In this bulletin:

• New US-led offensive in Tora Bora
• South Korea hostage talks delayed
• Briton killed in Afghanistan named
• No al Qaeda safe havens in Pakistan: Kasuri
• ‘Safe haven will be hit, but not at cost of ties’
• 15 suspected militants detained in Farah
• Chinese president pledges support for Afghan reconstruction
• Spanta to visit China
• Iran meddling in Afghanistan: US lawmaker
• Afghan civilians injured in Coalition's firing
• UK's Afghan mission at turning point, says Browne
• British losing faith as Afghan toll climbs
• Opinion: It's Time to Review Germany's Afghan Mission
• Delegates treated like royals at Pak-Afghan jirga
• Kabul jirga: tribal chiefs threatened
• A stumble over the 'W' word in Afghanistan
• Was the 'peace jirga' a success?
• Iran's disruptive hold over Afghanistan is rising
• Snub to the US as Karzai forges local ties
• Canadians shortening rifles to fit Afghan soldiers
• Afghan women storm male bastion

New US-led offensive in Tora Bora – BBC

Hundreds of US and Afghan soldiers have returned to launch a new attack on the last known hideout of the fugitive al-Qaeda leader Osama Bin Laden. They have launched an air and ground assault in the Tora Bora region, near the border with Pakistan.

A US military spokeswoman said the mountainous terrain was an ideal environment to conceal militant bases. Tora Bora was the scene of a failed major US operation to capture Osama Bin Laden in 2001.

Reports say dozens of families in the area have fled the latest fighting. A US military spokeswoman, Captain Vanessa Bowman, said the assault was launched against targeted positions:

"The targets were carefully chosen to pinpoint enemy positions and eliminate the likelihood of harming innocent civilians."

"This region has provided an ideal environment to conceal enemy support bases and training sites, as well as plan and launch attacks aimed at terrorizing innocent civilians, both inside and outside the region," she said.

She did not say how long the operation would continue for. The Tora Bora region, a complex of caves, is known as the last stronghold of al-Qaeda in Afghanistan.

News of the US offensive comes as three German nationals were killed, and a fourth wounded, by a roadside bomb, near the Afghan capital, Kabul.

They were travelling in a diplomatic convoy. Local police say the blast was caused by a remote-controlled bomb, which completely destroyed one vehicle.

In a separate incident, a British national working for a private security firm which guards the British embassy, was killed by unknown assailants in Kabul.

South Korea hostage talks delayed

Ghazni (AFP) - Talks due Thursday between Afghanistan's Taliban and South Korean officials aimed at freeing 19 hostages did not take place as scheduled, though neither side ruled out a meeting.

The Taliban had said negotiations with the South Korean delegation would start Thursday morning in the small town of Ghazni, about 140 kilometres (90 miles) south of Kabul.

But the International Committee of the Red Cross, which is facilitating the talks, said that the two sides had still not met by early afternoon.

"They have not started yet," deputy head of delegation Franz Rauchenstein told AFP, refusing to comment on the reasons for the delay.

New negotiations would be the first since Monday's release of Kim Gin-A, 32, and Kim Kyung-Ja, 37, two of the hostages who were taken by the hardline Islamic militants.

The two women were still in Afghanistan and arrangements were being made for their return home, the embassy said, with a departure expected "very soon."

After their release in Ghazni, they were due to have undergone medical checks at the US military base at Bagram, north of Kabul.

South Korean President Roh Moo-Hyun this week urged a redoubling of efforts to release the remaining 19 hostages, to build on Monday's success.

"The government has to make greater efforts to have them released. We shouldn't relax until the last moment," Roh said Tuesday.

The militia abducted 23 South Koreans, all Christian aid workers including 16 women, on July 19 as they were travelling by bus through insurgency-plagued southern Afghanistan.

They have killed two after the government refused a demand to release Taliban from jail, but on Monday released two as a "gesture of goodwill" for direct talks with the South Koreans over the remaining captives.

South Korea has said it understands the difficulties facing the Afghan administration as it tries to tackle an insurgency launched by the Taliban soon after they were driven from government in 2001.

The US-backed government of Afghan President Hamid Karzai was heavily criticised, notably by Washington, after it freed five Taliban in March in exchange for an Italian journalist.

The Taliban beheaded the journalist's Afghan driver and a translator, giving rise to accusations that Kabul put more value on the lives of foreign nationals than Afghans.

Karzai then vowed that such a deal would not be repeated, and officials have reiterated that agreeing to the extremists' demands would only encourage abductions by the Taliban and criminal groups alike.

The Taliban, who are influenced by Al-Qaeda, are also involved in the kidnapping of a 62-year-old German engineer captured near Kabul a day before the South Koreans.

The hardliners say talks with the Afghan and German government to free him are going nowhere, but officials say they are doing what they can.

Briton killed in Afghanistan named

Press Association - Wednesday August 15, 2007

A British man shot dead in Afghanistan has been named as Richard Adamson, a manager for private security firm ArmorGroup.

A spokesman for the company said Mr Adamson, a former Royal Marine Warrant Officer, died of gunshot wounds inflicted by unknown assailants.

Mr Adamson's relationship with Afghanistan spanned more than 20 years and he was described as having been a "true friend" of the country. Next of kin have been informed.

Mr Adamson died as a result of an incident that took place in mid-afternoon Afghan time in the centre of Kabul.

Zemari Bashary, an Afghanistan Interior Ministry spokesman, said that two Afghan men had been arrested on suspicion of the attack that killed him.

Mr Bashary said that both suspects are also employees of ArmorGroup, a private security firm that assists national governments, multinational corporations and international peace organisations in hostile environments.

But the London-based firm described the assailants as "unknown", with a spokesman adding that they did not know if they were employees of the firm.

Mr Adamson, said to be in his 60s, was a former Royal Marine Warrant Officer with 20 years' service. He was described as having a wealth of experience working with humanitarian agencies.

He joined ArmorGroup in 2002 and was responsible for managing client contracts in support of the Afghanistan reconstruction effort.

In 2003, the firm was awarded the contract to protect British Government personnel in Afghanistan, a contract that was renewed last November.

No al Qaeda safe havens in Pakistan: Kasuri

From our ANI Correspondent

Lahore, Aug 16: Foreign Minister Khurshid Mehmood Kasuri has once again rejected the existence of al Qaeda safe havens in Pakistan, and said that Islamabad is doing enough to counter terrorism. The fact that it had lost 700 soldiers during the "war on terror" is ample testimony of its commitment, he added.

Kasuri told BBC's 'Hard Talk' programme: "I completely and emphatically reject that Pakistan has 'safe havens' for al Qaeada."

"Pakistan is facing problems, but these problems have to be viewed in the right context. The problem we have in the tribal areas goes back to its origin in the 80s when the West glorified jihad. We are reaping the consequences of that," he added.

Kasuri said statements such as the one calling for attacks on Mecca and Medina had immense potential to damage Pak-US relations.

He asked the US leadership to be careful in this regard. "We value our relations with the US, but our people think the US dictates terms to us, but we will not take any dictation," the Daily Times quoted him, as saying.

Kasuri said the situation in Afghanistan had deteriorated after the West had shifted its focus from Afghanistan to Iraq.

"It is inappropriate to hold Pakistan responsible for the poor law and order situation in Afghanistan. Those who make such allegations are not taking account of the actual situation on the ground," Kasuri said.

Responding to another question, Kasuri said no foreign elements could warn President Musharraf. "It's totally rubbish that the US Secretary of State (Condoleezza Rice)warned him against imposing emergency," he said.

‘Safe haven will be hit, but not at cost of ties’

WASHINGTON, Aug 15: The US State Department has said that Washington will not hesitate to hit ‘high-value’ Al Qaeda targets inside another country, but will do so in a way that it does not harm America’s relations with that state.

“If there is actionable intelligence on high-value targets, wherever they may be, we are going to do everything that we can to act on that information,” State Department spokesman Sean McCormack told a briefing in Washington.

“And we are confident that we will be able to do that in such a way that we don’t harm our relations with any states that may be in question, whether that’s Pakistan, Afghanistan or some other state,” he said.

The debate over a possible US action against suspected Al Qaeda targets started late last month when a US intelligence report claimed that Al Qaeda had established a safe haven in Pakistan’s tribal territory.

Later, several senior US officials said that if they had ‘actionable’ intelligence about suspected Al Qaeda hideouts inside Pakistan, they would launch direct military strikes at those targets.

The statements caused a bitter reaction in Islamabad where both government and opposition leaders said that such an attack would violate Pakistan’s territorial integrity.

Since then, Washington has softened its stance, with President Bush declaring earlier this week that the US respects Pakistan’s sovereignty but expects Islamabad to take immediate action against terrorist hideouts.

15 suspected militants detained in Farah

FARAH CITY, Aug 16 (Pajhwok Afghan News): A Taliban commander with 14 militants had been arrested during a joint operation by Afghan and foreign troops in the western Farah province, officials claimed on Thursday.

Gen. Jalandar Shah Behnam, commander of the 207 Zafar Military Corps in Herat, said the sweep launched three days back was concluded last night.

He said Afghan military, police and soldiers of the international security force took part in the operation conducted in Bala Bulook district of the province.

Stopping short of disclosing his identity, Behnam said a Taliban commander and 14 common militants had been arrested during the three-day sweep. A suicide vest was also recovered during raids, he added.

The commander said hundreds of elders from the area had gathered in the Shewan Mosque and assured the government of their support in operations against Taliban and other anti-government elements.

Maj. Gen. Ikramuddin Yawar, border police chief in the western zone, said operation against miscreants would continue in the area.

Bala Bulook is one of the lawless districts in the western Farah province,

where Taliban militants have been launching attacks on government troops and installations from time to time.

Police in the western Herat province claimed they had freed two kidnapped Iranian citizen from their captors during an operation.

Maj. Gen. Shafiq Fazli, police chief of the province, told journalists on Thursday the two boys were abducted from Iran. They were recovered during a raid on a house last night, said Fazli, adding owner of the house had been arrested.

Meanwhile, five people were detained along with five landmines in Shindand district. The detainees wanted to use the mines for disruptive activities, said the police chief.

Chinese president pledges support for Afghan reconstruction ,

www.chinaview.cn2007-08-15

BISHKEK, Aug. 15 (Xinhua) -- China attaches great importance to developing relations with Afghanistan and supports its reconstruction efforts, Chinese President Hu Jintao said here on Wednesday during a meeting with his Afghan counterpart Hamid Karzai.

    China supports the Afghan government and people in choosing their country's own political system and model of development, said Hu, who was currently on a state visit to Kyrgyzstan and will later attend a summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) in the Central Asian country.

    Since the formation of the new Afghan government under the leadership of President Karzai, cooperation between China and Afghanistan has grown steadily and bilateral ties have shown a good momentum, said Hu.

    The Chinese government attaches great importance to developing the partnership of all-round cooperation with Afghanistan and is willing to remain Afghanistan's good neighbor, friend and partner forever, he said.

    To help the reconstruction in the war-torn country, China will again provide 80 million yuan (about 10.53 million U.S. dollars) in assistance, and will carry on existing aid projects on hydro-power and medical facilities, according to Hu.

    China also supports the Afghan efforts to enhance regional cooperation and is ready to continue its cooperation with Afghanistan within the framework of the SCO, the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC), the Central Asia Regional Economic Cooperation (CAREC) and other organizations, the Chinese president said.

    China is following closely the situation in Afghanistan and it is China's sincere hope that the country will realize peace and embark on the path of reconstruction, which will serve the fundamental interests of the Afghan people and will be conducive to peace and stability in the region and the world as a whole, Hu said.

    Karzai, who was here to attend the SCO summit as a special guest of the summit host Kyrgyzstan, thanked China for its assistance and voiced his country's readiness to promote good-neighborly relations with China and carry out cooperation in economy, trade and security.

    Afghanistan is also committed to developing cooperation with the SCO, SAARC and other regional organizations, Karzai said. The Afghan government firmly adheres to the one-China policy, Karzai stressed.

    The SCO, a regional organization founded in June 2001, now groups China, Russia and Central Asia's Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan.

Spanta to visit China

KABUL, Aug 15 (Pajhwok Afghan News): Foreign Minister Dr. Rangin Dadfar Spanta will leave for a three-day visit to China after attending the Shanghai Cooperation Summit in the Kyrgyz capital of Bishkek on Thursday.

The Foreign Minister is accompanying President Hamid Karzai to the one-day summit of the four-nation Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO). He will leave for China from Bishkek, said Foreign Ministry spokesman Sultan Ahmad Bahin.

Speaking to Pajhwok Afghan News, Bahin said the FM was visiting that country on special invitation from his Chinese counterpart. During his stay in China, Spanta would sign agreements in health and mining sectors and discuss strategic cooperation between the two countries with his counterpart.

The two ministers would also discuss bilateral ties, terrorism, narcotics and role of China in reconstruction of Afghanistan, said the spokesman. Spanta would also call on Chinese vice president and deliver a speech at the Strategic Studies Centre there.

Iran meddling in Afghanistan: US lawmaker

NEW YORK, Aug 16 (Pajhwok Afghan News): An influential US lawmaker has accused Iran of meddling in the internal affairs of Afghanistan by allegedly supplying arms and equipment to Taliban and al-Qaeda.

" I'm gravely concerned about the increase in both the quantity and quality of Iranian arms shipments and technological expertise to Taliban and other terrorist organisations," Republican Congresswoman from Florida Ileana Ros-Lehtinen said after her two-day trip to Afghanistan early this week .

Considered to be a friend of Afghanistan at the Capitol Hill, Ros-Lehtinen has been, in the past, instrumental in the passage of several key Afghan-related legislations from the Congress including the Afghan Freedom Act, which was recently passed by the House of Representatives .

The statement coming from Ros-Lehtinen, only a day after the visit of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to Kabul on Tuesday carries significance as the Congresswoman is considered close to President George Bush, who has been levying such a charge against Iran for the quite some time now .

During his visit to Kabul, Iranian President denied allegations that his government was supplying arms to Taliban. "I doubt if there is any truth in it," Ahmadinejad told a questioner.

The US Congresswoman also expressed concern over the increase in poppy cultivation and narcotics trade in Afghanistan, which accounts for more than 93 per cent of the world's illicit opium supply .

"Unless we act soon, the drug kingpins and drug cartels allied with terrorists will erode all of the progress that has been made in Afghanistan," she warned.

Afghan civilians injured in Coalition's firing

KABUL, Aug 16 (Pajhwok Afghan News): Two civilians were wounded in firing by the US-led Coalition troops in this capital city on Thursday.

A statement from the Coalition Bagram base said "the Coalition forces used small-arms fire to stop an oncoming vehicle in Kabul today after several non-lethal attempts failed to stop the approaching Afghan motorist".

Driver of the vehicle and a bystander were wounded as the Coalition forces opened fire at the vehicle.

"Medical personnel are doing everything in their power to care for the wounded civilians and our prayers are with them for a full, quick recovery," said Capt. Vanessa R. Bowman, spokesperson for the Combined Joint Task Force-82. 

Regretting the harm to civilians, the spokesperson said a "full investigation will be conducted into the incident".

UK's Afghan mission at turning point, says Browne

Richard Norton-Taylor. Thursday August 16, 2007 The Guardian

Des Browne, the defence secretary, said yesterday that British forces could be at a "turning point" in bringing stability to Afghanistan, but suggested that there would still be a substantial UK military presence in the country for many years.

And going further than other ministers have done, he said in an interview with the Guardian that he had "no doubt" that the Taliban was being supplied with weapons from Iran, via drug routes.

On other issues, he compared the process of handing over responsibility to local security forces in Afghanistan with that in Iraq. He said he expected British forces to be able to hand over responsibility for security in Basra to the Iraqis "in a matter of months". But any further cut in the number of UK troops there - beyond the 500, out of the total of 5,500, already announced - would depend on an agreement with the Americans.

"The drawdown on Iraq depends on some agreement with the US," he said. Gordon Brown has promised a statement when the Commons returns in October, against a background of growing disquiet about the nature of the Iraq mission and the morale of the troops.

The defence secretary did not deny that there had been problems with the healthcare of wounded troops and delays in inquests on those who had been killed, but said progress was being made.

Mr Browne, recently returned from his fourth visit to Afghanistan since he was appointed 14 months ago, painted an optimistic picture of the effect of heavy, often ferocious, fighting between British troops and the Taliban in recent weeks.

Seven soldiers have been killed in Helmand province, in southern Afghanistan, in the past 10 days. Separately, a Briton working for the private security firm ArmorGroup who was shot dead in Kabul was named last night as Richard Adamson.

Mr Browne told the Guardian he was "genuinely surprised" at the progress British troops had made in promoting sustainable security against the Taliban.

Asked if the British mission in southern Afghanistan had reached a turning point, he replied: "I think the honest answer is, yes, it could be." Asked if there would still be thousands of British troops there in 10 years' time - more than 7,000 are deployed there now, a figure that will rise to 7,800 by the end of the year - he said: "I do not envisage we will be in anything like the same profile on the present scale." However, he added: "I think it's too early to put a time on that."

The Taliban claim that British soldiers are trying to deprive Afghan opium farmers of their livelihood, but Mr Browne insisted: "Our forces are not a narcotics police and never have been."

More opium poppies are grown in Helmand province than anywhere else in the world and this year there was a record crop. That is a matter for the Afghan authorities, ministers insist. The plan now, Mr Browne said, was to aim at the traffickers and heroin laboratories. But ministers are also concerned by the links between the Taliban, traffickers and gunrunners.

The defence secretary said: "I have no doubt - because we have uncovered evidence - of weapons coming in through narco-trafficking routes, supplying weapons to the Taliban. I have reason to believe the Taliban go to Tehran for training."

However, he acknowledged that Iran had contributed to Afghanistan's aid and development in the west and north of the country. He said the country could not be stable in the long term "unless it is in conjunction with Iran and Pakistan".

During his first visit to Kabul on Tuesday, Iran's president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, described Afghanistan as a "brotherly nation" the stability of which was paramount for the region. He said he had "serious doubts" that Iran was supplying weapons to the Taliban. Mr Browne yesterday described Iran as "backing every horse in the race".

British losing faith as Afghan toll climbs

BRETT POPPLEWELL - From Thursday's Globe and Mail August 16, 2007

LONDON — The British government is under attack over the war in Afghanistan as the rising troop toll is drawing the kind of negative attention previously given to the deeply unpopular efforts in Iraq.

Reports from Afghanistan - such as the ones detailing 12 soldiers' deaths in the past month - have raised questions about whether Britain's involvement is any more justified than its war effort in Iraq.

The government, however, is having none of it. "We can overmatch [the Taliban] ... we can face them down and we can drive them out of communities," Defence Secretary Des Browne said yesterday.

Earlier this week, war-death statistics published in a number of British papers indicated that front-line troops in Afghanistan's Helmand province were being killed at a rate of one in every 36 - compared with one in every 46 for U.S. servicemen in the Vietnam War.

The Daily Telegraph produced an even grimmer revelation yesterday: The overall casualty rate among front-line units in Afghanistan is higher than the casualties averaged by Commonwealth troops in the Second World War.

Britain has about 6,000 troops in Afghanistan, 500 more than it does in Iraq. The largest group of British troops in Afghanistan are training Afghan security forces, helping with reconstruction and providing security, while also combatting the country's growing opium trade.

Of its total forces in Afghanistan, only 1,500 are classified as front-line troops. It's these troops that have been taking a heavy pounding from Taliban insurgents in Helmand, which neighbours Kandahar province where Canadian forces took heavy casualties last year.

The hardest hit have been the Royal Anglians Regiment, which has lost a fifth of its troops to battle wounds, injuries and disease as 131 soldiers out of a 650-strong force have fallen out of combat duty.

These losses are comparable with those suffered by Commonwealth troops during the Second World War, when 11 per cent of the 11 million troops mobilized were either killed, wounded or declared missing in action.

These recent revelations, though based on math that is not entirely scientific as the past few weeks have seen a higher death rate in Afghanistan than previous weeks and the comparison is between front-line troops in Afghanistan, and all Second World War troops, have cast a shadow over a war effort that many Britons seem no longer to support.

On Monday, opposition parties called on the new Prime Minister, Gordon Brown, to urgently review his policy in Afghanistan.

"These statistics are deeply saddening, above all, because they represent personal tragedies for hundreds of British families. But they are also an indictment of a government which has no clear idea how to get British Forces home without further heavy loss of life," Sir Menzies Campbell, Leader of the Liberal Democrats, said.

But it doesn't look as though troops will be coming home any time soon. Brigadier John Lorimer, Britain's top soldier in Helmand, predicted yesterday that British troops would be in Afghanistan for as long as they were in Northern Ireland - 38 years.

A YouGov poll published this weekend found only 6 per cent of voters felt Britain was winning in Afghanistan while 15 per cent felt British troops were making Basra a safer place for its residents.

However, 74 per cent of those polled said they wanted the troops brought home from Iraq immediately or within the next year while 65 per cent said the same thing for Afghanistan.

At the heart of the debate in Parliament is the government's recent decision to disband three British battalions, a move critics say has increased the burden of the remaining battalions, which have to serve longer and more frequent rotations in both Afghanistan and Iraq. Special to The Globe and Mail

Opinion : It's Time to Review Germany's Afghan Mission

DW - Following the murder of three police officers in Afghanistan, Germany's government should heed criticism of its reconstruction efforts in the country and pause to figure out how to proceed, says DW's Nina Werkhäuser.

Whenever Germans are murdered in Afghanistan, politicians unload a bag of reassurances: They say that it's tragic and sad, but certainly no reason to reduce Germany's mission in Afghanistan.

Despite the fact that -- in addition to the three police officers -- a German aid worker, a German businessman and three German soldiers have already been murdered in Afghanistan this year, the federal government has not wasted a single thought on coming up with an exit strategy. Quite to the contrary: The costly deployment of Tornado reconnaissance jets was added this year and an expansion of training Afghan security personnel is under consideration.

By doing so, the government is avoiding an important question: What price are we ready to pay fort he reconstruction of Afghanistan? This question gets even more explosive as it becomes clearer that influential forces in Afghanistan are not interested in a stabilization of the country and fight this with all their might.

That's a fundamental difference to what's happening in other countries, where Germany sends soldiers or aid workers. It's expensive and it costs a lot of lives to try and bring peace to Afghanistan when the Taliban are fighting it.

The murder of three police officers who guarded the German embassy in Kabul shows that the perpetrators are now directly targeting the government. It's safe to assume that the Taliban are trying to influence the political debate in Germany as all three Afghanistan mandates for the German military are up for renewal the fall.

Of course it would be wrong to bend one's knees because of the Taliban's terror. But this argument must not be used to brush off justified doubts regarding the international reconstruction effort.

The Afghan government bears some of the responsibility for the fact that not enough was accomplished during the past five years. But the many tens of thousands of foreign soldiers and aid workers have also, in part, acted incorrectly and without coordination. Precious time and resources have been wasted as a result. The German government has so far failed to honestly weigh the mission's chances and risks.

While surveys show that a majority of Germans is now against the deployment of more than 3,000 soldiers in Afghanistan, most politicians continue to preach that it's necessary to endure.

But following the murder of three German police officers, the government should no longer stall a factual discussion. As long as every German in Afghanistan has to fear for his life, reconstruction efforts can't be effective, anyway.

Nina Werkhäuser covers foreign, defense and security policy affairs for DW-RADIO (win)

Delegates treated like royals at Pak-Afghan jirga

By Iqbal Khattak

KABUL: Pakistani delegates to the Pak-Afghan jirga were more than satisfied with the warm welcome they received in Kabul, with every luxury provided to them by the hosts.

The delegates praised the Afghan government’s arrangements and delegation

leader Interior Minister Aftab Ahmed Khan Sherpao told the hosts during his

speech on the last day of the jirga that their hospitality “is so warm that it makes one want to stay here for good”.

Security for the delegates was extremely tight and none were allowed out without a guard. Many streets and roads were closed to traffic in order to ensure safe movement of jirga members.

Muhammad Nasir Sabawoon, who supervised catering, repeatedly asked delegates whether they needed anything else, and said that he wanted the delegates to make the jirga a success. “You make the jirga successful and I will serve you forever,” he said.

At the jirga venue, all facilities were aplenty. One corner of a tent where the

working committee meetings took place was devoted to refreshments including

coffee, green and black tea, soft drinks and juices, without restrictions.

Special arrangements were made for naswar for the delegates, and luxury

transport was at their disposal throughout their stay. Afghan sources said that

around some $6 million was approved for the jirga, but did not say who provided

the money.

Former Mujahideen leaders Abdur Rab Rasool Sayyaf and Prof Burhanuddin

Rabbani said that Pakistan and Afghanistan should make arrangements between

themselves similar to European Union countries, which had abolished visas and

adopted one currency.

Former NWFP chief secretary Khalid Aziz said, “To their credit, all opposition

leaders acted as a team and we felt proud. No matter what our internal

differences, when it came to defending the state, all stood as one. There may be a lesson in all this for our leaders.”

Kabul jirga: tribal chiefs threatened

KHAR, Aug 15: Tribal elders in Pakistan have been threatened with reprisals for attending last week’s talks in Kabul aimed at ending support for Al Qaeda and Taliban militants, officials said on Wednesday.

The tribal council or jirga, involving tribes from both sides of the volatile Afghanistan-Pakistan border, pledged to eliminate terrorist sanctuaries in their respective tribal regions.

But an anonymous letter sent to elders in the Bajaur tribal area threatened unspecified “action” against them for taking part.

“Your participation at the jirga was not a good decision,” officials quoted the letter as saying. “Action will be taken against you,” it warned.

Local security official Adalat Khan said at least four tribal elders in a remote town in the region had received the warnings. Bajaur district is one of seven semi-autonomous tribal regions in northwest Pakistan.—AFP

A stumble over the 'W' word in Afghanistan

By Tarique Niazi

(Foreign Policy in Focus) - A group of tribal leaders from Afghanistan and Pakistan have called for talks with the Taliban. These leaders convened in Kabul from August 9-12 in a US-brokered peace jirga, a traditional council akin to a parliament of elders. At the Kabul meeting, the jirga formed a 50-member tribal council, made up of 25 members each from Afghanistan and Pakistan, to begin the dialogue.

The call does not spell out the talks' schedule, scope, substance or venue. Meanwhile, the Taliban have rejected the jirga as a "US-sponsored farce". They are opposed to the US-backed Northern Alliance government in Kabul and want troops led by the United States and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) to leave Afghanistan.

This issue of foreign troop withdrawal was controversial at the jirga. Although carefully screened by their respective governments, a smattering of jirga members did manage to articulate their support for the Taliban's call for foreign troops to leave, which they wished to replace with those of Islamic countries.

Many obstacles remain in the path of opening talks with the Taliban. The peace jirga in Kabul is subject to conflicts between the leaders of Afghanistan and Pakistan as well as pressures from the great powers. For all its shortcomings, though, the jirga's call for greater dialogue and its wide representation from both sides of the border suggest that it could serve as a key mechanism for resolving the swath of conflicts across Southwest Asia.

The key conflict at the peace jirga was the issue of foreign troops and Pakistan's behind-the-scenes support for withdrawal. On April 8, London's Daily Telegraph reported that Pakistan had urged the United Kingdom and the United States to pull out of Afghanistan. The suggestion, according to the newspaper, "reflects the growing belief in Islamabad that NATO is as much to blame for the endurance of the Islamic rebel army as Pakistan".

In public, however, Pakistan is more circumspect. A day before the Telegraph's report, Khurshid Kasuri, Pakistan's foreign minister, said: "NATO should consider holding talks with Taliban leaders." He added, "Britain in particular should know the limitations of a purely military approach in Afghanistan." This nuanced caution refers to Britain's three failed military campaigns in Afghanistan since the beginning of the 20th century.

Britain, however, taps into a different history of its conflicts to determine the length of its stay in Afghanistan. Drawing on his country's military campaign against the Irish Republican Army, a senior British commander estimates that the UK will need "38 years" to pacify the Taliban in Afghanistan. Minority ethnic communities in Afghanistan, especially Tajiks, Uzbeks and Hazaras, would welcome Britain's long-term commitment. The Taliban, who are predominantly drawn from the majority ethnic group the Pashtuns, oppose such resolve. Also, neighboring countries would likely resist British intent.

Pakistan wants to see foreign troops leave, as their presence has increased its arch-rival India's influence with Kabul while diminishing its own. If foreign troops depart from Afghanistan, the 35,000-strong Afghan National Army will be hard put to hold back the Taliban. Absent external forces, they are bound to reclaim Kabul, and with it restore Islamabad's traditional strategic advantage.

At a still larger scale, China and Russia are also getting impatient with the foreign presence in Afghanistan. In 2005, the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, which includes China and Russia as members, asked that the United States and NATO give a timetable for withdrawal of their forces. The jirga's call for replacing NATO-US troops with Islamic forces resonates in these larger circles.

Kabul has long accused President General Pervez Musharraf, Pakistan's military ruler, of harboring Taliban leadership in southwestern Pakistan, which borders southern Afghanistan. In a Newsweek interview last September, Afghan President Hamid Karzai faulted Musharraf for failing to act against senior Taliban leaders. "Mullah Omar is, for sure, in Quetta, Pakistan, and he [Musharraf] knows that. We have given him the GPS [Global Positioning System] numbers of his house and the telephone number."

Musharraf dismissed the charge as "baseless". In a CNN interview, he retaliated by saying that Karzai "is behaving like an ostrich". Later, he sardonically counseled the Afghan leader to "put your own house in order", a veiled reference to Kabul's and NATO-US troops' failure to end violence in the country.

This bickering between the two persuaded US President George W Bush to move quickly to calm passions on both sides. Last September, he hosted an Iftar dinner breaking the fast of Ramadan at the White House for Karzai and Musharraf. By then both had grown so far apart that they had stopped speaking to each other, except for trading barbs of criticism. At the dinner, Bush pleaded with both to end their acrimony and join forces in the common cause of fighting terrorism.

For a time, his persuasion seemed to work. A hopeful signal came from Karzai, who proposed that Afghanistan and Pakistan convene a joint jirga of the tribal leaders who live on both sides of the Durand Line that divides his country from Pakistan, to enlist their support against terrorism. The proposal froze Musharraf in his tracks. Yet Bush warmed to the idea, which eventually pushed Musharraf also to tag along.

Musharraf's reluctance to the call for a jirga sprang from his non-existent influence with this institution. In contrast, Karzai, who commands immense popularity with the tribal leaders of both Afghanistan and Pakistan, wanted to engage them in peace efforts to end the violence in Pashtun territories.

Karzai considers tribal leaders to be the foundation of Pashtun culture and believes in their primacy over all other cultural and political institutions to resolve internecine conflicts. Since 2002, when he came to power in Afghanistan, Karzai has attempted to revive this institution, which earned him many critics among the international community and beyond. Despite growing detractors of his approach, he continues to stick to his conviction that the jirga is the most effective tool in Pashtun society for conflict resolution.

Karzai is unhappy that Musharraf has contributed to "destroying Afghan culture" and its hallmark institution of the jirga. Musharraf, who was born in India and migrated as a child to Pakistan, lacks any ethnic base in the country. Viewing the general as a rootless carpetbagger, the tribal leaders don't treat him as their equal. In volatile northwestern Pakistan, especially North and South Waziristan, hundreds of Pashtun tribal leaders instead pledge their allegiance to Afghanistan and the Afghan president.

Musharraf has been ambivalent about the success of the proposed jirga from the very outset and has spared no effort to undermine its authority. First, he delayed convening it for 10 months. Second, he let the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), Pakistan's premier intelligence agency, name the delegates, including a substantial number of ISI agents themselves. Third, he failed to name even a single delegate from North and South Waziristan, where the United States suspects al-Qaeda is regrouping. As a result, all of the 70 tribal leaders of Waziristan agencies stayed away from the jirga.

Finally, Musharraf pulled out of the event only a day before it opened on August 9, citing "pressing commitments" in Islamabad, which turned out to be his plan to impose emergency rule in Pakistan, which he later dropped. The Bush administration was baffled by his last-minute walkout. It took a telephone call from Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice in the early hours of August 9 to change his mind on both emergency rule in Pakistan and abstaining from the jirga. By August 9, however, only 175 of the planned 350 Pakistani delegates attended.

If the jirga was not a complete success, it was not a failure, either. After all, it was the grandest gathering of Pashtun leaders since the Durand Line was drawn in 1893 to divide Pashtun territories between Afghanistan and the British Raj.

The lineup included pre-eminent Pashtun leaders who tower over even Karzai and Musharraf: Senator Asfandyar Wali Khan, who leads the Awami National Party, and Mehmood Khan Achakzai, who heads the Pashtun Milli Awami Party. Both scorn Musharraf for dumping Arab and non-Arab al-Qaeda members into Pashtun tribal areas and then committing what they call genocide against Pashtuns by ruthlessly bombing them.

The jirga, which represented the 50 million Pashtuns on both sides of the Durand Line, further bolstered the standing of Karzai as a Pashtun leader. His embrace by the leading lights of the Pashtun nation sends a strong message to the Taliban that they do not have a monopoly on Pashtun nationalism.

Finally, from the US standpoint, the jirga was a success for its unequivocal commitment to end terrorism and eliminate al-Qaeda from Pashtun territories. Since September 11, 2001, no such commitment was ever made at such a grand forum of Pashtun leaders. The jirga's call shatters the vogue idiom of "Pashtun terrorists", "tribal badlands", and "lawless tribal areas" that cast Pashtuns in bad light. At the jirga, Pashtuns demonstrated their stake in peace within and between Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Yet the jirga was "long on generalities and short on specifics". US and NATO leaders should engage this institution to supply the missing "specifics" to foster peace. It is deceptively simple to dub the Afghan resistance "Taliban militancy" or "al-Qaeda-inspired terrorism".

Although Pashtuns reject al-Qaeda and its terrorism, as the Kabul jirga resoundingly demonstrated, they are resentful of their loss of power in Kabul, which they held for 200 years, to the ethnic-minority-dominated and US-backed Northern Alliance. The Taliban, who are predominantly Pashtuns, are drawing on this sense of exclusion among the majority community to sustain their struggle. An ethnic balance to the current distribution of power, therefore, would help drain the Afghan resistance of energy and serve as well the long-term security interests of the Northern Alliance.

Karzai, aided by the 50-member Tribal Council, is best placed to pull off this feat. He is a devout Muslim, a former cabinet officer of the Taliban government, a member of the Pashtun royalty, a nominee of the ruling Northern Alliance, and the only hope for the international community to bring peace in Afghanistan.

He already has been in discreet talks with the Taliban and with Hizb-i-Islami leader and former prime minister Gulbuddin Hekmatyar. His outreach is, however, unsupported by the international community, especially the Bush administration. Now that Asfandyar Wali Khan and Mehmood Achakzai - the two most influential Pashtun leaders who are pro-Afghanistan, pro-Karzai secular nationalists - have added their voices to the call for talks with the Afghan resistance, the international community and especially the Bush administration should take notice.

Tarique Niazi is an environmental sociologist at the University of Wisconsin at Eau Claire (niazit@uwec.edu) and a contributor to Foreign Policy In Focus.

Was the 'peace jirga' a success?

By Charles Haviland, BBC Nmews, Kabul Monday, 13 August 2007

At last Thursday's opening of the "peace jirga", President Hamid Karzai of Afghanistan said that if only his country and Pakistan would act in a united way, the "disaster and cruelty" in the two nations would "be finished in one day".

That reflects a growing belief in Afghanistan that Pakistan has not given moral or logistical backing for its neighbour's anti-insurgency campaign, despite the growth of the Taleban on Pakistani soil.

And it explains why the Kabul government was keen on the idea of a jirga which - in contrast to previous all-Afghan councils - would for the first time embrace hundreds of Pakistani participants as well.

Islamabad sees things very differently. It wants Afghanistan to perceive that its insurgency is, by and large, an Afghan affair. In the words of Pakistan's prime minister, "Afghanistan is not yet at peace with itself".

It has blamed its own Taleban problem on foreign forces operating on the Afghan side of the border, and it was cooler towards the idea of the jirga.

Yet despite these antagonistic viewpoints, the jirga has happened, has attracted a good many Pakistani delegates, and - albeit only on the last day - has been addressed by President Pervez Musharraf.

Many Afghan delegates are therefore giving upbeat, almost elated, verdicts on the event. "It was a very, very important step towards reconciliatory measures among the two countries," said one. "It was fabulous, it went very well," said another.

There is a sense on the Afghan side that while things were far from perfect, there has been a definite improvement. That is even though there is no doubt that the proceedings over the four days included familiar lines of mutual accusation.

The speaker of Afghanistan's upper house, Sibghatullah Mojadeddi, said terrorists were continuing to enter his country from Pakistan.

A Pakistani delegate accused Afghanistan of never giving her country any support. Another said India should close some of its consulates in Afghanistan. There were even arguments about the still-disputed common frontier.

Yet simply talking is an achievement, say Afghan MPs who were present. "This is the first people-to-people contact between the two nations," said one. "People came very close together."

The reaction to President Musharraf's speech was also broadly positive - especially to his admission, more frank than usual, that problems in Afghanistan were "because of support for the Taleban in areas under our control".

His remarks that the Taleban are "part of Afghan society" and that not all their supporters were "fanatics" differed in emphasis from those coming out of Kabul.

But for much of his speech President Karzai nodded in agreement. A few months ago, at the White House, the two men refused to shake hands.

The jirga has come in for plenty of criticism as well. Leaders of Pakistan's Islamist opposition refused to attend because the Taleban were not present, saying the gathering would be meaningless.

Afghan delegates, however, say that Taleban figures have said they are not interested in discussing reconciliation but only in having undivided power.

There has been wider concern at the non-attendance of tribal delegates from Pakistan's troubled border region of Waziristan. Some reports say they stayed away in protest at the Taleban's exclusion. Others say the Taleban intimidated them not to attend.

Certainly, it is difficult to see how peace - the aim of this jirga - can come about without the involvement of such people. The Islamabad government has little hold on their territories and armed clashes there are common.

Bringing peace, even reducing violence, in such a vast and unruly region as the Afghan-Pakistani border will in any case be a mammoth undertaking.

The jirga's joint declaration contained a mix of tough and softer sentiments. It says there will be a "tireless... campaign against terrorism" and against the two countries offering "sanctuaries [or] training centres for terrorists". There will also be an "all-out war" against narcotics cultivation and trafficking.

By contrast, there is talk of pursuing policies of mutual respect and non-interference, which may signal a desire to reduce the flow of mutual accusations; and of implementing economic and social projects in the troubled areas.

And - perhaps the most notable concrete development - a smaller, regularly meeting jirga will be set up to consolidate the other aims and promote dialogue with "opposition", although it is not stated whom this refers to.

Iran's disruptive hold over Afghanistan is rising

The Daily Star 08/14/2007 By Amin Tarzi

The guardians of the Islamic republican system in Iran are continuing their quest to ensure the existence of Iran's clerical regime. To eliminate potential existential threats, these guardians have gradually entered yet another arena in which to confront their adversaries: Afghanistan.

Iran has played a positive role in increasing Afghanistan's economic and political development. However, its underhanded and multidimensional meddling in Afghanistan's internal affairs is increasing. A brief look at key recent events provides insight into the motivations behind the Islamic Republic's current support, as well as the unspoken threat of further support, for the myriad insurgent groups - the neo-Taliban - opposing the current state of affairs in Afghanistan.

The appearance of traceable sophisticated weapons and Iranian-produced assault rifles, mortars and plastic explosives in Afghanistan provides evidence of Iran's direct support to the neo-Taliban. Until recently, the explosively-formed penetrators had primarily been seen in Iraq. These weapons, capable of piercing armor, are now being used against NATO forces in Afghanistan, compliments of Iran. If Iran did not want its involvement known it could have supplied untraceable weapons. The introduction of marked weapons into the Afghan theater was purposeful, sending a message of Iran's ability to destabilize western Afghanistan.

Reports of territorial violations also began surfacing earlier this year. Afghan officials accuse their western neighbor of repeatedly violating Afghan airspace as well as of conducting armed incursions into Afghan territory. Furthermore, a former Afghan provincial governor alleges that the Islamic Republic has been hosting a training camp, identified as Shamsabad, for opponents of the Afghan government. These infringements on Afghan sovereignty challenge the efficacy of the central authority in Kabul and its international backers.

These two examples provide insight into the hold Iran has over Afghanistan and why it has sought this position of

influence. While most consider Pakistan to be Afghanistan's most troublesome neighbor, one would be remiss if Iran did not enter into the equation. Amid persistent claims of Pakistan's fingerprints all over the neo-Taliban, Afghan President Hamid Karzai could hardly afford another blow to his central authority. Yet Iran, the "exemplary" neighbor, removed any subtlety in its message to both the Karzai administration and the international community by revealing its hand in arms shipments and territorial violations. Although Iran has denied all allegations and lamented the "unfortunate" resurgence of the Taliban, it knows the value of its actions.

One must remember that Iran's hold on Afghanistan is much stronger than Pakistan's. Iran has infiltrated much of the current power structure. In the 1980s, Iran cultivated strong political and military alliances with several fronts inside Afghanistan as well as with Afghan resistance groups based in Iran and Pakistan. Some of Iran's key Afghan assets hold principal posts in Karzai's administration, Afghanistan's Parliament and the intelligence community. Because of this, Iran is capable of exerting pressure when it suits its needs.

The expulsion of approximately 100,000 Afghan refugees from Iran is an example of Iran's ability to apply political pressure. Iran claimed that it had the legal right to expel what it considered illegal refugees. This triggered a humanitarian nightmare for Afghanistan and prompted the Parliament to sack two of Karzai's loyal Cabinet ministers. After Karzai requested leniency, the Iranian authorities agreed to slow down repatriation efforts.

The refugee expulsion gave Iran three advantages. First, Tehran was able to demonstrate to Kabul that it could wreak havoc within reasonably legal grounds if it so desired; second, Iran was able to portray the refugee crisis as reflecting the inadequacy of Western-sponsored democracy in Afghanistan. And third and perhaps most dangerous in tactical calculations, Iran may have slipped any number of its own agents into the throngs of returning refugees. These refugees lacked identity papers because, as some Afghan refugees have claimed, the Iranian authorities ripped up their documents even though some had identity cards that allowed them to stay in Iran legally. The sea of refugees without identity cards constituted the perfect cover for Iranian agents to penetrate into Afghanistan.

Iran's actions in Afghanistan appear to be part of a calculated plan to give Tehran an advantage in its efforts to safeguard the regime and its aspirations. As international pressure has mounted against the regime's nuclear ambitions, Iran has ramped up its campaign in Afghanistan, selecting a strange bedfellow - the staunchly Sunni neo-Taliban. Yet Shiite Iran has frequently established political alliances based on expediency. Consider its relationships with Gulbuddin Hekmatyar and Ahmad Shah Massoud. These have proved useful in Iran's efforts to control its environment.

The airspace violations, dispatch of traceable light weapons and EPFs to the neo-Taliban and possible presence of covert agents inside Afghanistan are further reminders to NATO and other international forces stationed in Afghanistan of Iran's ability to create instability. If Iran's nuclear facilities are attacked or if the country is brought under severe economic and political pressure because of its nuclear activities or other misdeeds, Iran can and will make life difficult for the foreign forces in Afghanistan.

In Iran's calculation, the current regime's security rests in having a nuclear capability. Until that time, Tehran has created pressure points to dissuade Western powers, especially the United States, and other perceived enemies from challenging the authority of the regime. Iran is using Afghanistan to showcase its might and its ability to create a scenario worse than Iraq for the US and others. If we are not careful, Afghanistan may once again find itself the pawn in a "great game."

Amin Tarzi is director of Middle East studies at the Marine Corps University, Quantico, Virginia. The opinions and conclusions expressed here do not necessarily represent the views of either the Marine Corps University or any other governmental agency. This commentary first appeared at bitterlemons-international.org, an online newsletter.

Snub to the US as Karzai forges local ties

The Times, UK 08/14/2007 By Bronwen Maddox - You can't fault Hamid Karzai, the President of Afghanistan, for ambition. Yesterday at a summit with President Ahmadinejad of Iran he said that his country might be able to bridge the divide between the US and Iran. Never mind that no other broker has managed that since the 1979 Iranian revolution. The feat would go some way to offset Afghanistan's most significant influence on the wider world, as supplier of nine tenths of its heroin.

But although American intransigence towards Iran shows only occasional signs of softening, it is not a ridiculous proposition, but simply one unlikely to go far. Iran has clear interests in stopping the drugs trade too, and its claims to have been helpful are justified, for all the US's dismissive scepticism. The mere fact of the summit in Kabul is a rebuff by Karzai to the US, let alone the warmth of his welcome. "Afghanistan has strong ties with Iran – we share the same religion and language," Karzai said yesterday. The summit follows his bitter demands that the US rein back immediately on military operations that have caused significant civilian casualties, because of the anger rising in the country towards a foreign presence.

Indeed, it is one in a long list of ways in which Karzai has set out to demonstrate his independence from his Western supporters, not least replacing a governor of the opium-ridden Helmand province, whom British forces had found particularly sympathetic to their goals, with one distinctly less helpful. It is a less extreme form of the equivocation that President Musharraf of Pakistan has practised for eight years and which is now unravelling.

In the joint press conference, Ahmadinejad claimed that "for us, a strong and stable Afghanistan is the best option", adding that "the security of Afghanistan has a primary impact on Iran because we have long borders".

This should be uncontroversial, although the US disputes it. The US-led invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq have replaced two regimes hostile to Iran -- the Taleban and Saddam Hussein -- with two much more sympathetic ones. "From our point of view, this is great progress," a senior Iranian official said after Saddam fell.

The instability that most intimately affects Iran is the drug trafficking, and it has lost more than 3,000 members of its security forces trying to stem the convoys of brand-new 4x4 vehicles tearing across southern Afghanistan.

Last week, at the US State Department's launch of its new Plan to Control Narcotics in Afghanistan (like a recent British briefing, an attempt to preempt a forthcoming UN report that opium crops have reached record levels), senior officials were pressed on why the US refused to work with Iran on this issue when Britain was prepared to do so. John Walters, US Director of National Drug Control Policy, acknowledged that America has "other issues with Iran" that made a relationship impossible.

One issue is Iran's nuclear ambitions, although Britain, which shares America's concern, has not found that a barrier to dealing with Tehran on Afghanistan. A second, harder to pin down, is the US's suspicion that Iran is supplying weapons to the Taleban, including a particularly lethal form of roadside bomb, with the aim of undermining Western efforts at stabilisation. US officials say that Iranian weapons are entering Afghanistan in such quantities that it is hard to believe that Tehran is unaware, even if it is not ordering the deliveries.

Asked about the accusations, Ahmadinejad said yesterday: "I strongly doubt that -- there is no truth in it". He has previously pointed out that Shia Iran nearly went to war with the profoundly Sunni Taleban in the late 1990s and has no interest in seeing them back.

It would be wrong for the US to deny Iran's understandable -- even legitimate -- interests in its near neighbours. It is unnecessarily provocative to deny the real help it has given Afghanistan over drugs.

The predicament of the US is that, in Afghanistan and Iraq, countries where it had hoped to install a government that would see the world its way, local ties will compete with any sense of an obligation to the West.

Canadians shortening rifles to fit Afghan soldiers

ALEX DOBROTA - From Wednesday's Globe and Mail August 15, 2007

CAMP SHIRAZ, AFGHANISTAN — A shipment of modern rifles destined for the ill-equipped Afghan National Army is being delayed in part by the shorter size of its soldiers, suggested the Canadian officer in charge of training them.

Designed for the taller Canadian troops, the butts of the C-7 assault rifles must first be shortened to fit the height of the Afghan troops, said Lieutenant-Colonel Wayne Eyre, the commander of the Operational Mentoring and Liaison Team.

"Afghan soldiers are a little shorter than Canadian soldiers," he said. "So you want a shorter butt stock on it."

Other bureaucratic considerations that regulate the international transfer of arms are also hampering the shipment eagerly awaited by the ANA, Col. Eyre said.

Last week, Lt.-Col. Sherinshaw Kohbandi, commander of the ANA's 2nd Kandak, or battalion, said former defence minister Gordon O'Connor had personally promised to equip Afghan soldiers with C-7 rifles earlier this year.

The weapons would give Afghan soldiers an upper hand over Taliban fighters, by providing them with an upgrade to the Soviet-era AK-47 rifle, a weapon in widespread use across the region.

Colonel Abdul Basir, the commander of a Kandahar brigade, which includes several kandaks, said he expects the new weapons to arrive by the end of next month, when a new kandak will begin training. About one kandak, or fewer than 500 soldiers, is now ready for battle in Kandahar province.

But Col. Eyre - and Lt.-Col. Stéphane Lafaut, who is set to take the helm of the OMLT today - refused to commit to a fixed timetable on the delivery of the C-7s. "They're going through a process in Ottawa with technology transfer," Col. Eyre said. "They're going through the bureaucracy."

Afghan women storm male bastion

By Tahir Qadiry - MAZAR-E-SHARIF (Afghanistan): Women have stormed a male bastion in this historic city, capital of the northern province of Balkh, and traditionalists are clicking their tongues in disapproval.

For the first time, five women have opened shops in Mazar under an initiative

promoted by the provincial Women’s Affairs Department. The head of the

department, Friba Majid, said a big market exclusively run by women will open here in the coming months.

The shops, some located close to the stunning, nearly five-century old Rawze-e-Sharif or Blue Mosque, stock mainly women’s things and some food items.

“Women feel comfortable coming and purchasing from us,” says Kamila who used to

work with a non-governmental organisation before she opened the shop. “Some

families are very strict and don’t let their women enter shops run by men,” she adds.

Mazar-e-Sharif is Afghanistan’s fourth largest city with a population of 300,600 people, according to a 2006 estimate. It is linked by roads to Kabul in the south-east, Herat to the west, and Uzbekistan in the north.

During Afghanistan’s tumultuous war years, between the Soviet invasion in 1979 and the fall of the Taliban in end-2001, Mazar was a theatre of bloody conflict.

The scars of the brutal war years are yet to heal, but Balkh province has made

advances in restoring the rights of citizens. Women are back at the workplace and girls are in schools after years of being forced to stay within the high walls around their houses.

“Men and women have equal rights,” asserts Majid of the Women’s Affairs

Department. “We want women to take part in political and social spheres. We want them to improve their economy. Women are not only for sitting at home and doing housework,” she says.

Pointing out that the women-run shops will improve women’s lifestyles, she asks

rhetorically: “Why shouldn’t they be allowed to deal with their own gender?”

For 34-year-old Nasima Jalal in Mazar the new shops are a boon. Her husband is very strict and religious, she explains. “I cannot buy my things from shops run by men. But now, I am very happy. I am free to do my shopping in these shops run by women,” she says.

Afghan society is inherently patriarchal. Women’s rights are ignored. Many are

forced into early marriages, or live with violent husbands who torture, beat and imprison them.

“Women have suffered a lot in Afghanistan,” rues Malalai Usmani, head of a Balkh women’s organisation that defends women’s rights.

Raqiba, 40, who runs a shop, says she has a lot of customers. “I am very happy to be a shopkeeper. I have always wanted to be one, but I thought it would be tough in such a strict environment. Today, I feel no fear and think we women can do anything”, she says very optimistically.

Equally, she relishes her new found financial independence. “I invested $500 in this shop. Now I make $10 or more every day, which is quite good,” this former

supervisor of a community project says modestly.

Her only complaint, however, is about the attitude of men. “Some men come here and make fun of us. They say how is it possible for women to run shops?” she said, “I get pissed off and quarrel with them.”

Indeed, traditionalists are shocked to see women enter a profession that has been an exclusively male preserve. Fortunately, liberal voices are also being heard. Mawlawi Tahir Mofid, a prominent intellectual, remarks: “Islam has welcomed women taking part in business. We can cite an example of our prophet’s wife who was doing business with the prophet.”

He describes the initiative as a “good step” to encourage women to take part in social affairs. Balkh’s Women’s Affairs Department is briskly proceeding with plans for the women’s-only market. “We have laid the foundation stone,” says Majid. “It will have more than 200 shops. It will be built very soon,” she adds.

Maybe Mazar-e-Sharif is on its way to reclaiming some of its lost glory, mused a resident. Before the war years, it was a liberal place with a university that attracted students from all over the country.

Most people who lived here were migrants from the neighbouring provinces,

prospering on the local economy dominated by agriculture.—Dawn/The IPS News

Service

[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.]