In this bulletin:

• NATO Forces Fight Taliban in 5 Provinces of Afghanistan
• Nato force too weak for early Afghan success, says general
• Afghan spy agency captures "suicide bombers from Pakistan
• Militancy will be crushed with force, vows Musharraf
• Pakistan’s Leader Defends Airstrike on School
• Awami National Party (ANP) on Bajaur Attach
• U.S., Afghanistan to Hold Strategic Dialogue Next Year
• US Diplomat: Taleban Not Strategic Threat to Afghanistan
• Chinese, Afghan defence ministers vow to strengthen cooperation
• China ratifies treaty with Afghanistan forging closer security ties
• Interior minister discusses major issues with Afghan counterpart
• EU To Give EUR2.5 Million For People Hit By Afghanistan Drought
• Nationalists' Afghan contacts worries Pakistan
• Traditional Afghan council will address return of Taliban
• Set proper agenda before convening jirgas
• Kasuri, Rice likely to miss Afghanistan conclave
• German chancellor says Afghan skull picture case intolerable
• Defence Secretary under fire over Taleban comeback
• Opinion: What next in Afghanistan?
• People in eastern Afghan district threaten to cultivate poppy
• Narcotics smuggling from Afghanistan: Pakistan not authorised to check consignments

NATO Forces Fight Taliban in 5 Provinces of Afghanistan

By ABDUL WAHEED WAFA - Published: November 1, 2006 The NY Times

KABUL, Afghanistan, Oct. 31 — Clashes erupted in five provinces in eastern and southern Afghanistan on Monday and Tuesday, with roadside bombs, suicide bombings and gun battles killing four NATO soldiers and an estimated 67 Taliban fighters, NATO officials said.

The violence came as NATO forces continued a military operation started last week intended to put pressure on Taliban forces through the fall and winter, and to allow reconstruction and development to reach the country’s restive south and east, NATO officials said. Taliban forces, meanwhile, continued to demonstrate their ability to carry out multiple roadside bombings and suicide attacks.

In the eastern province of Nuristan on Tuesday, a roadside bomb killed three NATO soldiers and wounded one as they patrolled in Weygal district, NATO officials said. In separate attack on Tuesday, one Afghan policeman died and two NATO soldiers were wounded in a suicide bombing in Ghazni Province, just south of Kabul.

On Monday, NATO soldiers involved in the new operation, named “Oqab,” or eagle, battled Taliban fighters in a six-hour firefight in the Daychopan district of the southern province of Zabul, NATO officials said. The clash killed one NATO soldier and an estimated 55 Taliban insurgents, they said.

In a second attack on Monday, three NATO soldiers were wounded by a roadside bomb in the eastern province of Kunar. In a third clash on Monday, NATO forces in the Zhera district of the southern province of Kandahar called in an airstrike on a group of suspected insurgents on the roof of a compound. The bombing killed as many as 12 insurgents, according to NATO officials.

Maj. Luke Knittig, a NATO spokesman, cautioned that the Taliban toll from Monday and Tuesday was an estimate. He said the figures had been based on sightings by pilotless aerial vehicles, aircraft and NATO soldiers directly involved in gun battles with insurgents. “It is not a precise endeavor,” he said. “But we had eyes on these targets.”

Last week, Afghan villagers reported that dozens of civilians were killed in an errant NATO airstrike in the Panjwai district of Kandahar Province. An investigation ordered by the Afghan president, Hamid Karzai, is still under way.

The clashes on Monday and Tuesday came after dozens of suspected Taliban were reportedly killed by NATO-led forces in fighting on Saturday in southern Oruzgan Province.

Since NATO took over responsibility for the region from American troops at the beginning of August, 56 of its soldiers have been killed in fighting. The nationalities of the four NATO soldiers killed Monday and Tuesday were not released.

Nato force too weak for early Afghan success, says general

By Rachel Morarjee in Kabul - FT.com November 1 2006

Nato does not have enough troops in Afghanistan to ensure an early victory over Taliban militants, the alliance's military commander in the country said yesterday.

"If you said to me, if your aim is to win, I'd say no. I haven't got enough [to] win this, say, in the next six months, but I can continue to make sufficient improvements to keep the people here confident in us and in their government," General David Richards said in an interview with the Financial Times.

Gen Richards said that with the 31,000 Nato forces currently in Afghanistan it would be possible to "persuade through substantive improvement, the people of this country that we are making real progress.

"I can persuade them of that without huge amounts of additional troops," he said, adding that the fledgling Afghan National Army and the creation of auxiliary police forces would bolster Nato forces' capability. Two fresh Canadian companies had already arrived in the country and 1,000 Polish troops would boost Nato force numbers in the new year. "I am confident that Nato nations will continue to answer the call," he said.

Nato had launched an operation this week to speed reconstruction and development in the wake of military operations in a bid to claw back public confidence, which had been severely dented by the spiralling violence in the south, Gen Richards said. Operation Eagle, which aimed to push out development and curb government corruption, was "a psychological operation to persuade people that the government and the international community are capable of delivering on their promises".

He gave few details on how the alliance planned to work with Afghan officials to show "tangible progress" on reconstruction across the country, but said fruits of the effort would be obvious before the end of the year.

The alliance faces a crisis of confidence in southern Afghanistan after dozens of civilians were killed in a ground and air offensive by Nato troops in Panjwai district of southern Kandahar province last week.

Gen Richards said he regularly called off military operations due to the risk of civilian casualties, but it was not possible to ensure there were no civilian deaths when the Taliban used non-combatants as human shields.

"The ultimate criminal is the Taliban. I think it is quite amazing that there have not been more civilian casualties given the completely callous disregard of the Taliban for civilians."

More than 200 people - mostly militants, according to Nato - have been killed in a series of bloody clashes across southern Afghanistan in the past week in an attempt by Nato and Afghan forces to push Taliban militants on to the back foot ahead of the winter months.

Gen Richards defended Nato's strategy, saying: "We are winning. We needed to establish our ability to secure and defend the Afghan people. There was scepticism about Nato's military prowess." He said the force had now shown it could fight robustly.

But mounting civilian casualties and an economic downturn caused by the violence has eroded public faith in the Nato alliance in southern Afghanistan with business grinding to halt due to security fears.

Atta Mohammad Khan, a shopkeeper in Kandahar, said: "Before Nato came to southern Afghanistan, we were making money as people came from different villages to our shops. Now people have fled their homes and no one is coming to buy anything. We are really losing money."

Afghan spy agency captures "suicide bombers from Pakistan"

AFP - 10/31/2006 - KABUL - Afghanistan's intelligence agency said on Tuesday it had arrested three men planning suicide attacks in Kabul, including two from a Pakistan-based cell run by the capital's Taleban-era deputy police chief.

The two were seized this week while trying to enter the city from neighbouring Logar province, spokesman Sayed Ansari told reporters.

They were part of a Pakistan-based cell organised by Mullah Mohammad Ibrahim Hanifi, who was the deputy police chief of Kabul during the 1996-2001 Taleban regime, he said.

"Mullah Ibrahim Hanifi, who is living in Pakistan, has been organising suicide attacks in southern Afghanistan. The two men we captured were also sent by him," he said.

The agency was holding another man suspected of being an accomplice to a suicide bomber who killed around a dozen people outside the interior ministry on September 30, Ansari said.

The blast was one of a series of seven that rattled the capital between early September and early October, killing scores of people, including three foreign soldiers.

The suspect had been identified as a Pakistani national sent to Afghanistan by the outlawed Pakistani militant group of Harkat-ul-Mujahideen to carry out a suicide attack, Ansari said.

Harkat-ul-Mujahideen has reported links to the Al Qaeda terror network and is said to be involved in crossborder attacks.

Suicide attacks have soared in Afghanistan this year, with the tactic generally agreed to have been picked up from international militant groups.

The NATO-led International Security Assistance Force said this month there had been 91 such attacks in 2006.

The latest was on Tuesday and killed an Afghan policeman in the southern province of Ghazni, according to authorities.

These attacks have killed 155 civilians, 40 members of the Afghan security forces, six government officials and 14 foreign troops, ISAF said.

The Taleban, ousted from government in a US-led military offensive in 2001, uses suicide and road-side bombings in an insurgency that has peaked this year and seen the rebels take on security forces in sophisticated attacks.

Militancy will be crushed with force, vows Musharraf

* President says camp was monitored for week before attack

Staff Report Daily Times 1 November 2006

ISLAMABAD: President General Musharraf has vowed to “crush” militancy with force and insisted that the Bajaur madrassa targeted in an airstrike on Monday was a training camp for Taliban militants.

“We will crush militancy with force and no one will be allowed to challenge the writ of the government,” Gen Musharraf said in his address at a seminar on ‘Security in South Asia in the Non-Traditional Spheres and Human Security’ on Tuesday. He added that the targeting of the training camp was a manifestation of the government’s resolve to crush militants.

“Anyone who says that they were innocent people are telling lies. The compound was being used for training of militants,” Gen Musharraf said. “They were being monitored for the last seven days. We knew exactly who they are, what they are doing. They were all militants, using weapons, doing military training within the compound.”

However, he said use of military force only bought time and did not provide a political solution to extremism and terrorism, which must be addressed through a holistic strategy.

Pakistan’s Leader Defends Airstrike on School

NY Times By SALMAN MASOOD Published: November 1, 2006

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan, Oct. 31 — Faced with protests across the country, President Pervez Musharraf on Tuesday defended a military strike that killed 80 people at a religious school, and insisted that the dead were militants undergoing terrorist training.

General Musharraf’s claim came amid protests across the political spectrum, but especially by an alliance of Islamic parties and thousands of people in the semi-autonomous tribal areas straddling the Afghan border where the strike took place.

Angry speakers at rallies across the country condemned General Musharraf’s alliance with the United States and the airstrike on Monday, when helicopter gunships fired missiles into the Islamic school, or madrasa, in the village of Chingai, near the town of Khar in the Bajur region.

General Musharraf said the dead were militants, and Pakistani military officials maintained that the madrasa was being used as a staging post for Al Qaeda and that it was frequently visited by Qaeda leaders.

Some local residents and opposition politicians have said that there were children in the school, and alleged that American warplanes had taken part in the attack. But the president dismissed the suggestion that the dead were innocent.

“Anyone who is saying that these were innocent Taliban is telling lies,” General Musharraf said while addressing a seminar in Islamabad, the capital.

“We were watching them since the last six, seven days,” he said. “We knew exactly who they are, what they were doing. They were all militants, using weapons, doing military training within the compound.”

Local news outlets on Tuesday quoted unidentified intelligence officials as saying that Ayman al-Zawahri, the top deputy to Osama bin Laden, and Abu Faraj al-Libbi, a senior Qaeda operative, used to visit the madrasa.

The local television station AAJ reported that satellite images showed militant activity going on within the madrasa and that it was used as a staging point for attacks in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

“Militants were given training to prepare explosives, and the madrasa was used to provide ideological motivation,” the report said.

Maj. Gen. Shaukat Sultan, the chief military spokesman, refused to confirm or deny the news report. “I cannot comment on that,” General Sultan said in a telephone interview on Tuesday evening.

When asked the reason for the attack, he said, “We had confirmed information about militant training going on in the madrasa.”

He denied that the military had any information about the presence of any high-level Qaeda leader at the madrasa at the time of the strike.

He also denied comments attributed to him by The Associated Press in which he appeared to acknowledge sharing intelligence with the United States to carry out the operation, an extremely delicate issue in Pakistan.

“That was wrong,” General Sultan said. “I was grossly misinterpreted. If there was any intelligence sharing, we cannot open it to media.”

In Washington, however, officials said Tuesday that American officials had provided intelligence to the Pakistani government that in part led to the strike on the madrasa. Before the attack on Monday, American and Pakistani officials discussed the intelligence and signed off on the target.

“There was a body of evidence that both sides agreed on,” said an American official, speaking on condition of anonymity because he was discussing classified information.

The official said American and Pakistani officials had agreed on the target in part because the madrasa was training militants to carry out attacks in Pakistan and Afghanistan. Liaquat Hussein, an associate of Mr. Zawahri’s who ran the madrasa, was killed in Monday’s airstrike.

The strike is expected to further polarize the political environment in the country. General Musharraf’s alliance with the United States has incensed hard-line Islamists who accuse him of being subservient to the United States.

But apart from Islamic opposition parties, liberal opposition parties also condemned the airstrike.

“This was a very ill-planned operation,” said Enver Baig, a senator from the opposition Pakistan Peoples Party. “They knew that there were students inside the madrasa and in case of an aerial operation, the casualties would be on a large scale. “It has not gone well with the common man on the street.”

Awami National Party (ANP) on Bajaur Attach

Press Release - Peshawar October 30, 2006
 
Asfandyar Wali Khan, President Awami National Party (ANP) has expressed his grief over the tragic loss of human lives in an attack by the Pakistani security forces on a Madrassa at Khar, Bajaur Agency. The ANP President has termed the incident yet another failure of the “anti-terror” policies of the government of Pakistan and has shown deep concern at the growing violence in the tribal areas.
 
It was ironical, he said, that the government had to resort to indiscriminate bombing instead of arresting the real culprits, who were living under the nose of the Bajaur Agency’s administration. This policy of the Gen. Musharraf’s government to allow terrorist’s stay in the tribal areas with sporadic resort to indiscriminate bombing, surprisingly on occasions when a high profile Western dignitary is on a trip to Pakistan, is causing resentment and is radicalizing the local population. 
 
A reasonable approach to isolate the extremists and discourage the terrorists a safe haven in the tribal areas is to open the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) to democratic, progressive and moderate political forces; make the administration of FATA transparent and accountable through a process of democratic reforms; and take immediate measures for the social and economic development areas. ANP, he said, has been consistently demanding such reforms in FATA but Gen. Musharraf’s  government has been constantly delaying this process for obvious reasons i.e. to keep the area in total darkness and cover up its hidden agenda vis-à-vis Afghanistan.
 
ANP President further said that Pakhtuns are being killed since the early 80s on both sides of the Durand Line due to failed foreign policy of the Pakistani establishment towards Afghanistan.
 
ANP has been consistently demanding that “foreign guests” of the establishment should not be entertained at the cost of Pakhtuns’ blood. If the establishment had sincerely taken measures to stop violent activities of the extremists in the border region, resort to such tragic acts would not have happened.
 
ANP President demanded that political matters could only be resolved through dialogue. Further delay in negating democratic reforms and the peace process will have disastrous repercussions for the entire region.

U.S., Afghanistan to Hold Strategic Dialogue Next Year

By REUTERS Published: October 31, 2006 - WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The United States will hold senior-level talks with Afghanistan next year, a senior U.S. official said on Tuesday, stressing American support for Kabul as it confronts rising violence from the Islamist Taliban.

Undersecretary of State Nicholas Burns said the spike in clashes and suicide bombings in Afghanistan this year did not represent a threat to President Hamid Karzai's government.

``While we've seen an increase in the number of attacks in the regions and some of the provincial cities and even in Kabul and Kandahar themselves over the past few months, we do not believe that these attacks pose a strategic threat to the central government,'' he said.

Burns, who will hold strategic talks with Karzai in Kabul in January, said the clashes also were the result of NATO and other allied troops ``taking the battle to the Taliban, along with the Afghan forces'' in southern and eastern parts of the country.

He told a conference in Washington on Afghan reconstruction that the United States would continue its support for Afghanistan in expanding security, eradicating the opium trade and fighting corruption.

Fighting, mainly in the Taliban's southern stronghold, is the worst since U.S.-led forces drove the group from power in 2001. More than 3,000 people have died this year, mostly rebels but including hundreds of civilians and about 150 foreign soldiers.

US Diplomat: Taleban Not Strategic Threat to Afghanistan

By Gary Thomas – Washington 31 October 2006

A senior U.S. diplomat is playing down the resurgence of the Taleban in Afghanistan, saying it poses no real threat to the government of President Hamid Karzai.

In a speech Tuesday to an Afghan investment conference in Washington, Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs Nicholas Burns said the surge of attacks by the Taleban does not pose any long-term threat to the Afghan government.

"Security has to be the primary concern of any government, at any level of government,” he said.  “And while we've seen an increased number of attacks in the regions and some of the provincial cities and even in Kabul and Kandahar themselves over the past few months, we do not believe that these attacks pose a strategic threat to the central government.  But they do have an effect because they prevent government from operating at the provincial level."

In a brief interview after the speech, Burns said he was not saying there is no security threat in Afghanistan.  But, he added, the Afghan government is stable.

"We don't believe the Taleban represent a strategic threat in this sense: the government of Afghanistan is secure,” he said.  “And there's a problem of security in Afghanistan.  It's primarily in the east and in the southern provinces of Kandahar and Uruzgan and Helmand.

It is in those areas, Burns said, that U.S. and allied forces are, along with Afghan troops, fighting the Taleban.

"And that's where you find the Canadians and British and Dutch and Australian and American forces,” he added.  “And we are taking the battle to the Taleban along with the Afghan forces beside us and working with us.  And we intend to continue that because that's our responsibility as a friend to Afghanistan itself."

Barnett Rubin, senior fellow of New York University's Center for International Cooperation, says the Taleban may not pose a strategic threat in the conventional military sense.  But Rubin, who was a U.N. advisor in the Afghan peace negotiations after the Taleban fell in 2001, says the Taleban is eating away at the Kabul government's authority.

"The Taleban pose a very serious threat to the government of Afghanistan,” he said.  “They do not pose a conventional military threat to NATO, the U.S.-led coalition, or the Afghan government, which is unfortunately what U.S. planners seem to have in mind when they make statements like 'the Taleban do not pose a strategic threat.' But the Taleban are very successfully undermining the legitimacy of the Afghan government."

Rubin says the Afghan government's failure so far to provide services like adequate roads and electricity give political ammunition to the Taleban.

"They [the Taleban] are showing that it cannot provide security to people, cannot provide development, and that it cannot provide good relations with its neighbors,” he added.  “They are attempting to show that they are a better alternative, and they have provoked NATO and the United States, unfortunately, into undertaking actions that make Afghans perceive them as occupiers."

The Taleban have increasingly adopted tactics used by insurgents in Iraq, such as suicide bombings and improvised explosive devices.  At least 65 U.S. troops have died in Afghanistan this year, according to the Department of Defense, and about 70 U.S. troops died in Afghanistan during 2005.

Chinese, Afghan defence ministers vow to strengthen cooperation

Text of report in English by official Chinese news agency Xinhua (New China News Agency)

Beijing, 31 October: Chinese Defence Minister Cao Gangchuan and his Afghan counterpart Abdul Rahim Wardak held talks here on Tuesday [31 October], vowing to strengthen military cooperation between the two armed forces.

Cao said the Chinese side attaches great importance to the development of relations between the two countries and the two armed forces.

He said China will continue to help the reconstruction of Afghanistan and promote exchanges and cooperation with the Afghan side in various fields.

Wardak said Afghanistan and China shared a long history of friendly relations, adding the Afghan side will strengthen exchanges with China to further bilateral cooperation in security and other fields.

He said he was very glad to visit so many places of China and he had found a lot that Afghanistan can learn from China.

Wardak said the two countries faced the same task of anti-terrorism and he hoped the two sides strengthen cooperation in this aspect.

Wardak, who started his official good-will visit to China last Thursday as Cao's guest, had visited northwestern Xinjiang Uighur Autonomous Region and will proceed to visit Shanghai, China's business hub.

China ratifies treaty with Afghanistan forging closer security ties

Text of report in English by official Chinese news agency Xinhua (New China News Agency)

Beijing, 31 October: China's top legislature on Tuesday [31 October] ratified a treaty with Afghanistan, forging closer ties especially in security cooperation to maintain peace in the region.

The Good-neighbourly Treaty of Friendship and Cooperation between China and Afghanistan, signed by Chinese President Hu Jintao and Afghan President Hamed Karzai in Beijing on 19 June 2006, says the two sides will enhance the fight against terrorism, separatism and extremism.

"Under the treaty, China and Afghanistan will launch more military and security cooperation and expand exchanges in trade, agriculture, science, education, natural resources exploration and so on," said Deputy Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi.

Chinese experts have voiced concern that terrorists and drugs in Afghanistan are threatening peace and stability in China's western region.

Signing the treaty will consolidate China-Afghanistan ties, and be helpful in maintaining peace in Afghanistan and to fight "East Turkestan" terrorists in western China, source with the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress said.

Interior minister discusses major issues with Afghan counterpart

Tehran, Nov 1, IRNA Iran-Afghanistan-ECO

Interior Minister Mostafa Pour-Mohammadi discussed latest bilateral and regional issues here with his Afghan counterpart, Ahmad Zarar Moqbal, on Tuesday.

The meeting was held on the sidelines of a two-day meeting of interior ministers of member states of the Economic Cooperation Organization (ECO) in the Iranian capital which ends today.

Referring to the two countries' common history and civilization, the Iranian minister said Tehran was in favor of an advanced and powerful Afghanistan.

"Given the many historical and cultural commonalties enjoyed by Iran and Afghanistan, they should be able to forge a better cooperation without interference by a third party," Pour-Mohammadi stressed.

The Afghan minister, for his part, expressed Kabul's gratitude to Tehran for decades of hosting Afghan refugees, and praised Iran as a powerful neighboring state of Afghanistan that gives it "great comfort and peace of mind."
At present, Moqbal said without further elaborating, Afghanistan "still needs the support of Iran."

EU To Give EUR2.5 Million For People Hit By Afghanistan Drought

October 31, 2006 - BRUSSELS (AP)--The European Commission said Tuesday it would give EUR2.5 million to help people affected by a severe drought in Afghanistan.

The money will provide more food and clean water to the 2.5 million people the European Union estimates have been affected by a drought that caused reduced harvests in the past year.

Afghanistan saw less snowfall last winter and fewer rain showers in the spring.
The Commission said the funding should help those it believes have been hit the hardest, such as female-headed households and the disabled.

Since 2004, the E.U. has provided EUR77 million in humanitarian aid to Afghanistan. The E.U.'s 25 nations also make individual aid donations on top of that.

Nationalists' Afghan contacts worries Pakistan

Pajhwok 10/31/2006 - KABUL - A Pakistani minister has expressed reservations about President Hamid Karzai's contacts with nationalist leaders from NWWP and described it as "intervention in the internal affairs of Pakistan."

However, in a quick reaction, the Awami National Party (ANP) branded the statement as lack of political wisdom on part of the minister.

Pakistan's Minister for Political Affairs Amir Muqam, while speaking to journalists in Peshawar, said the direct contacts of President Hamid Karzai with various political leaders was a bare intervention in the internal affairs of Pakistan.

He said direct contact by the Afghan president with ANP leaders was unacceptable. "It is after these contacts that incidents of bomb blasts in Pakistan, particularly the Frontier province have increased. We have got certain indications that foreign hand was involved in Peshawar blasts," the minister was quoted by a section of the Pakistani media.

He alleged situation had changed after fresh contacts of President Hamid Karzai with different individuals like Maulana Fazlur Rahman, chief of Jamiat Ulma-i-Islam, Asfandyar Wali Khan, president of Awami National Party, and other leaders.

He believed Afghan "contacts" with "individuals" would create unrest among the people and would adversely affect the ties between the two neighbouring countries. "Therefore, the Afghan president should contact directly the government instead of a few individuals," he added.

Defending the peace agreement signed by the Pakistani government with local Taliban in North Waziristan, the Pakistani minister said the Afghan government, NATO forces and the West first opposed the agreement, but now had started making similar agreements inside Afghanistan.

Brushing aside the minister's statement, the Awami National Party, in a statement, said the minister lacked political wisdom. The party's general secretary Mian Iftikhar Hussain said the minister and his statement had no political standing or ideology.

Traditional Afghan council will address return of Taliban

By Agence France Presse (AFP) Wednesday, November 01, 2006

KABUL: Looking back to a centuries-old tradition, Afghanistan is preparing a tribal meeting of hundreds of people to tackle a Taliban insurgency that is paralyzing the country. But analysts warn the "jirga" could backfire, with a chance that delegates - likely to include Islamist tribal leaders - will make demands that are unacceptable to the government and its international allies.

The gathering in Afghanistan and another due in Pakistan are intended to enlist support in the ethnic Pashtun belt along their border that sees the worst of the violence.

The eastern city of Jalalabad will likely be the venue for the Afghan jirga expected in December or January, Foreign Minister Rangeen Dadfar Spanta told AFP.

The meeting is part of the government's mission to "use all the possibilities, chances and instruments to reduce terrorist activities in Afghanistan," he said.

Up to 1,600 people were expected to attend, presidential spokesman Khaleeq Ahmad said. They would be drawn from Parliament, civil society and tribal elders, he said, with the United Nations and other international representatives asked to monitor.

Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf will also be invited, reflecting the government's drive to emphasize that the Taliban problem straddles the border.

Afghan President Hamid Karzai mooted the jirgas in Washington last month amid tension between Afghanistan and Pakistan about the insurgency, with each blaming the other for not doing enough against the militants.

Pashtuns have for centuries used jirgas or tribal councils, traditionally composed of male tribal elders, to resolve internal disputes. Weightier matters of national political import are the subject of the grander Loya Jirga or Great Council.
Decisions of both are meant to be binding, but analysts say the meetings could be manipulated by pro-Taliban conservatives who could steer conclusions against government policy.

"If the jirga makes decisions against the presence of NATO troops in Afghanistan, or if it says the government must resign, or the Parliament should be dissolved, will the Afghan government accept this?" said analyst and university lecturer Nasrullah Stanikzai.

Foreign Minister Spanta said the jirga would stress "the principle of consensus" and conceded its decisions would not necessarily be binding.

Stanikzai was particularly concerned about who would attend on the Pakistan side of the border, where Afghan officials allege religious circles are recruiting and training militants sent to fight in Afghanistan.

Another analyst, Waheed Mujda, agreed. "In Pakistani tribal regions, religious figures have replaced tribal chiefs," he said.

Karzai said in Washington he believed the jirga was "a very efficient way of preventing terrorists from cross-border activities or from trying to have sanctuaries." This reflects a leaning toward "local solutions" to the grinding insurgency, which officials say cannot be ended through the military action under way.

"From our point of view, it is very important through the organization of this jirga to give the message to the international community and also the Afghan people that the terrorist problem in Afghanistan has an international character and an ideological character," Spanta said.

But Mujda was doubtful the jirgas would make headway against the insurgency, in which the Taliban are supported by other Islamic outfits such as Al-Qaeda and have adopted Iraq-style terror tactics and a blind anti-Western vitriol. "This is a dream and a fantasy. It will have no outcome," he said.

Set proper agenda before convening jirgas

Pajhwok - 10/31/2006 By Abdul Khaliq Fazal - KABUL - During his recent visit to the United States, President Hamid Karzai has suggested convening two parallel jirgas on both sides of the During Line to settle the lingering issue of cross border infiltration between Pakistan and Afghanistan.

The suggestion came during the meeting between presidents George Bush, Pervez Musharraf and Hamid Karzai at the White House dinner hosted by the US president. Both President Bush and Pervez Musharraf welcomed the suggestion.

The people living on both sides of the 2640 kilometres (1610miles) border between Pakistan and Afghanistan are Pashtuns while the Taliban are also mainly from ethnic Pashtun tribes.

In an interview, President Karzai said: "I'm thinking of a meeting between Afghan civil society, Afghan elders, tribal chiefs, clergy and Afghan spiritual leadership plus the intellectuals. From the Pakistan side, I'm hoping for the same thing."

The Afghan president believes the proposed jirga would help the Pashtuns living on both sides of the border to meet, understand and listen to each others problems, and would finally be able to find a way to bring an end to the lawlessness, Taliban-related violence in Afghanistan and the growing Talibanization of the region.

Procedure for the jirga has not yet been devised by either side, except President Karzai's mentioning of formation of a UN-sponsored joint commission to decide as to who would sit in the jirga and devise modalities for the meeting. The agenda of the Jirga is also not yet clear.

The following points are of utmost importance to be discussed during the proposed meeting:

• Discussion of the security problems in Afghanistan
• Finding a way to end the al-Qaida and Taliban-related violence in Afghanistan
• To discuss ways and means to combat the growing threat of Talibanization in the region

 If the above agenda is set and agreed upon by both sides, then it would be beneficial for Afghanistan to hold this kind of jirga. Both sides must ensure that no other issue should be discussed or added to the agenda.

However, if the agenda of the jirga was not guaranteed by both sides, then it is quite possible that some of the attendants, who are supporters of the Taliban and Pakistan Islamist fundamentalist groups, would infiltrate the ideas of:

• Support for the Taliban in Afghanistan
• Expulsion of all foreign forces from Afghanistan
• Jihad against American and other foreign forces
• Afghanistan's recognition of the Durand Line

 The raising of any of the above issues in such a meeting would most certainly create angry debate which can further aggravate the problem and spoil the efforts to find a possible solution to the problem.

Discussion of any of the above issues during the proposed jirga will be against the interests of Afghanistan. If any of the participants voice support for Taliban, it will create problems for the Afghan government as well as the NATO forces.

Demand for the withdrawal of foreign forces will also affect the peace mission in the country because withdrawal of the foreign forces from Afghanistan will once again push the country towards a civil war and clear way for Taliban to occupy the country.

The 2640-kilometre border has been a long-standing dispute between Pakistan and Afghanistan. Pakistan has always been using different tactics to force the Afghan government to recognise the Durand line. However, Afghan governments in the past and present believe the British-drawn borderline is not the officially recognised border because it has been drawn during the colonial era.

However, this border issue between Afghanistan and Pakistan needs to be resolved some time, the sooner the better due to the friction it has created between the two countries.

Politically, economically and socially, Pakistan is one of the most important countries for Afghanistan, and same is the case of Afghanistan for Pakistan. But to resolve border issue, it needs the right time. It also needs the assistance of the international community and agreement of the people living on both sides of the divide.

The proper time for moving forward to resolve the issue is when both countries are at peace and having purely democratic governments. Both Afghanistan and Pakistan should wait till the formation of strong and stable governments to resolve the issue once and for all.

At the moment, environment for discussing the border issue is not favourable as both the neighbours are facing security problems and political instability.

If Pakistan insists on bringing the issue to the table, then they should be ready for a back fire. For Afghanistan, it will be better not to discuss the issue at the moment as the country is faced with numerous problems. If some people in the Afghan government are out to raise the issue with Pakistan, then they should hold behind the scene talks and wait for the moment the country attain political and economic stability.

(The writer is a former minister for Public Works)

Kasuri, Rice likely to miss Afghanistan conclave

Paktribun November 01, 2006 - NEW DELHI: US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Pakistan Foreign Minister Khurshid Mehmood Kasuri are likely to give a miss to the Nov 18-19 meet here on promoting security and economy in Afghanistan.

"There is no plan for Rice to come to India. Assistant Secretary of State for South and Central Asia Richard Boucher will be coming for the Afghanistan conference," reliable sources in the US embassy told IANS.

The US Senate was expected to take up for voting the India-US civil nuclear deal at its lame duck session in November. But there is little likelihood of that happening. The session's preoccupation will be with budgetary and fiscal issues. If the deal doesn't go through, the Bush administration will have a tough time explaining the fiasco to New Delhi. Rice's visit to India is therefore very unlikely this year, the sources said. Likewise, there is little chance of Kasuri coming here for the Second Regional Economic Conference on Afghanistan. "Instead, Pakistan will be represented by Minister of State for Economic Affairs Hina Rabbani Khar," Pakistan's deputy high commissioner Afrasiab told IANS.

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and Afghan President Hamid Karzai will jointly inaugurate the meet. The first conference was held in Kabul last year. The conference aims at accelerating regional cooperation for Afghanistan's economic development and beefing up security of the war-ravaged country. Nineteen countries including the G8 group of most industrialised nations, Central Asian countries, China, Pakistan and Iran will participate in the conference.

Foreign Ministers Manouchehr Mottaki of Iran, Philippe Douste-Blazy of France and Sergey Lavrov of Russia are likely to attend the conference. Besides the regional conference, a back-to-back business conclave, organized jointly by the three apex Indian business chambers, will take place here in association with the Afghanistan Investment Support Agency (AISA).The New Delhi conference will build on the areas identified at Kabul, including trade facilitation and transport, investment and business potential, electricity trade and energy development. Regional cooperation for the security of Afghanistan and for the prosperity of the entire region will be a key theme of the conference.

Energy security is another important theme, with discussions planned on the Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan-Afghanistan (TAPI) pipeline. The conference will also take up agriculture and agro-development. A paper will be presented by Afghan ministry of agriculture on the potential for opening markets and promoting horticulture.

German chancellor says Afghan skull picture case intolerable

Excerpt from "exclusive" interview with Chancellor Angela Merkel by M. Jach, V. Koettker and R. Poertner in Berlin entitled "My style is more successful" published by German news magazine Focus on 30 October

[Focus] Afghanistan is burning. In the south NATO is engaged in a bloody battle with the Taleban, the Bundeswehr's northern sector has remained relatively quiet so far. Will the series of skull pictures of German soldiers desecrating dead bodies incite terrorist attacks in the north?

[Merkel] The speedy clarification of these disgusting and shocking incidents, which Defence Minister Franz Josef Jung has pushed through, will hopefully not remain without an effect on the Afghan people. The important thing is for Afghanistan to see: such misbehaviour is not tolerated but is relentlessly prosecuted and punished. Anyone who behaves in such an irresponsible manner has no place in the Bundeswehr.

[Focus] Do our soldiers become brutalized and turn into mercenaries on missions abroad?

[Merkel] No. But it is important that the defence minister reviews the training and preparation of the soldiers and has sent a commissioner to Afghanistan. We will do everything in our power to prevent any such incidents in the future.

[Focus] The NATO partners are increasing their pressure on Germany to participate in the war against the Taleban in southern Afghanistan. How long will the federal government be able to stick to its no without risking an alliance crisis?

[Merkel] We have taken over responsibility in the north, to a very great extent. I discussed the issue with NATO Secretary-General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer, and the alliance appreciates Germany's involvement. I said: it would not be useful to open up gaps in the north to help in the south. This has been met with understanding.

Afghanistan's future is not a purely military task. That is why the federal government has developed an Afghanistan concept, which is based on several pillars. Civilian reconstruction and military protection must go hand in hand. We will discuss this intensively at the NATO summit in Riga in mid-November. [passage omitted]

Defence Secretary under fire over Taleban comeback

The Times – Nov. 01, 2006 - From Anthony Loyd in Kandahar and Anthony Browne

THE aftermath of the British withdrawal from the town of Musa Qala in northern Helmand province marked a clear political as well as military victory for the Taleban, according to well-placed Afghan officials.

The return of the Taleban, reported in The Times on Monday, prompted a clash in the House of Commons in which Conservative MPs accused Des Browne, the Defence Secretary, of failing to appreciate the gravity of the problem.

In Afghanistan officials said that the return of the Taleban to a town secured and then left by British troops was beyond dispute. “This is the first time in history that the Taleban were recognised as a political movement,” said Haji Dad Mohammed Khan, the former intelligence chief of Helmand, and now an MP in Kabul.

Mr Khan, who lost most of his family to a Taleban ambush this summer, said that since British troops pulled out a few weeks ago the town had become “a shelter for the Taleban”. He named the four main Taleban commanders controlling Musa Qala, and said that the new administration’s police chief and its principal leader, Mullah Malang and Haji Sher Agha, were a front for the Tale ban. Mr Khan added that only four days ago the Taleban kidnapped Ahmad Shahan, a prominent local government official, from the centre of Musa Qala. He has not been seen since.

The Defence Secretary was questioned in the Commons after The Times revealed that the Taleban had returned to Musa Qala. Mr Browne played down the idea that Taleban influence had returned.

He said that neither he nor his officials had heard of Nafaz Khan, a militia commander and former police chief, who was injured fighting alongside the British, and voiced frustration at the reappearance of the Taleban.

Mr Browne’s response was attacked by Crispin Blunt, the Conservative MP for Reigate, who said that rather than searching for Mr Khan’s identity he ought to listen to his troops, who had found that some village elders were supporters of the Taleban.

British troops have withdrawn from Musa Qala after a deal with tribal chiefs under which the town is supposed to be demilitarised and under government control.

It was one of four towns in northern Helmand where British forces came under weeks of fierce and sustained fire after deploying at the request of Mohammed Daud, the governor of Helmand province.

Lieutenant-General David Richards, the Nato commander in Afghanistan, told The Times that he was keeping his eye on the town. He said that Nato forces would return if needed. “I have the right to send troops back into Musa Qala if necessary. If the Taleban start to base themselves there again, then we’ll have to deal with it.”

Opinion: What next in Afghanistan?

By Najmuddin A. Shaikh - 1 November 2006(DAWN)

THE situation in Iraq is deteriorating. An exit strategy — in essence to find a face-saving way to “cut and run” — will probably surface in the report that the bipartisan Iraq Study Group, headed by former Secretary James Baker and Congressman Lee Hamilton will publish a little after the conclusion of the mid-term elections to be held on November 7.

There is now little doubt that in these elections the Republicans will lose control of the House of Representatives, and, possibly, of the Senate too. In this changed political scenario, not only will there be a rush to get out of Iraq, there will also be increasing clamour to find a similar way out for the Americans and Nato forces in Afghanistan.

In Iraq, an important part of the exit strategy will be a conference of regional powers and direct talks between the US and Iraq’s two pariah neighbours, Syria and Iran, to seek their assistance in whatever stabilisation programme the Americans advocate. This will be a bitter pill to swallow for the neo-conservatives of the Bush administration. But they will be persuaded that the realities on the ground and political pressure exerted by a Democrat-dominated Congress would permit no other choice.

Whether these two countries will agree or not is open to question; and whether they have the influence to be able to deliver is even more uncertain. Sectarian strife has created divisions within Iraq’s tribal society that will not be easily bridged. But if some measure of assent is won from Iran and Syria on the basis of concessions in other areas, the Americans will be able to justify their withdrawal and will then leave the Iraqis to their own devices. This may well mean that the Iraqi scenario will duplicate the scenario we had in Afghanistan after the Soviet withdrawal — civil war, exacerbated by interference from Iraq’s neighbours, each with its own perspective of how Iraq should be governed.

In Iraq, the problems arose because of a whole series of mistakes. These included inadequate troop deployment, the virtual dismantling of the administrative structure in the name of de-Ba’athification, disbanding the Iraqi army, the pro-Shia and anti-Sunni bias of the Paul Bremer administration, rejection of UN proposals for a government of technocrats, acquiescence in a constitution heavily loaded against the interests of Sunnis, tolerance of Shia militias, turning a blind eye to the corruption of Iraqi officials and politicians, etc.

Above all, it was the initial neglect of nation-building and subsequently the corruption in the awarding and execution of contracts for reconstruction which, along with security problems, ensured that the Iraqi people have less access to electricity, clean water and sewerage facilities than in the days of Saddam Hussein.

In Afghanistan, the same mistakes were made and compounded by the diverting of American attention and resources to Iraq, the benign or malevolent neglect of the Pushtun-majority areas in the south and east and the dubious alliances with warlords to facilitate the search for and the destruction of Al Qaeda. In the five years that have passed since the American moved into Afghanistan, the Pushtun belt has seen little development and growing insecurity.

Under the patronage of US- and Kabul-supported warlords, the people there have become the world’s largest producers of opium and masters of smuggling banned goods to Pakistan. These are the principal sources of livelihood. High unemployment makes it easy for the Taliban to recruit people for their ranks, particularly when monetary incentive can be combined with an appeal to serve the cause of Islam.

In Iraq, there are probably very few areas — mostly in the Sunni-majority area of central Iraq — where there are demands for the return of Saddam’s dictatorial regime. But, in Afghanistan, it seems that the plurality, if not the majority, of the Pushtuns are nostalgic for the days of the Taliban. As Taliban rule is now recalled it is felt that the limitations on civil liberties and the imposition of Islamic law after coming heavily under the influence of Al Qaeda’s Arab brigade, were not very much more constraining than the conservative traditions of the Pushtuns or even those of other ethnic groups in Afghanistan.

There was little development but there was security. Arbitrary decisions were taken by the Taliban but there were no extortions by the warlords. There was fighting with the Northern Alliance but there were no bombing raids in which innocent civilians died. There was interference by Afghanistan’s neighbours, there was an inordinate influence exercised over Mullah Omar by Osama and his Arab brigade, but the perception that the rulers in Kandahar were handmaidens of foreign masters did not exist.

In Afghanistan, therefore, whatever the circumstances that existed in 2001, today the situation is even worse for the coalition forces there than in Iraq. The warlords, many of them represented in the Afghan Wolesi Jirga, have a vested interest in the perpetuation of instability which will permit the continued cultivation of opium — the principal source of illicit revenue in Afghanistan. Many of them, along with smugglers of other goods, have an alliance of convenience with the Taliban and Taliban supporters in Pakistan.

In the border areas of Pakistan, radicalisation encouraged during the anti-Soviet jihad and then during the period of Taliban rule in Afghanistan has now taken firm root. The authority of the tribal maliks and the “white beards”, who traditionally provided leadership and administration in these unruly areas has now been marginalised. The radical agenda is to bring Taliban-like rule to Pakistan, and they are well aware that this cannot happen unless the Taliban succeed in establishing a measure of control over at least the Pushtun areas of Afghanistan.

These are factors that will have to be borne in mind when the Americans plan their strategy for withdrawal from Afghanistan. These are the dangers with which Pakistan will have to contend.
For the Americans, the withdrawal will represent a major setback. It will erode their international standing. It will be a blow to their global war on terrorism.

They may and probably will retreat into an isolationist mode and seek to fight the war on terrorism by additional internal measures.

These, of course, will include new restrictions on Muslim immigration and heighten suspicions of and alienation from American Muslims. The American way of life will be affected in some measure. All of this will be a heavy price but one that the Americans may be prepared to pay to get out of their present predicament.

For Pakistan, however, the costs will be far higher. The longer the Taliban can keep the border areas of South and East Afghanistan unstable, the greater the influence they will acquire in the adjoining Pakistani areas. The longer this happens the more the forces of obscurantism will be strengthened in Pakistan’s fractured polity and the slimmer the chances that the current effort at reconciliation in the tribal areas will lead to the weakening of the radicals and the re-emergence of the traditional “malik/white beard” power structure. Also, the longer this happens the greater the chance that misguided perceptions of Pakistan’s national interest will persuade the powers that be to shift the current ambivalence in our Afghan policy in the wrong direction. Will Pakistan then be able to survive within its present borders as a progressive, moderate Islamic state?

If “enlightened moderation” continues to be our goal we should canvas strongly in Washington and with the European visitors expected in Islamabad in the next few weeks that America and Nato remain in Afghanistan until the Taliban menace has been curbed. As much as the Afghans, we must persuade our friends in Nato that more troops need to be deployed in Afghanistan and more military personnel shifted to the south and southeast where the battle against the Taliban is raging. There are reports, probably no more than bombastic propaganda, that this year the Taliban will not observe the usual winter break in fighting because they believe that they are close to breaking the will of the Nato military, even more, the will of the Nato political leadership. I believe, however, that there will be a lull in the fighting. We should suggest that the time should be utilised to renew the Karzai offer of amnesty and offer all our efforts to persuade moderate Taliban elements to respond positively after getting guarantees that the amnesty will be faithfully and fully implemented.

We should hasten the process of holding jointly with President Karzai a number of jirgas of all tribes straddling the Pak-Afghan border, and demonstrate, even as we pursue a political agreement in the tribal agencies, that such reconciliation will not mean giving the militants a free hand and that we perceive it to be in our own interest to curb the militants even when their declared intent is to fight only in Afghanistan.

It is to be hoped that the Monday morning attack on the militant training camp in Bajaur will be seen as giving the lie to the charges that political agreements in the tribal agencies have been concluded to allow for an escalation of cross border infiltration and for increased attacks on coalition and Afghan forces. We must also be prepared to deal with the storm that could result as the ruling party in the NWFP seeks to portray this as an attack on loyal Pakistani Islamic scholars.

We should also note that it is the members of this party and their sympathisers who fuel suspicions about Pakistan’s policy. In a recent article, a New York Times contributor, Elizabeth Rubin, mentions her interview of M. Yusuf Qureshi, the prayer leader at the Mohabat Khan mosque in Peshawar and the director of the Deobandi madressah, the Jamia Ashrafia. He reportedly told her that he meets President Musharraf twice a year and that when he asked the president “what are you doing” he replied that “I’m moving in both ways. I want to support the Taliban, but I can’t afford to displease America. I am caught between the devil and the deep sea.” He opined further that “I think they want a weak government and want to support the Taliban without letting them win.”

Such incendiary statements are not designed to improve the president’s image or that of Pakistan. Given that this appeared in the first instalment of the article in the New York Times Sunday magazine on the October 22, a strong contradiction should surely have appeared by now, not only in the New York Times but also in our local media.The writer is a former foreign secretary.

People in eastern Afghan district threaten to cultivate poppy

Text of report by Pakistan-based Afghan Islamic Press news agency

Jalalabad, 31 October: People are demanding aid in return for not cultivating poppy.

Malek Rahamtollah, a local elder at Marakekhel area of Sherzad District in Nangarhar Province told Afghan Islamic Press [AIP] that people will cultivate poppy on a large scale in this area this year.

He stated that the reason for poppy cultivation is unavailability of aid for people promised by foreign governments to Afghanistan. He added: "Some 30 per cent of people have already cultivated poppy plants and others are getting their land ready for poppy cultivation."

Malek Rahmatollah added: "The government did not fulfil its promises to people. The aid which is sent to Afghanistan for poor people is not distributed to them. These people are poor and do not have any other source of income. The government promised to build the roads, but it did not happen either. Also nothing else has been done for these people, so they are obliged to grow poppy."

In response to a question by AIP, he said: "We know that poppy cultivation is not a good deed and that it is in violation to the constitution, but the people have no other choice. They want the government to fulfil its promises and offer them aid."

Narcotics smuggling from Afghanistan: Pakistan not authorised to check consignments

Staff Report Daily Times 1 November 2006

ISLAMABAD: Pakistan does not have the authority to check consignments imported under the Afghan Transit Trade Agreement and therefore it is unaware of the quantity of chemicals being imported for the preparation of heroin and other narcotics.

This information was disclosed at a meeting of the World Customs Organisation’s Regional Intelligence Liaison Offices (RILO) on Tuesday.

Customs Intelligence Director General Usman Ali Shah told the delegates that poppy was being cultivated in Afghanistan in areas under the government’s control. He said the total value of narcotics smuggled from Afghanistan to neighbouring countries including Pakistan stood at $3 billion in 2006 as compared to $2.7 billion in 2005.

Shah said that according to data of heroin seizures by Afghanistan’s neighbouring countries, Pakistan seized 2.1 metric tonnes (MT) of heroin, Iran 5.5 MT, Tajikistan 2.3 MT, Kyrgizstan 0.2 MT, Uzbekistan 0.5 MT and Turkmenistan seized 0.18 metric tonnes of heroin. He added that the price of heroin is $850 per kilogramme (kg) in Pakistan and Afghanistan, $8,300 in the Middle East, $11,000 in Europe and $16,000 in the United States.

He said that the potential yield of heroin was 441 MT in 2005 while the total seizure by the neighbouring countries was 10.78 MT. “Where did the remaining 431.22 MT of heroin go?” Shah said that resurgence of poppy cultivation in Pakistan was evident from the fact that opium production was 65 MT in 2005 against 40 MT in 2004. One of the reasons for this, he added, was the use of Pakistani territory as an alternative area because of coalition forces presence in Afghanistan. He said that most of the poppy growing areas were inaccessible to law enforcement agencies and the lack of dedicated aerial capability for early detection, suitable soil and climate conditions and lack of funds from donor countries were other reasons of resurgence of the poppy crop. Customs Intelligence Deputy Director Habib Ahmed told the delegates that hashih is one of the most commonly used herbal drugs in Pakistan. He said that Customs officials seized 22,374 kg of hashih in 2006 against 10,988 kg seized in 2005.

[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.]