In 2006, Stanekzai says there could be three, four, maybe even five times as many visitors. Just around the corner from his office is Royal Limited, one of Afghanistan's first locally owned and operated travel agencies.

Proprietor Naveed Wardak says business already is pretty good and getting better every day. "Business is wonderful. I am advising that everyone wants to come here if they can," he said. "Everyone wants to come … we have daily two flights and all (the) time it is full."

Wardak opened his office, by himself, two years ago. Now he has more than six employees and plans to hire more in the next few weeks.

But he insists he is interested in more than just expanding his business or making money. He says really what he wants is to help people see his country and see how much it has changed since the Taleban were kicked out of power in 2001.

"Look, whenever I am going to the airport, whenever I am seeing the flight is full it is proud (pride) and happiness for me," he said. Of course, he says the challenge is making sure that once people get here they have a good time and stay safe.

And obviously, he says, Afghanistan has a long way to go. But for the first time in decades, he says he thinks the country is headed in the right direction.

Changing geostrategic landscape - By Shamshad Ahmad Khan – DAWN 3.30.06

PRESIDENT George W. Bush’s recent visit to Pakistan continues to be the subject of debate and discourse at all levels and in every segment of our society. The mood at the level of people has been one of anxiety and concern over the spectacularly preferential treatment that India received during his visit to New Delhi.

By all accounts India came out as “a big winner” whereas in sharp contrast, unequal dialogue, minimum protocol, cheerless welcome, arrival and departure in the dark of the night, maximum security, terrorist scare, death and debris in the vicinity of US consulate in Karachi, and a sombre mood on both sides characterized President Bush’s less than 24-hour sojourn in Islamabad.

According to a revelation in the New York Times a week after the visit, President Bush made an “unrivalled” gesture to Pakistan by overruling his secret service and going ahead with an “overnight” stay in Pakistan, a country alleged to be “the assumed haven of Osama bin Laden and one of the most dangerous countries in the world.” According to this report, all our diplomatic exertions in recent months, including those during the recent visit of our prime minister to Washington, were focused on persuading the US president to spend a night in Islamabad.

He did oblige us and took “calculated risks” by committing himself to “the overnight stay” in Pakistan. Indeed, it must have been a great solace to our leaders to have the world’s “most powerful” man spending a night in their neighbourhood. He slept at the US embassy in the heavily fortified diplomatic enclave. He may have had a restful night after his tiring schedule in India but for his secret service, it must have been a rare night of nightmares.

In New Delhi, President Bush not only spent three “memorable” days but also bestowed on India all that it needed and for it to be able eventually to claim a permanent seat in an enlarged UN Security Council. Although the details of its contents are not known yet, the nuclear deal signed by President Bush during his New Delhi visit is a recognition of India’s new place in the world and also a reflection of its phenomenal rise in the American estimation as a “thriving democracy, a growing economy and a responsible nuclear power.”

Under this deal, the US has agreed to end its decades long moratorium on sales of nuclear fuel and technology to India which on its part has agreed to take steps that will bring it into the international non-proliferation mainstream, including placing its civilian nuclear facilities and programmes under IAEA safeguards and adhering to the guidelines of the Nuclear Suppliers Group and the Missile Technology Control Regime. Both countries also undertook to “support efforts to limit the spread of enrichment and reprocessing technologies and also support the conclusion of a Fissile Material Cut-off Treaty (FMCT).”

President Bush justified the groundbreaking arrangement with India by acknowledging its “strong commitment to preventing proliferation” of weapons of mass destruction. He went on to suggest that “as a responsible state with advanced nuclear technology,” India should receive the same privileges as other such states. He also pledged to seek Congressional approval for the deal through an amendment in US laws and policies and also to work with friends and allies to adjust international regimes to enable full civil nuclear energy cooperation and trade with India. In return, India agreed to take a number of specific steps to expand its nonproliferation commitments.

Besides the nuclear deal as the centrepiece of his visit to New Delhi, President Bush also reached additional agreements encompassing “a long list” of areas, including trade, agriculture, science and technology, energy, environment, defence, combating HIV/Aids, counterterrorism and “strengthening” of democratic institutions in Third World countries.

In Pakistan, the only agreements signed were those on the establishment of a US-funded entrepreneurals training centre and Pakistan’s participation in the US-sponsored container security initiative. No progress was reported on much trumpeted bilateral investment or free trade arrangements. As against a substantive framework of “strategic partnership” with India, only a “strategic dialogue” mechanism was announced for Pakistan.

Even on the four high-profile issues on Pakistan-US agenda, namely, nuclear, technology, democracy, terrorism and Kashmir, the US message was loud and clear. There will be no nuclear cooperation with Pakistan, not even for peaceful purposes, until it re-establishes its non-proliferation credentials. For Washington democracy is merely a subject for sermonic discussion and not a priority issue. On terrorism, Pakistan was doing great but still needs to do a lot more. On Kashmir, the US will only encourage a bilateral approach as the only “way forward.”

No matter what we now say to keep face, the fact remains that the US has given us an “unmannerly” reminder of the changing realities and a new geo-strategic landscape in South Asia. Not only the tone and tenor of what was said at the joint press conferences in Islamabad and New Delhi but also the texts of joint statements issued in the two capitals represented a clear contrast in the US treatment of its two strategic partners.

The new multidimensional India-US relationship comes as a culmination of the process launched formally during Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s visit to Washington last July. But this relationship has been in the making for years with India attracting American interest as the world’s largest democracy and an emerging global economic power with a huge market and investment potential. Washington has always reckoned India as a counterweight to China and as a potential check on China’s rising economic and military power.

The inevitability of US-India strategic nexus had long been foreseen and was publicly articulated during President Clinton’s five-day visit to India in March, 2000. In fact, he laid the foundation of the new relationship by signing a five-page “India-US Vision for the 21st Century” charting a new and purposeful direction for their future relationship as “partners in peace” in the new century. The Bush administration has not only continued but also added a strategic dimension to this relationship.

Where does Pakistan stand? Last few years have been a fateful period for us. A dispassionate though painful soul-searching would reveal that our recognition in the comity of nations today is only as a “breeding ground” for religious extremism and militancy and as a country afflicted with a culture of violence and sectarianism. This perception not only impairs our global image but also complicates things in our dealings with our friends and foes alike.

The US, in particular, sees Pakistan as the “ground zero” and a pivotal linchpin in its fight against terrorism. From being a major power in South Asia always equated with India, Pakistan today is bracketed with Afghanistan in terms of its outlook, role, needs and problems. This is an unenviable distinction which circumscribes our role both within and beyond our region.

Our domestic failures have seriously constricted our foreign policy options. Decades of political instability resulting from protracted military rule, institutional paralysis, poor governance, socio-economic malaise, rampant crime and corruption, and general aversion to the rule of law have weakened Pakistan’s external image and standing. Terrorism is our sole identity now. We are seen both as a problem and as a key to its solution.

In 1998, after nuclear tests first by India and then by Pakistan, the US engaged both countries in a “strategic dialogue.” After eight rounds of talks with both countries on an equal footing ending in February, 1999, a clear parity was established between the two countries.

Like India, we accepted no obligation under the global nonproliferation regime that could circumvent the quality and future of our strategic programme. Besides obtaining relief from the much dreaded US sanctions, we were able to develop an implicit “strategic linkage” between Pakistan and India promising them “equality of treatment” in terms of any future concessions, including access to technology.

That linkage is no longer there now. Pakistan has been categorically “de-hyphenated” from India. President Bush left us in no doubt that India and Pakistan were two “different countries with different needs and different histories and could not be compared to each other.” He was blunt enough to tell President Musharraf at their joint press conference that Pakistan should not expect a civilian nuclear agreement like the one he had signed with India. He had earlier described India a “great democracy” and a “responsible nuclear power” which had earned the right to nuclear technology. The fact of the matter is that Pakistan never stood a chance for any such deal because of its alleged “proliferation” record. The New York Times had editorially predicted even before Bush arrived in Pakistan that “the Pakistanis won’t get that deal, and any time spent discussing the issue will be wasted time that could be spent on other ways in which America should be developing its relationship with the Pakistani people.” Alas, the Pakistani people or their future have never figured anywhere or at any level in US engagements with successive military regimes in Pakistan, including the latest Bush-Musharraf meeting.

US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice also made it clear a day before their arrival in Islamabad that no nuclear deal with Pakistan was possible “at this juncture” as, according to her, there were serious “concerns” over its “proliferation” record. Did she mean to say that the US might be willing to revisit this issue “at some other juncture” or whenever Pakistan returns to a civilian rule and re-establishes its credentials as a responsible nuclear state? Many of us would like to believe that there remains a window of opportunity for Pakistan to catch up with India in nuclear status which could open only on the civilianization of its political command and control.

For now, at least, there are many questions on how this historic event of the “nouveau siecle” will impact on the overall security environment of South Asia which today stands out as a critical factor for regional and global stability. Is the US-Pakistan relationship any stronger in its strategic content after the Bush visit? Does Pakistan feel safer in the emerging environment of strategic imbalances in its region? Has Pakistan’s role in the war on terror been rewarded in any significant manner beyond words of personal praise and accolades for President Musharraf? Did the visit contribute in any measure to promoting stability and conflict resolution in South Asia? Is the prospect of India-Pakistan rapprochement and durable peace between them is any brighter now?

These are difficult questions and only time will provide the answer. But if the turbulent political history of this region has any lessons, Washington needs to understand the real issues of peace and security in this region.

Its future engagement must not exacerbate those issues. Any step that fuels an arms race with an escalatory effect on the military budgets and arsenals of India and Pakistan is no service to their peoples.

Indo-US defence and strategic alliance will not be without serious implications for the delicate balance of power and stability in the region and might also undermine the on-going process of nuclear and conventional restraint and stabilization measures which India and Pakistan have been pursuing as part of their composite dialogue and mutual confidence- building arrangements in recent years.

There are fears that India will use this nuclear accord to divert fuel and technology from peaceful to military uses and substantially increase its fissile material production leaving Pakistan with no choice but to bolster its own capability. No doubt, there will also be a serious and far-reaching effect on the global non-proliferation regime. But this is not an aspect that Pakistan should be playing up as a non-NPT country itself. We should instead be focusing more on our own security compulsions and on the need for equality of treatment between India and Pakistan.

For us, India’s access to civilian nuclear technology provides a precedent that should give us hope and motivation to deserve in due course the same status and treatment from the US and the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG). We only need to put our house in order and rebuild Pakistan’s image and credentials as a stable, mature and responsible nuclear state.

It is time we looked at ourselves and then realize whether we really deserved the treatment that India today is getting as the largest democracy of the world, and as the emerging global economic power. We also need to look at the nature and chequered history of our errand-specific “alignment” with the US which, in essence, has been an on-again, off-again relationship without any continuity, conceptual framework or shared vision.

For a country, domestically as unstable and unpredictable as ours, there can be not many choices. In today’s world, our options under a military controlled dispensation will remain limited. In the ultimate analysis, our problems are not external. They are domestic. Putting our house in order is our priority need.

We need to overcome our domestic weaknesses through national confidence-building and political reconciliation. National policies and priorities need to be rationalized. Tolerance and moderation, not extremism or obscurantism, should be our strength. The country must return to genuine democracy rooted in the will of the people, constitutional supremacy, rule of law, good governance, and a culture of political consistency and institutional integrity.

World’s major powers also need to recognize that under a democratically elected civilian government and with stable institutions strictly adhering to their constitutional roles, Pakistan will be a more responsible, more reliable, more effective and more appropriate partner of the free world in pursuit of common goals and in defence of shared values.

The writer is a former foreign secretary of Pakistan.

Khyber Agency fighting – Dawn 3.30.06 editorial (Pakistan)

ANOTHER example of how religion can be exploited for petty purposes and can lead to death and destruction can be seen in what happened in Khyber Agency on Monday and Tuesday. Two days of fighting between two tribal leaders has left at least 25 dead, scores injured and houses and property destroyed. No major issues were involved, nor was there any trace of the on-going conflict between the Taliban and their opponents. The highly motivated and well-armed militants on both sides owe their allegiance to two tribal leaders, both of whom obviously attach more importance to their narrow interests than to their religion. The two have disappeared without a trace in the mountain fastness along the Afghan-Pakistan border. But behind them they have left many women widowed and children orphaned. More shockingly, some women and children have been taken hostage. Trouble had been brewing in the area since November, and there was bad blood between the two sides, the issues being the establishment of illegal FM stations, disputes over property and the foul language the two leaders were using against each other in their “sermons”. Gunpowder was thus ready waiting to be ignited.

Since the British days, the tribal areas have enjoyed a sort of autonomy that now seems anachronistic. The colonial power allowed the tribesmen in designated areas to carry arms, maintain their traditions and settle disputes according to tribal laws and customs. In return, the Maliks — tribal chieftains — were forbidden from making forays into the “settled” areas and told to maintain peace within their areas. No one was allowed to carry arms outside the tribal areas — now called the Federally Administered Tribal Areas. The British paid some of the Maliks money to ensure their loyalty. Pakistan has been paying this subsidy to tribal Maliks in the form of building roads, schools and hospitals. However, in the wake of the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in 1979 and the civil war in the post-Soviet period, the rules of the game were violated. Pakistan became one big arms bazaar, as the Ziaul Haq government allowed tribesmen to operate throughout the country by establishing recruiting centres for the ‘jihad’ in Afghanistan and to establish madressahs of their own where only the Taliban version of Islam was taught. All these violations were ignored by sections of the military sympathetic to the Taliban, and as a consequence, the country stood in danger of becoming one big tribal entity.

The fighting in the Sur Dand area highlights this unpleasant reality. There is very little that the government can do besides what it has been doing — without any results. There may be no foreign militants in Sur Dand, as they are in Wana, and therefore there is no need for military action by the federal government. But the fighting and the background to it emphasize the need for doing away with Fata. If the purpose of Fata was to maintain peace within the tribal belt, the aim has failed. Time may not be right for abolishing Fata now, but there is need for developing a political consensus on a new approach to the issue. The tribal areas must be brought into the national mainstream, and the pace of economic development must be quickened to break the hold of pseudo-religious leaders and Maliks who like the sardars in Balochistan are interested in keeping the status quo, because it serves their interests.

[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.]