Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf (L) and his Afghan counterpart Hamid Karzai inspect honour guards in Kabul September 6, 2006. Pakistan, criticized by some Afghan leaders over cross-border infiltration by the Taliban, vowed on Wednesday to help its neighbor fight terrorism as Afghanistan battles its worst violence in five years. REUTERS/Ahmad Masood/Pool (AFGHANISTAN)

In this bulletin:

· Pakistan president in Afghanistan for 'war on terror' talks
· The Afghan mission is not a failure
· There's 'tradition' and then there's getting the job done
· Canadian troops advance on Taliban
· Canada's valuable role in Afghanistan's fight
· NATO chief says Taliban will be defeated
· NATO pledges long-term commitment to Afghanistan
· Mine kills NATO soldier in Afghanistan
· "700 Taliban under siege in southern Afghanistan," says NATO
· Showdown brewing in Ottawa over Afghanistan
· 'Brit-Pakistanis join Taliban to fight UK'
· Meshrano Jirga member passes away

Pakistan president in Afghanistan for 'war on terror' talks
by Rana Jawad Wed Sep 6, 2006

KABUL (AFP) - Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf has arrived in Afghanistan for talks on the "war on terror" amid Afghan claims that Islamabad is not doing enough to tackle the roots of the Taliban insurgency.

The keenly awaited visit Wednesday comes after increased international pressure on Musharraf to deal with Islamist groups that Afghanistan says are fomenting the Taliban uprising.

Musharraf was whisked through the war-scarred capital Kabul to the presidential palace in a tightly secured motorcade that included gunfitted military vehicles.
He was due to go into talks with Afghan President Hamid Karzai after a formal welcome with a guard of honour.

The general, who was last in Afghanistan in 2002, is also scheduled to address cabinet members, parliamentarians and other policymakers on Thursday.
The visit comes amid a spike in the Taliban insurgency, which Afghan officials allege is being fed by Taliban and Al-Qaeda leaders who are based in Pakistan and sending militants into Afghanistan to fight.

The presidents would have "frank discussions on the war on terror and expanding bilateral cooperation on regional issues," Karzai's office said.

"They will exchange views on bilateral relations, economic cooperation, reconstruction activities in Afghanistan and cooperation in the fight against terrorism," Pakistan foreign office spokeswoman Tasnim Aslam told AFP.

The Islamic neighbours had a heated exchange earlier in the year after Musharraf dismissed Afghan intelligence about Taliban and Al-Qaeda leaders allegedly living in Pakistan as "nonsense."

Afghan officials also say Islamabad could do more against Taliban and Al-Qaeda militants who fled to Pakistan after the Taliban government was toppled in 2001 and are directing the insurgency.

Pakistan has 80,000 troops along the frontier to stop militants from crossing over and has also arrested some key Al-Qaeda leaders.

"Pakistan has the potential to be the solution to the problems of Afghanistan," Afghan foreign ministry advisor Ali Muradian said.

"We hope that President Musharraf will open a new chapter in relations between Afghanistan and Pakistan."

Many Afghans are still suspicious of their neighbour because it helped to bring the Taliban to power in 1996 and was one of only three nations that recognised the extremist theocracy as a legitimate government.

Musharraf's trip comes a day after the Pakistan government announced it had signed a "peace deal" with pro-Taliban militants in the North Waziristan belt. In return the militants agreed to disarm or expel foreign Al-Qaeda-linked fighters.

The move, the details of which have not been made clear, has raised concern in Afghanistan.

The agreement will likely be "meaningless", said one Western diplomat, who questioned its announcement just before Musharraf's visit.

"The key concern is whether the agreement is going to lead to more insurgents going to and fro across the border or less," another diplomat said.

Some Afghan newspapers questioned if the visit would yield anything new.

The aim "seems to be an effort by America to bring closer these rival leaders but as previous experiences have shown, Pakistan's pledges have remained on paper without being implemented," the Cheragh daily said in an editorial.

Musharraf and Karzai are due to meet with US President George W. Bush on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly later this month.

The Kabul Times said Afghanistan was grateful for Pakistan's help to thousands of Afghan refugees but pointed out that the neighbour had long interfered in the country's affairs.

Pakistani nationals were also being caught "red-handed together with Taliban in skirmishes" and the rebels' "sophisticated" weapons clearly came from outside Afghanistan, it said.

Musharraf is heading a 27-member delegation, including several cabinet members -- among them ministers for foreign and religious affairs and the petroleum sector, and the head of Pakistan's intelligence agency.

The Afghan mission is not a failure

Thanks to the efforts of Canadian and other troops, most of Afghanistan is finally enjoying relative normalcy, says Afghan ambassador OMAR SAMAD

OMAR SAMAD

In the past few days, as pitched battles take place to liberate Taliban-occupied districts in southern Afghanistan, during which precious lives have been lost to uphold higher principles, thought-provoking comments are being made in political circles about Afghanistan and the Canadian role there. Obviously, everyone is fully entitled to their views and the continued debate is healthy. But when it comes to addressing complex Afghan political dynamics and presenting new formulas, one should do so with a solid reading of Afghan history and an acute appreciation for the realities on the ground.

Pulling out of Afghanistan, or abandoning the peace-building policies that ensure my country won't return to its pre-9/11 failing-state status, is tantamount to capitulating to terrorist groups. That is not acceptable to Afghans. The world turned its back on Afghanistan in the 1990s once it lost its strategic Cold War significance, and this helped to turn it into a haven for extremists and terrorists. It would be a strategic blunder if the debate about the country's future became a proxy ideological battleground.

We are not losing in Afghanistan. We are successfully preventing a resurgence of extremist forces in order to provide better opportunities for millions of poor people. The Afghan case is not a mediation case between two contending factions. Simplifying the context by calling for peace talks between an elected government and heavily-armed gangs of militant school-burners, drug-runners and suicide-attackers will not resolve the immediate challenges in southern Afghanistan. It might make it worse for everyone in the longer term if we allow serious human rights violators, terrorist agents and fanatics with a very poor governance record to return to power. The past 20 years have shown that theories about peacekeeping and hollow peace talks that are not backed by real commitments to stabilize and rebuild a failing state do not work well in Afghanistan, or anywhere for that matter.

The Afghan government has for the past three years left the door open for unarmed Taliban and other militants to join the peace program.

Thousands have accepted; others, affiliated with international terrorism and drug mafias, are not inclined to accept anything short of a return to Taliban rule and practices. Meanwhile, the people of Afghanistan have overwhelmingly rejected Talibanism and their foreign support network that includes al-Qaeda. They do not want to see a return of terrorist training camps or a takeover of their country by these elements, as was the case five years ago. As demonstrated by two national elections held in the past two years, our people have made a conscious choice to move forward not backwards, to strengthen constitutional and democratic institutions, not an extremist worldview, and to improve their socio-economic conditions, not to return to days of destitution and despair.

These objectives are achievable even in the southern and eastern tiers of Afghanistan, where attacks are more prevalent. Contrary to ill-founded views that this is the U.S. President's war, and in spite of the fact that Afghans were resisting the terrorist regime alone before 9/11, the international community is constructively involved in Afghanistan at the request of the Afghan people, and under a United Nations mandate. There was no argument establishing the links between the Taliban and al-Qaeda in Afghanistan in 2001. Since then, more than 70 nations have committed billions of dollars of aid and security assistance to help us restore stability, and help rebuild the country.

We are grateful for this tremendous show of support for peace-building in Afghanistan.

While the rest of Afghanistan is experiencing relative normalcy after three decades of turmoil, the provinces adjacent to the tribal regions between Afghanistan and Pakistan are targets of terrorist and insurgent attacks by a force of new and former Taliban and foreign militants.

Using terror-like tactics, these infiltrating insurgents, hold villagers hostage, threaten or bribe farmers, kill teachers, doctors, clerics, tribal leaders, aid workers, road-builders, and oppress women and schoolgirls. In the process, they also attack NATO and Afghan army forces to influence Western evening news reports and prevent us from creating an environment conducive to better economic and security conditions.

One of their tactics is to weaken the international community's resolve by forcing only one alternative: accepting their terms or running the risk of more attacks. To this end, the use of political manipulation is widespread.

The solution lies in denying these armed gangs of extremists and drug lords sanctuaries, arms, training and funding, which would, in turn, help protect civilians, safeguard NATO troops and start reconstruction in earnest. Protecting the civilians and providing developmental aid that is needed to revitalize the licit economy within secure areas will prevent the insurgency from taking root, especially in the south-eastern infiltration crescent.

Politicians with thought-provoking observations may or may not agree that this is the most effective and durable means of helping the Afghan people, and we welcome the debate. But, all along, has Canada's involvement in Afghanistan over the past five years not been about security, poverty reduction and human rights? Afghans think it has, and the record speaks for itself.
When tragedy strikes, we all mourn the victims, including Canadians, and express our gratitude and pride for their invaluable services to mankind. Afghans are very much appreciative of the continued help to provide better opportunities for millions of deprived people, to rebuild a shattered nation, and combat the forces that threaten human and world security. Two generations of Afghans were lost to war; we owe it to new generations the world over to provide them with a safer and brighter future.
The Afghan mission is not a failure

There's 'tradition' and then there's getting the job done, says retired major-general LEWIS MacKENZIE

As the leader of a party that has little chance of governing the country, the NDP's Jack Layton can accept the political risk of holding up a mirror to the government's decisions and occasionally acting as our national conscience. On the subject of Canada's role in Afghanistan, however, I fear he is dead wrong and am left to wonder if he is following the polls and playing domestic politics on the backs of our soldiers.
Mr. Layton says that he and the NDP support our soldiers but question the wisdom and achievability of NATO's mission in Afghanistan. And, having said that, he goes on to say the mission is the wrong mission for Canada and is, at the very least, unclear. I can only assume Mr. Layton's call for a withdrawal from Afghanistan in 2007, to pursue more traditional Canadian roles involving mediation and negotiation, is based on a widely held myth that we are better than the rest of the 192 nations in the United Nations at the dated concept of "peacekeeping."

Peacekeeping between states that went to war and needed an excuse to stop fighting worked relatively well during the Cold War and Canada played a role in each and every mission. Mind you, at the height of our participation in UN missions during the 1970s and '80s we had a maximum of 2,000 soldiers wearing the blue beret deployed abroad in places such as Cyprus and the Golan Heights. At the same time, we had 10,000 personnel serving with NATO on the Central Front in Germany, armed with nuclear weapons, ready and waiting for the Soviet hoards to attack across the East German border. Peacekeeping was a sideline activity. We did it well, along with others such as Sweden, India,
Norway, Brazil -- but it was never even close to being our top priority.

The other Canadian myth that might have influenced Mr. Layton's ill-timed call for our withdrawal is the oft-quoted description of Canada's policies being "even-handed," "neutral" or "impartial." We never take a stand for fear of upsetting someone. But the facts surrounding even our exaggerated peacekeeping role explode this troubling myth. For example, in the approval process preceding the very first UN lightly armed peacekeeping mission -- stick-handled by Lester Pearson through a hesitant Security Council in 1956 -- Canada voted against the British and French and, by default, sided with Egypt. We took a stand.

To suggest, as Mr. Layton does, that we should pull out of the Afghan mission next year and return to our more "traditional" roles ignores one compelling fact. There will be no significant capability for any nation to carry out those "traditional" roles of nation-building in southern Afghanistan until those who are committed to stopping such undertakings are removed from the equation.
In other words, by leaving, we would be saying to the remaining 36 nations on the ground in Afghanistan, "Hey guys, this is getting pretty difficult. We have decided to leave and go home, but don't worry, when the rest of you have put down this insurrection and things are peaceful, we will return and offer our vastly superior skills in putting countries back together. So please, call us as soon as the shooting stops -- for good."

For all those who, like Mr. Layton, say the mission is imprecise, unclear, without an exit strategy, etc., let me disagree and say that to a NATO military commander the mission is crystal clear.
It is to leave Afghanistan as quickly as humanly possible -- having turned the security of the country over to competent Afghan military and police forces controlled in their efforts by a democratically elected national government. Sounds pretty clear to me.

Retired major-general Lewis MacKenzie was the first commander of United Nations peacekeeping forces in Sarajevo.

Canadian troops advance on Taliban

Soldiers cross rough terrain to surround insurgents as offensive continues

GRAEME SMITH From Wednesday's Globe and Mail

PANJWAI DISTRICT, AFGHANISTAN — Canadian troops pushed deep into the warren of fields in Panjwai district Wednesday morning, hunting Taliban under bright moonlight after enduring hours of co-ordinated attacks by the insurgents.

The soldiers crept forward on foot, into terrain so difficult that armoured vehicles could not advance for fear of getting stuck in the rutted fields, irrigation trenches and dry canals.

It was the first major incursion by either side in the past 24 hours, in the continuing struggle for control of Panjwai district. Operation Medusa, launched four days ago to control the volatile region southwest of Kandahar city, has settled into a siege, with hundreds of Canadian troops and their allies encircling about 700 insurgents who fiercely defend their foothold near Afghanistan's second-largest city.

U.S. forces taking part in the battle said Tuesday they had killed between 50 and 60 suspected Taliban militants. NATO and Afghan officials have said about 200 insurgents have so far died in the operation.

The Canadians were forced to cancel a major attack on Monday after a U.S. warplane mistakenly fired on a group of Canadian soldiers, killing one and injuring dozens. Canadian military police say they plan to probe the incident, and will work with American investigators to determine whether criminal charges are warranted. A board of inquiry will also be established as a fact-finding effort to determine whether any changes are needed to reduce the possibility of a similar incident in the future.

The Taliban did not immediately rush to counterattack during the lull after the friendly-fire incident. By noon, the battlefield was baking under the hot sun, with nothing moving except the flames from the soldiers' garbage fires.

The stillness broke around 1 p.m., when a white sedan carrying three men in traditional Afghan dress appeared on Highway 1, driving west, deep inside the Canadians' security cordon. The sedan was stopped by Canadian soldiers, who questioned the occupants about how they ended up driving along a road already blocked by other checkpoints.

“Our guys became suspicious right off the bat,” said Major Geoff Abthorpe, commander of Bravo Company. “Then we found the gunpowder residue on their hands.”

One of the men had fired a gun recently, according to a field test, while another had faint traces of gunpowder. The third was clean, but none of them could explain how they got inside the Canadian cordon. Soldiers have been hearing reports about Taliban trying to escape Panjwai district, and the three were taken for questioning at Patrol Base Wilson.

A mobile phone belonging to one of the detainees started ringing during the initial questioning, Major Abthorpe said. A military interpreter answered the call, and discovered that he was talking with a senior Taliban commander.

“At that point, all the gloves were off,” Major Abthorpe said. The questioning continued for three hours, before the detainees were transferred to Kandahar for further investigation.

The Canadians are hopeful that one of the captured men is a high-level insurgent, but declined to identify him. The man's importance might be connected to the flurry of violence that followed his detention, Major Abthorpe said.

“They've taken the fight to us,” he said. “We've seen a spike in activity after the heat of the day passed. It started a ripple effect, from west to east.”

Around 3 p.m., a group of four Taliban soldiers emerged from a line of trees just south of a Canadian unit, fired wildly and disappeared. The Canadians flushed the attackers back toward them using a barrage of artillery fire, until the Taliban were trapped in the mud-walled compound.

But even after an Apache attack helicopter hit the compound with rockets, Major Abthorpe said, a lone fighter still managed to stumble out and raise his AK-47 rifle toward Major Abthorpe's position. The 25-millimetre gun on his LAV-3 armoured vehicle destroyed the insurgent, he said.

About an hour later, a volley of eight to 10 explosive rounds, perhaps mortars or rocket-propelled grenades, hit another Canadian vehicle farther west.

Five soldiers suffered burns, shrapnel cuts and concussions, and a helicopter took them to Kandahar Air Field for treatment, but none of their injuries were considered life-threatening.

Later in the evening, a plume of fire and smoke could be seen rising several storeys high as the battles apparently destroyed a school building. Red tracers zipped across the farmland, as Canadian M777 artillery continued its regular pounding of Panjwai.

After a difficult start to the operation, with five Canadian deaths and dozens of injuries, the soldiers were excited about the prospects of Tuesday night's ground attack.

“The guys are chomping at the bit,” said Captain Piers Pappin, a platoon commander.

Canada's valuable role in Afghanistan's fight

The globe and mail September 6, 2006

It was inevitable that rising combat deaths in southern Afghanistan would lead a growing number of Canadians to question whether Canada's military is playing the right role in that benighted country and, increasingly, whether our soldiers should be there at all. It was just as inevitable that opposition politicians would seek to use the tragic losses of Canadian soldiers to score political points.
Such was the case after three days of heavy fighting left another five Canadian soldiers dead. One of them, Private Mark Anthony Graham, a former Olympian, was killed when a U.S. warplane mistakenly strafed a Canadian position. Like their other fallen comrades, these were fine young people of considerable promise. Many left behind young families in order to take part in a mission in which they strongly believed.

Bloc Québécois Leader Gilles Duceppe is calling for an emergency debate on the direction of Canadian foreign policy. NDP Leader Jack Layton said last week that Canada should withdraw its troops from Afghanistan next year and restated his party's position that Canadian soldiers should be spending their time on development and their traditional role as peacekeepers. The problem is that first there has to be a peace to keep.

The Liberal leadership hopefuls are divided on Canada's military role. The latest to weigh in is Ken Dryden, who has joined the chorus of voices calling for a renewed debate on that role, although he would wait six months to do so. "The question for us is the basic one: whether we should be there in the first place. We need the thorough review that we did not have last spring. And there is no indication that we are going to have that review."

The public is right to be upset over the deaths of Canadian soldiers in combat and to ask tough questions of its government. Is our military getting all the help it needs? Are the tactics being deployed the best ones? Are communications among the allies and with the Afghan forces all they could be? Is our $100-million in annual aid going where it belongs?

But this is not the time to reopen a parliamentary debate on Canada's role or to confuse the progress of the mission with the mission itself. Mr. Dryden's own party was in power and he was in cabinet when the decision was made to send troops to southern Afghanistan as part of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization's broader effort to root out the Taliban, stabilize the region and give millions of people a chance to live a decent life in relative security. It was not then, and is not now, a peacekeeping exercise. Nothing has changed. The deaths of soldiers do not alter the nature of the mandate or its importance.

How vital is the Canadian combat role? On the page opposite, Afghanistan's ambassador to Canada, Omar Samad, notes that "while the rest of Afghanistan is experiencing relative normalcy after three decades of turmoil, the provinces adjacent to the tribal regions between Afghanistan and Pakistan are targets of terrorist and insurgent attacks by a force of new and former Taliban and foreign militants." They seize hostages, kill teachers, moderate clerics and aid workers, and burn down schools and hospitals that accept Western assistance. They also target NATO and Afghan troops "to influence Western evening news reports and prevent us from creating an environment conducive to better economic and security conditions."

This is not a fight Canada can afford to abandon.

NATO chief says Taliban will be defeated

RAHIM FAIEZ Associated Press

KABUL — Taliban militants believe they “can win” in southern Afghanistan, but NATO forces will defeat them, the alliance's secretary-general said Wednesday.

“It is clear that some of the terrorists, the spoilers think they can win in the south,” NATO Secretary-General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer told reporters during a press conference in Kabul with Afghan President Hamid Karzai.

“They are wrong. Because they cannot win, they will not win,” the NATO chief said. “That is why we are engaged in combat as well at this very moment.”

Mr. de Hoop Scheffer and Mr. Karzai also signed an accord to boost security and development in war-ravaged Afghanistan.

The NATO chief, who arrived in Afghanistan with the alliance's top commander, U.S. General James Jones, said the upcoming fifth anniversary of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on the United States highlighted the importance of taking the fight to militants at large here.

If terrorists are allowed to regroup, Mr. de Hoop Scheffer said the “consequences will be felt not only in Afghanistan but in the NATO nations and other nations as well.”

A U.S.-led invasion toppled Afghanistan's hard-line Taliban regime in late 2001 for refusing to hand-over al-Qaeda terror network leader Osama bin Laden.

Afghanistan this year has been gripped by its deadliest spate of violence since the Taliban's ouster as U.S. and NATO forces continue hunting for militants in volatile southern and eastern parts of the country.

This weekend was especially bloody for Canadian troops fighting Taliban insurgents in the volatile Panjwaii district, west of Kandahar.

Four Canadians died in fierce clashes with militants Sunday after launching Operation Medusa, a massive anti-Taliban offensive. Early Monday, one Canadian was killed and more than 30 were injured when two U.S. warplanes opened fire during a strafing run.

NATO pledges long-term commitment to Afghanistan

Wed Sep 6, 2006, KABUL (AFP) -

NATO has reiterated its commitment to helping stabilise and develop

Afghanistan by signing an agreement here after talks between the alliance's leadership and President Hamid Karzai.

Karzai and NATO Secretary General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer signed the declaration at a ceremony in the presidential palace in the capital Kabul attended by 25 NATO ambassadors and some Afghan cabinet members.

"This agreement is for the good of Afghanistan, for its stability. It provides Afghanistan deep ties with the international community," Karzai said.

"Afghanistan is a country in need, in war with terrorism and Al-Qaeda," he said on Wednesday.

De Hoop Scheffer stressed the importance of bringing peace to Afghanistan, which is going through the bloodiest phase of an insurgency launched by the extremist Taliban movement after it was toppled from government in late 2001.

"It shows NATO's long-term commitment to the nation," he said.

NATO is leading the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) of 21,000 soldiers from 37 countries.

The force is trying to stabilise the country so that reconstruction can take place, a strategy it hopes will break support for the Taliban which was toppled for not handing over Al-Qaeda leaders after the September 11, 2001 attacks.

"If we don't go to Afghanistan and if we are not here, Afghanistan will come to us," De Hoop Scheffer said. The "consequences will be felt not only in Afghanistan but in other nations as well ... we will not give the terrorists an opportunity to win."

The NATO chief stressed that development was essential.

"There will be no development without security ... but the opposite is also true -- there is no lasting security without development," he said.

Afghan legislators meet the NATO delegation earlier, asking them to ensure that the alliance's troops worked to avoid civilian casualties.

"Preventing civilian casualties is one of the basic demands of the representatives of the people," parliamentary speaker Mohammad Younus Qanooni said.

He said that the Taliban were using injuries to civilians as a way to turn the general populace against the parliament.

Scores of civilians have been killed in strikes on the Taliban carried out by foreign troops mainly from the US-led coalition.

Qanooni told the delegation the safety of civilians could be improved through better coordination between Afghan and foreign troops during operations.

Mine kills NATO soldier in Afghanistan

Wed Sep 6, 2006 KANDAHAR,

Afghanistan – A NATO soldier was killed and six others wounded after their patrol strayed into an unmarked minefield in southern

Afghanistan on Wednesday, the alliance said. The soldiers were evacuated to a NATO medical facility after they were taken from the minefield in volatile Helmand province, a NATO statement said.
It said the nationality of the dead soldier would be released later, and gave no details about the conditions of the wounded.

Most of the NATO-led forces in Helmand are British.

Also Wednesday, a suicide bomber blew himself up alongside a car in eastern Afghanistan, killing two passengers and wounding the driver, police said.

The bomber, who was on foot, struck in the Khost province town of Yaqubi. A teacher and a government employee who were inside the vehicle were killed, provincial police chief Mohammed Ayub said.

The motive for the bombing was unclear, but Ayub said the attacker may have confused his victims with another target.

"700 Taliban under siege in southern Afghanistan," says NATO - KUNA 9/05/2006

KABUL - Fierce fighting and clashes continued in southern Afghanistan as NATO Secretary General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer and US top commander General James Jones arrived in Kabul on Tuesday.

The two top officials will discuss the security situation with Afghan officials during their stay in Afghanistan, said a source in the Interior Ministry. They will also review the development projects as well as deliberate on ways and means to bring stability to the insurgency-plagued country.

The leaders are visiting Afghanistan when fierce fighting is going on in southern Afghanistan between NATO and Afghan forces and Taliban fighters. A day earlier, the NATO forces claimed they had killed 200 Taliban in a military operation in Kandahar province.

NATO spokesman Major Innis told journalists more than 700 Taliban were besieged by their forces in the Panjwayee district of Kandahar province. He said the fighting in Panjwayee and Zerai, the two districts of Kandahar which are volatile for the past few months, was part of the Operation Medusa.
The joint operation was launched by NATO and Afghan forces in two districts of Kandahar on Saturday. Major Innis said the people in the area had been asked not to return to their houses till the completion of the operation.

He said the Taliban, besieged by their forces, were hiding in the area since long and they used to launch attacks on NATO and Afghan forces from time to time.

Meanwhile, officials in the neighbouring province of Helmand said they had killed three Taliban following a clash. Nabi Mulakhel, police chief of the province, said the militants attacked Musa Kala district last night. The NATO and Afghan forces retaliated and after exchange of fire for several hours, they had gunned down three attackers, while their other colleagues managed to escape.

Showdown brewing in Ottawa over Afghanistan

Updated Tue. Sep. 5 2006 CTV.ca News Staff

Canada's minority Conservative government appears headed toward a showdown with Opposition parties over Canada's growing combat role in Afghanistan.

When unveiling his leadership platform on Tuesday, federal Liberal leadership hopeful Ken Dryden aimed some choice criticism at the Conservative government's reluctance to debate Canada's increasingly dangerous role in the war-torn country.

"What we needed in the spring was a real debate, what we still need is a real debate," he said.

"The question for us is the basic one: whether we should be there in the first place," said Dryden as Canada's death toll rose past 30 over Labour Day weekend.

Dryden's voice joins those of NDP Leader Jack Layton, who has repeatedly called for a withdrawal, and Bloc Québécois Leader Gilles Duceppe, who has called for an emergency debate.

Duceppe said in an interview in Tuesday's Globe and Mail that Quebecers increasingly feel as though Prime Minister Stephen Harper is aligned with U.S. President George Bush on foreign policy.
"I think they have more and more the impression that Harper is taking the same alignment that Bush is taking, and they are firmly against that," Duceppe said.

In a letter sent to Commons Speaker Peter Milliken requesting a debate, Bloc House Leader Michel Gauthier says the Tories have strayed from Canada's longstanding position "of mediation and balance" and from the "major values of the Québécois and Canadian populations, which are, I am convinced by it, resolutely peaceful."

Duceppe wants an emergency debate in mid-September before Harper delivers his maiden speech to the General Assembly of the United Nations late next month.

But his request doesn't leave much time, because the House of Commons resumes sitting on Sept. 18.

Layton renewed his call for withdrawal on the weekend, telling The Globe and Mail "This is the wrong mission for Canada."

The House of Commons voted by a slim margin in May to extend the mission in Afghanistan until February of 2009. Layton has suggested that the motion might be defeated if MPs were to vote on it now.

Dryden has not said he opposes Canada's new combat role in Afghanistan. During a press conference on Tuesday to unveil his platform for the Liberal leadership, he objected to the lack of diplomatic voices and called for a review of the move from a peacekeeping role to active combat.
"There's no indication that we're about to have that review. All we have heard in the last four or five months is military rhetoric," he said.

The statements from the Opposition leaders came after Pte. Mark Graham was killed and 30 other Canadians were wounded Monday when two U.S. aircraft accidentally opened fire on Canadians during a strafing run.

The friendly fire occurred when soldiers trying to seize a Taliban stronghold along the Arghandab River requested air support.

It was the same area where four Canadians were killed on Sunday, during Operation Medusa, a mission aimed at purging militants from the Taliban stronghold of the Panjwaii district west of Kandahar.

Sgt. Shane Stachnik, Warrant Officer Frank Mellish and Warrant Officer Richard Nolan, all based at CFB Petawawa, Ont., died on Sunday.

The identity of the fourth slain soldier was made public Tuesday afternoon: Pte. William Jonathan James Cushley, also a member of 1st Battalion, The Royal Canadian Regiment in Petawawa.
Thirty-two Canadian soldiers and one diplomat have died since Canadian troops first arrived in Afghanistan in early 2002.

With files from The Globe and Mail and The Canadian Press

'Brit-Pakistanis join Taliban to fight UK'

via The Times of India [ 3 Sep, 200 PTI ]

LONDON: A number of British Pakistanis have joined Taliban insurgents to fight against the UK troops in southern Afghanistan, a media report claimed here on Sunday.

The intelligence about their presence in Helmand province of Afghanistan, where 13 British soldiers have died, is believed to have come from Pakistan where authorities recently arrested suspects said to be involved in training of al-Qaeda and Taliban recruits, 'The Sunday Times' reported.

Pakistani, Chechen, Syrian, Egyptian, and Yemeni nationals are among the other foreign recruits fighting along side the Taliban, who train new recruits in the Pakistani city of Quetta, it claimed.

According to the report, a Pakistani official said on Saturday there were a number of British Pakistanis known to be fighting along side the Taliban in Afghanistan. "They come quietly in twos and threes and then disappear. It's difficult to trace them as they (also) carry Pakistani passport."

A source close to the Taliban claimed that two British Pakistanis had gone through Waziristan tribal area on their way to fight the British Army six weeks ago. A second Pakistani official said that others had since gone into Afghanistan "in an individual capacity".

The report quoted sources close to the Taliban as saying that "no more than ten" of its fighters were known to be British passport holders. "There are a lot of Pakistanis (fighting with the Taliban) and one cannot say how many of them hold British passports."

News of British recruits among the Taliban suggested that the war in Afghanistan, like that in Iraq, has become a magnet for extremists determined to fight western forces.

"It is not clear how many there are but we are told they are definitely there," a defence source was quoted as saying.

The report comes as the head of Scotland Yard's anti-terrorist branch told BBC that British Muslims were suspected of taking part in the fighting in Iraq. Commander Peter Clarke said that the number of British Muslims suspected of being involved in supporting terrorism runs into "thousands".

British troops estimate they have killed more than 1,200 Taliban insurgents over the past three months. But there appears to be no end to the new recruits replacing those killed.
"The Pakistan border is the problem and we know it is hard to close it all off, but the Taliban seem to have a conveyor belt of new recruits," the source said.

According to the report, the fighting in the British area of operations has been fierce around the UK outposts at Sangin, Musa Qala and Nowzad in northern Helmand over the past few days, with RAF and US aircraft mounting repeated bombing raids.

Ranger Anare Draiva, of First Royal Irish Regiment was killed and another soldier was seriously wounded in a Taliban attack on the Musa Qala base last Friday. Last week a 20-man British patrol sent to root out a group of Taliban holed up in a house a kilometre from the Sangin base found themselves outnumbered by the insurgents.

Acting on intelligence that there were a small number of Taliban in the house the British called in air support to bomb the building. The British troops waited in another building codenamed "Chinese restaurant" while the building was demolished but there were far more Taliban than anticipated, the report said.

Meshrano Jirga member passes away

KABUL, Sep 5 (Pajhwok Afghan News): Member of the Meshrano Jirga or upper house of parliament Haji Sher Mohammad Nuristani died while undergoing an eye surgery in the Ibn-i-Sina Hospital here last night.

The deceased was brother of Qadir Nuristani, interior minister in the cabinet of late Daud Khan. He was 62.

The cause of his death was said to be excessive bleeding due to cutting of a vein during surgery of one of his eyes. The late Sher Mohammad Nuristani was elected to the upper house of the parliament during the September 18 parliamentary elections.

The upper house of parliament has expressed grief over his demise and caused it a loss for the house and the country. In a statement, the senators expressed sympathy with the bereaved family of late Nuristani and prayed for his departed soul.
The statement said the late senator had fight jihad against Russian under the banner of Jabha-i-Milli Nijat Party led by Professor Sibghatullah Mojaddedi.

[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.]