In this bulletin:

• Musharraf admits border problems
• Pakistan to Fence Border With Afghanistan
• U.N. rights chief attacks amnesty for Afghan warlords
• UNAMA – Statement on the Wolesi Jirga Resolution of 31 January
• Amnesty is sought for Afghan war leaders
• Afghanistan ponders amnesty
• Increase in troops to Afghanistan
• Clash in western Afghanistan kills at least 12 suspected militants: police
• Afghan rebels behead 'spy'
• Afghan FM met German Chancellor
• Afghan FM met UK Senior Officials
• U.S. House Speaker Calls for More European Aid for Afghanistan
• `Accelerate' aid, Afghan envoy says
• Plenty of Afghan reconstruction info on internet: minister
• Quick action urged on Afghan drugs to head off AIDS
• Afghan registration in Pakistan tops 2 million mark
• "Pak's help is crucial in winning Afghan war"
• Facts on the ground in Pakistan
• An Afghan’s Path From Ally of U.S. to Drug Suspect
• Destroying poppies isn't path to Afghan stability

Musharraf admits border problems – BBC

Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf has conceded that some border security forces have been letting Taleban fighters cross into Afghanistan. He said that there had been incidents in which guards had turned "a blind eye" to the militants. He again denied that his intelligence services were helping the Taleban.

The Afghan government and Nato forces have been critical of border security and called on Pakistan to do more to curb cross-border militant activity.

The president has also come under fire for pacts with tribal militants in the North and South Waziristan areas. Critics say the deals give Taleban fighters based there freedom to go where they please.

"We had some incidents I know of that in some [border] posts, a blind eye was being turned," President Musharraf told a press conference in Rawalpindi when asked about criticism of Pakistan's role in the US-led war on terror. "So similarly I imagine that others may be doing the same."

The president said that it would be difficult for two border guards on a typical check post on the Afghan border when they are faced with a group of "20 well-armed, well-trained and well-motivated people challenging them".

The BBC's Haroon Rashid on a recent visit to the South Waziristan region met tribal militants allied to the Taleban who openly admitted crossing over into Afghanistan to fight foreign troops.

Gen Musharraf repeated Pakistani complaints that his country was being made "a scapegoat" for the resurgence of Taleban-led militants. He pointed out that Afghan authorities, and US and Nato-led troops in Afghanistan shared responsibility for the border.

"A misperception is being created that the resurgence of Taleban is from Pakistan. This is absolutely wrong. The resurgence of the Taleban is in Afghanistan, but some support goes from Pakistan," he said.

The president also gave details of Pakistan's plans to build a fence along the Afghan border. He said it would be 35kms (22 miles) long and that the first phase would see fencing erected at seven or eight locations along Pakistan's northwest frontier, which would take a "few months" to be completed.

"The decision has been taken and movement of logistics must be taking place at the moment," he said. President Musharraf said mines would not be used in the first phase because of concerns raised by the international community.

But he said that it was possible that fencing and mines would be used to secure 250kms (150 miles) of the frontier further south, in Balochistan province.

"No one has the right to criticise unless they come up with an alternative solution ... if there is no (other) solution, we will do it our way," the president said.

Turning to relations with India, the president said that confidence-building measures under the peace process that began three years ago were going well.

He said that he was "fairly optimistic" that the two governments would be able to move forward to resolve all issues in dispute, including the Kashmir question.

"Our relations have never been this good before in our history, and we ought to be happy about that," he said.

Pakistan to Fence Border With Afghanistan
By MATTHEW PENNINGTON 02.02.07, 6:46 AM ET

Pakistan will erect fencing to reinforce parts of its porous mountain border with Afghanistan, President Gen. Pervez Musharraf said Friday, while acknowledging for the first time that some outgunned Pakistani frontier guards have allowed militants to cross.

However, Musharraf denied that the Pakistani army or intelligence service was actively supporting Taliban militants, who have stepped up attacks in Afghanistan over the past year, sparking fighting that has killed thousands.

"There is no question of anyone abetting, but there are people at the tactical level who turn a blind eye ... and that needs to be corrected," Musharraf told reporters at his army office.

Musharraf had proposed fencing and mining the border under Western pressure to do more to prevent Taliban and al-Qaida militants from using Pakistan's wild borderlands as a base for operations against Afghan and foreign troops on the other side.

A first phase would see fencing erected along seven or eight locations - a total of 22 miles along Pakistan's northwest frontier - and would take "a few months," Musharraf said. "The decision has been taken and movement of logistics must be taking place at the moment."

He said mines would not be used in the initial phase because of concerns raised by the international community. However, he said plans for a second phase still foresaw using both fencing and mines to secure 150 miles of the frontier further south, in Pakistan's Baluchistan province.

"No one has the right to criticize unless they come up with an alternative solution ... if there is no (other) solution, we will do it our way," Musharraf said. There was no immediate comment from Afghan officials Friday.

Musharraf also repeated Pakistani complaints that it is being used as a scapegoat for the resurgence of Taliban-led militants. Afghan authorities and U.S. and NATO-led troops in Afghanistan shared responsibility for the border, he said.

"A misperception is being created that the resurgence of Taliban is from Pakistan. This is absolutely wrong. The resurgence of the Taliban is in Afghanistan, but some support goes from Pakistan," he said.

Pakistan had helped foreign forces "eliminate" Mullah Akhtar Mohammad Osmani - a top lieutenant of Taliban leader Mullah Omar - in Afghanistan's southern Helmand province, just across the border from Pakistan, Musharraf said.

U.S. military officials in Afghanistan have privately said that Pakistan helped them locate Osmani, who died in an airstrike in December. He was the highest-ranking militant killed there since the ouster of the hardline regime in 2001.

"You could not have done this unless ISI cooperated," Musharraf said, referring to Pakistan's powerful Inter-Services Intelligence, which is accused by Afghanistan of backing the militia.

Musharraf, a key ally in the U.S.-led war on terror, revealed that three times a top Taliban military commander, Mullah Dadullah, had been inside Pakistan but evaded capture.

"Thrice we tried to get him, and thrice we failed," he said, adding that the attempts were the fruits of intelligence cooperation with Pakistan's anti-terror allies. "It was a combined failure," he said.

While he denied any official Pakistani collusion with militants, Musharraf acknowledged that there had been cases of security forces at isolated posts at the frontier letting fighters pass.

"We had some incidents and I know that in some posts a blind eye was turned, so similarly I would imagine that others may be doing the same thing," he said, adding that he had personally chaired a meeting that examined such reports.

He cited an example of two guards, located 500 yards from their section base, being outnumbered by around 20 highly trained and motivated al-Qaida militants.

Pakistan would give extra security to such frontier troops so they "feel strong enough and secure enough to check (people at the border) and that they won't be killed," he said.

Copyright 2006 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed

U.N. rights chief attacks amnesty for Afghan warlords

The Associated Press - Friday, February 2, 2007

GENEVA - The United Nations human rights chief Friday criticized a plan by Afghanistan's parliament to grant an amnesty to warlords and others accused of war crimes in a quarter-century of bloodshed in the country.

The measure, passed by the Afghan parliament Wednesday and aimed at promoting national reconciliation, could lead to warlords who committed serious war crimes going unpunished, the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights Louise Arbour said.

"Those responsible for serious human rights violations must be brought to justice," said Arbour. "Experience has shown time and again that effective and durable national reconciliation must be based on respect for international human rights standards and the rule of law, and must not come at their expense."

The parliamentary resolution, which said "all opponents ... should forgive each other and they should not be dealt with through legal and judicial channels," stands in contrast to a peace plan launched by Afghan President Hamid Karzai in December that foresees no amnesty for war crimes, crimes against humanity and gross human rights violations.

"The voices of the victims must be heard and they have spoken out clearly for the culture of impunity in Afghanistan to end", Arbour said.

UNAMA – Statement on the Wolesi Jirga Resolution of 31 January

Source: United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan (UNAMA)

KABUL (February 1, 2007) – The United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan has taken note of yesterday's debate and resolution in the Wolesi Jirga on national stability, which comes in the wake of other recent contributions to the essential discussion among Afghans about strengthening national unity and reconciliation while addressing the legacy of the past.

The struggle and sacrifice of the Afghan people in their quest for peace, freedom, independence and a better life over twenty-five years of conflict deserve full recognition. In this regard, UNAMA is keen to ensure that the rights of victims remain at the heart of this debate. For any process of national reconciliation to succeed the suffering of victims must be acknowledged and impunity tackled. No one has the right to forgive those responsible for human rights violations other than the victims themselves.

International experience shows that truth is vital to reconciliation. As a consequence, the search for truth and the rights of victims are central elements of Afghanistan's Action Plan on Peace, Reconciliation, and Justice. In implementing this plan, which is fully endorsed by the Afghan Government and required by the Afghanistan Compact, the Afghan people have the full backing of their international partners, including the United Nations.

Afghanistan's Constitution guarantees for all its citizens the right to freedom of expression. Contributions from all quarters to this debate about dealing with the past are healthy, and should be encouraged.

Amnesty is sought for Afghan war leaders

By Rahim Faiez, Associated Press  |  February 2, 2007

KABUL, Afghanistan -- Parliament has voted for an amnesty for leaders accused of war crimes during a quarter-century of fighting, arguing that it would help heal the deep divisions in Afghanistan.

The amnesty resolution, passed in the lower house Wednesday, covers the mujahideen leaders who led the resistance against the Soviet occupation of the 1980s and later turned their weapons on one another, plunging the country into civil war.

Sayed Mustafa Kazmi, a lawmaker who backed the resolution, said it was aimed at fostering national unity. But rights activists have called for Afghanistan's factional leaders and warlords to face prosecution for the massacres and torture they allegedly committed in their struggle for power, especially during the 1992-96 civil war.

Only justice, the rights advocates say, will heal the wounds of Afghanistan's traumatic past. But justice for the warlords would come at a political price. Several of the accused hold prominent positions in parliament and in the government of President Hamid Karzai, who has shown little enthusiasm for charging them with war crimes.

The United Nations reacted coolly to the amnesty. For national reconciliation to succeed "the suffering of victims must be acknowledged and impunity tackled," the UN mission in Afghanistan said. "No one has the right to forgive those responsible for human rights violations other than the victims themselves."

The resolution follows a report from Human Rights Watch calling for Afghan officials -- including Vice President Karim Khalili and Army Chief of Staff Abdul Rashid Dostum -- to face trial before a special court.

Human Rights Watch also listed Energy Minister Ismail Khan and former president Burhanuddin Rabbani as among the "worst perpetrators."

Afghanistan ponders amnesty

Resolution urges government to grant immunity to those accused of war crimes
Feb 02, 2007 - Carlotta Gall, New York Times

KABUL–Afghanistan's lower house of parliament has approved a non-binding resolution urging the government to grant immunity to all Afghans involved in the wars of the last 25 years.

The move brought protests yesterday from human rights advocates and the UN mission in Afghanistan, which had been working with the government on a plan to address the many abuses of the last three decades.

Lawmakers said the resolution was passed in the interest of peace and stability and was intended to include even the fugitive Taliban leader, Mullah Muhammad Omar, and the renegade mujahideen leader Gulbuddin Hekmatyar.

It was approved just days after Afghan President Hamid Karzai began work on the government's reconciliation plan. He said he was ready to hold talks with Taliban leaders as Afghanistan braces for a spring offensive by insurgents linked to the Taliban. The resolution is not a law. It was not scheduled to proceed to the upper house of parliament or to the president. But it is a public expression of the views of those who advocate one approach to reconciliation, legislators said.

The lower house of Parliament, which includes many former militants and mujahideen commanders and a handful of former members of the Taliban government and the earlier Communist leadership, passed the resolution by a show of hands on Wednesday.

The resolution had been proposed by a group of former mujahideen leaders and Nur ul-Hag Ulumi, a former Communist general who served during the Soviet occupation. A small number of liberal and democratic legislators left the chamber in protest before the vote.

Despite the language about immunity, Ulumi said the resolution was not intended to advocate pardoning criminals. "This is just an invitation for peace," he said.

The measure says that those who took up arms in the past should be free from prosecution and that those who had fought the current government should be allowed to join the reconciliation process if they accept the constitution and the laws of the land.

The UN Assistance Mission in Afghanistan issued a statement questioning the impartiality of a resolution passed by political and factional leaders.

"For any process of national reconciliation to succeed, the suffering of victims must be acknowledged and impunity tackled,'' the statement said. "No one has the right to forgive those responsible for human rights violations other than the victims themselves."

Increase in troops to Afghanistan - BBC

Britain is to increase its military presence in southern Afghanistan by about 800 troops to 5,800. Defence Secretary Des Browne, who made the announcement, said the extra troops would be in place by late summer.

But the UK's overall deployment in Afghanistan will only increase by 300 because the military is also reducing its presence in Kabul by 500 personnel. The British troops are part of a 32,000-strong Nato force which is currently based in Afghanistan.

Britain's presence in the capital Kabul is to be reduced this weekend as it hands over command of the Nato-led International Security Assistance Force to the US. Britain will still have 140 British personnel stationed in Kabul to assist the ISAF.

The change in troop numbers come as 3 Commando Brigade of the Royal Marines prepares to end its tour of duty in Helmand in April.

Mr Browne made the troop announcement in a written statement to MPs, in which he also confirmed that 3 Commando will be replaced by units drawn mainly from 12 Mechanised Brigade.

He also said that Harrier GR7 and GR9 jets, Apache attack helicopters, Viking all-terrain vehicles and Royal Engineer support units which are currently stationed in Helmand will remain there until April 2009.

Around 600 call-out notices are to be served on reservists, which will lead to around 420 posts being taken up.

Former Nato Secretary-General Lord Carrington has previously accused France and Germany of "not pulling their weight" by providing troops for the south of the country, where the Taleban still has control over large areas.

Mr Browne's announcement comes as the US presented its first consignment of new military equipment to the Afghan army. The consignment includes more than 200 Humvee armoured vehicles, 800 heavy army trucks and thousands of rifles.

The BBC's Alastair Leithead said many other countries do have troops in Afghanistan but also have "rules and regulations" which prevent them from going into the south, where the bulk of the fighting takes place.

Shadow defence secretary Liam Fox said there were "serious questions" about why Britain was taking an increased role when other countries in Nato were not doing the same.

"There have to be serious questions raised about why the British Army are shouldering yet more of the burden down in the south of Afghanistan," he said.

"It cannot be acceptable that British taxpayers are funding a greater proportion of the cost and the British military are shouldering a greater part of the burden in the most dangerous part of the country.

"Where are our Nato allies? This is simply not an acceptable long term position. "It is absolutely outrageous that when we have the concept of shared security we don't have properly shared risk."

Lib Dem defence secretary, Nick Harvey, said: "There is a real danger of our troops suffering from a mismatch between the commitments we are taking on around the world and the resources available to us.

"By setting up a framework to withdraw our troops from Iraq we would be able to sustain our presence in Afghanistan without leaving British soldiers suffering from the effects of overstretch."

Clash in western Afghanistan kills at least 12 suspected militants: police - Canadian Press - Friday, February 02, 2007

KABUL (AP) - Afghan police clashed with suspected militants in western Afghanistan on Friday, killing at least 12 of the fighters, officials said.

Gen. Abdul Rahman, head of Afghanistan's border police, said 12 militants died in the fight. However, Gen. Mohammad Daud Ahmadi, a border police official in Farah province, said 25 were killed. The reason for the discrepancy was not immediately clear.

Three policemen were wounded during the six-hour battle in Delaram district of Farah province, said Ahmadi. NATO-led troops confirmed a clash took place in the area but did not provide any details.

The clash started after militants attacked the border policemen from three directions, Ahmadi said. Police sent reinforcements, and NATO also sent fighter aircraft to the scene, he said.

U.S.-led coalition troops, meanwhile, said they killed up to seven suspected militants in Bermel district in eastern Paktika province on Friday, a statement said.

The coalition forces spotted a group setting up rockets before firing mortars and calling in air strikes, the statement said. Aircraft dropped two bombs on the militants, the statement said.

Two of the fighters were confirmed killed, while the other five were suspected to have been killed, it said.

Violence in Afghanistan has risen sharply over the last year. Some 4,000 people died in insurgency-related violence last year, according to a count by The Associated Press based on numbers from Afghan, NATO and U.S. officials.

Afghan rebels behead 'spy'

SUSPECTED militants beheaded a man and dumped his body in a tribal region near the Afghan border, leaving a note on the corpse accusing him of spying for the United States.

Villagers found the man's decapitated body in a ditch at the side of a road near Ghulam Khan, a frontier town in the North Waziristan tribal area. A note found with the body said: "Those who spy for America will meet this fate."

Afghan FM met German Chancellor

Posted On MoFA site, Kabul: Feb 01, 2007

On the last day of his official visit to Germany, Afghanistan’s foreign minister Dr. Spanta met with German Chancellor Angela Merkel .At the meeting Dr. Spanta expressed Afghanistan’s full appreciation to Germany’s generous support to Afghanistan in recent years. Referring to the long history of the two countries’ bilateral relations and also Afghans’ goodwill to Germany, the Afghan FM invited Germany to increase its role in the process of stabilization, reconstruction and democratisation of Afghanistan. On her part , the German chancellor expressed her satisfaction of the Afghanistan’s achievements since the collapse of the Taliban’s regime and reiterated Germany’s full support to help Afghanistan to overcome its remaining challenges. In another development, Afghan minister also the Foreign Policy Advisor to German Chancellor.

Afghan FM met UK Senior Officials

Posted On MoFA site, Kabul Feb 01, 2007 - On his first official visit to the UK Afghanistan’s foreign minister, Dr. Spanta met separately with the UK Defence and Foreign Secretaries. He also met with a number of UK MPs, UK Under-Secretary for International Development and Foreign Policy Advisor to the UK Prime Minister. In these meetings, Dr. Spanta expressed Afghanistan’s appreciation for the UK’s sustained and generous support to Afghanistan since the collapse of the Taliban’s regime. By referring to the UK’s constructive involvement in different fields, Dr. Spanta assured the British officials of the prospect of success in Afghanistan, despite the remaining challenges. Dr. Spatna expressed hope that some other members of the international community follow the UK in pursuing robust military presence, generous financial supports and the UK’s policy of directing 70% of its assistance via the Afghan Government.

On their parts, the British officials reiterated of the UK’s long-term commitment to the process of stabilisation, reconstruction and democratisation of Afghanistan.        

U.S. House Speaker Calls for More European Aid for Afghanistan

House of Representatives delegation criticizes new Iraq strategy - By David McKeeby - USINFO Staff Writer

Washington – A delegation of U.S. lawmakers is calling for more international help to rebuild Afghanistan and also is criticizing the Bush administration’s new strategy for Iraq.

Afghanistan is “a fight that needs our concerted effort and that of NATO nations,” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi told reporters at a January 30 press conference, “but we need much more of an effort.”  

Pelosi, a California Democrat, took leadership of the U.S. House of Representatives January 4 following her party’s triumph in the November 2006 elections.  She and a group composed of five other Democratic and one Republican congressmen discussed their recent trip to meet with leaders in Kuwait, Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan, and saluted U.S. diplomatic and military personnel. 

“Sadly, the war in Afghanistan is far from over,” she said, characterizing the struggle to defeat remaining militants and help the Afghan people rebuild their country as “a forgotten war” overshadowed by ongoing operations in Iraq.

NATO member states must honor their pledges to dedicate more troops to the International Security Assistance Force, which took over from the U.S.-led coalition in Afghanistan in 2006, Pelosi said, and join the United States in redoubling efforts to support Afghan President Hamid Karzai’s government.

“For years, we have been calling for NATO to take over the Afghan mission,” Congressman Tom Lantos, a California Democrat who heads the House Foreign Affairs Committee, said.  “And while, technically, NATO has done so, NATO has done so in a half-hearted, unsatisfactory, shabby fashion.”

Lantos criticized the limitations placed on NATO forces from Germany, France, Italy and Spain. These limitations, he said, complicated allied commanders’ jobs and unfairly placed the burden of the mission on forces from Canada, Denmark, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom and the United States.  “It is an outrage that this gigantic military alliance cannot provide the troops necessary to win this battle, which is an eminently winnable battle.” 

“I'm disappointed that our NATO partners haven't done a better job in putting more folks into Afghanistan,” Representative Ike Skelton, a Democrat from Missouri who heads the House Armed Services Committee, said.  “The NATO partners have committed themselves to the fight, and they must step up with more forces.” 

Members of the delegation emphasized that the alliance must do more to help Afghanistan secure its border. “There are many things the Pakistanis are doing well,” Lantos said, “but it is self-evident that they have not yet succeeded in closing the frontier to Taliban terrorist groups … Pakistan will have to do better.” 

Ohio Republican David Hobson agreed, adding that NATO also should help the Afghan government eradicate the booming opium trade that is disrupting Afghanistan’s recovery and flooding Europe’s streets with heroin. 

“The military effort against the Taliban is not over, and more troops are needed, and our NATO and European partners have got to do their fair share,” he said.

Pelosi characterized the current situation in Iraq as catastrophic and strongly criticized the Bush administration’s plan to “surge” thousands more troops into Baghdad and al-Anbar province to help the democratically elected Iraqi government bring sectarian violence under control.

`Accelerate' aid, Afghan envoy says

A year after world pledged $10.5 billion, Canada sees progress and dangers ahead

February 01, 2007 - bruce campion-smith, Toronto Star - ottawa bureau

OTTAWA–Canada and the international community must be "more aggressive" in boosting development efforts in Afghanistan, says that country's top diplomat in Ottawa.

Speaking on the first anniversary of the Afghanistan Compact, an ambitious strategy meant to improve the country's security and economy, Ambassador Omar Samad said nations must now "accelerate" the implementation of that plan.

"We have to be more aggressive in terms of development aid ... and in making sure that the Afghan people feel that this compact ... is making a real difference in their lives," Samad said.

He made his remarks on Parliament Hill with Foreign Affairs Minister Peter MacKay in an appearance meant to tout the progress made so far in Afghanistan.

At a London conference a year ago, Canada joined nearly 70 other nations and international bodies to pledge $10.5 billion (U.S.) to help Afghanistan fight poverty, improve security and crack down on the drug trade.

Canada's investments in Kandahar – development spending will rise to $20 million this year, up from $16 million last year – are already producing "tangible, touchable" signs of progress," MacKay said.

"You can see that dams (are) being built for greater irrigation and access to water supply," as well as roads to bring crops and goods to market and that bridges must be built to improve mobility around the country, he said.

But there were notes of caution sounded too, as Samad called 2007 a "critical" year in his country's transformation from war-ravaged nation to stable democracy.

"Thousands of Afghans have laid down their arms and joined this process. There are still thousands more who haven't. Amongst those are hard-core Taliban leaders who we don't expect to change," Samad said.

It's the resilience of those hard-core fighters that has sparked fears of a spring offensive – once snows melt in mountain passes and the weather improves – aimed at disrupting the work of allied troops, including 2,500 Canadians based in Kandahar.

"Traditionally in the winter, the insurgency reduces somewhat but based on our experience in past years I think they will mount a challenge in the spring again," said David Sproule, Canada's ambassador in Afghanistan.

"We are prepared for that," he told reporters in a telephone call from Berlin, where he was attending a meeting of nations involved in the compact.

Canadian troops are braced for a spring insurgent offensive but are hoping the progress they've made over the last year will take the punch out of the predicted attacks, said Col. Eric Tremblay, director of current operations for the Canadian Forces.

The big difference is that the Canadians, who moved into the Kandahar region almost a year ago, have pushed into rural areas along with Afghan security forces, where they are in regular contact with tribal elders and community leaders, Tremblay said.

In Afghanistan, NATO commanders said yesterday their success at removing key Taliban leaders has had an impact as well. Brig.-Gen. Richard Nugee, of NATO's International Security Assistance Force, said it will be NATO troops who will be launching the real offensive, referring to coming military operations but giving no details.

NATO allies are also examining ways to shore up and expand the Afghan border police to combat the influx of Taliban insurgents from Pakistan, a senior Canadian officer told Canadian Press.

"It's going to take a lot of work and a lot of effort to build up a robust network of surveillance and presence on this side of the border," said Col. Mike Kampman, chief of staff to Brig.-Gen. Ton van Loon, commander of coalition forces in southern Afghanistan.

A consensus seems to be building among NATO partners for each country to take over responsibility for the improvement of the border police in its own province. For example, Canada could take a lead role in Kandahar province, while the British handle volatile Helmand province, Kampman said.

This year, Sproule said Canada will focus its efforts in Kandahar on building new infrastructure, improving the justice system and boosting the Afghan national police force. with files from Associated Press

Plenty of Afghan reconstruction info on internet: minister

February 1, 2007 - CBC News - Canada has pledged to spend about $100 million to help Afghanistan rebuild itself and the federal government website is the best place for details, the minister in charge of international development said Thursday.

Josée Verner, minister of international co-operation, said in question period in Ottawa that the government is being accountable for funding it has announced for reconstruction projects in Afghanistan.

Michael Ignatieff, a Toronto Liberal MP, asked Verner how the government is tracking its reconstruction money in the troubled country.

"Canada has earmarked millions of dollars for development [in] Afghanistan but we are completely in the dark about how that money is being spent," Ignatieff said in French.

"Can the minister of international co-operation tell us what accountability measures are in place to ensure that the money invested in reconstruction is properly spent and getting to the Afghan people?" he asked.

Verner said the answer is a few clicks away. "As you know, the Canadian government has made a commitment to helping with reconstruction in Afghanistan," she said. "I would invite the member to consult the internet site to see what we are doing to help Afghanistan and you will see the results that we have obtained."

Canada has said it will spend close to $1 billion over 10 years in Afghanistan to rebuild the country, reduce poverty and enable the Afghan government to establish its authority.

Canada has set up an embassy in Kabul, as part of its mission, and has more than 2,000 troops stationed in Kandahar. Forty-four Canadian soldiers have died since Canada first sent troops to the country in early 2002.

Canada has also announced funding for several projects, including the building of schools, clinics, roads, drainage and waste management systems, promotion of literacy programs and efforts to clear land mines.

Wednesday was the first anniversary of the Afghanistan Compact, a five-year agreement between the United Nations, Afghan government and Western nations that sets out goals for security, governance and development.

According to Prime Minister Stephen Harper, Canadian involvement in Afghanistan is guided by the agreement. It was adopted in London, England, a year ago. "Rebuilding Afghanistan after decades of war and oppression takes time," Harper said in a news release on Wednesday.

"We must remember that development cannot occur in the absence of stability and security. Our brave men and women of the Canadian Forces are working alongside our development workers and diplomats to ensure that progress can continue."

Harper told Ignatieff in question period on Thursday, after being asked about attempts to "rebalance the mission," that the mission is something of which Canadians can be proud. "Let me tell you what the mission is about," Harper said.

"It's about the best traditions of this country, brave men and women putting on the Canadian uniform, defending freedom and democracy and protecting the rights of people around the world."

Quick action urged on Afghan drugs to head off AIDS

February 1, 2007 - KABUL (Reuters) - Quick action is needed to fight Afghanistan's growing drug addiction problem to head off an HIV/ AIDS crisis in the shattered country, leading health agencies said on Thursday.

"If not, we will be facing a widespread epidemic," Afghan Red Crescent president Fatima Gailani said in a statement for the opening of a new addicts treatment center in Kabul.

The Nawai Zwand (New Beginning) center on the city outskirts, near the police training academy, is a joint operation with the Italian Red Cross and the European thinktank the Senlis Council.

Amid warnings of another record opium crop after a 60 percent jump in 2006, a U.N. report released last year estimates almost one million Afghans -- about 4 percent of the population -- are drug users.

That report gives no figures for previous years, but drugs workers say anecdotal evidence from the field show numbers rising, especially among refugees returning home.

"Drug addiction is an increasingly worrying issue in Afghanistan and we hope this new treatment center will contribute to Afghanistan dealing with this growing problem," said Senlis founding President Norine MacDonald, who attended the opening.

"Many of the returnees are now injecting heroin and this poses a major threat in terms of HIV/AIDS transmission."

Afghanistan does not have a long history of intravenous drug use and the U.N. report, by its Office on Drugs and Crime, found most had started injecting while in Pakistan or Iran.

The most popular drugs include opium, hashish, pharmaceutical drugs and heroin. Nawai Zwand is modeled on an Italian center, Villa Maraini, that treats up to 700 people a day and where methods include needle exchange and methadone substitution.

UNAIDS, the United Nations HIV/AIDS group, says there are fewer than 50 known infections in the country of 24 million, but little information has ever been gathered in a country racked by 25 years of war and conflict and most experts say the problem is much greater. Pakistan and Iran have thousands.

Afghan registration in Pakistan tops 2 million mark

02 Feb 2007 - Source: UNHCR - The number of Afghans registered by the government of Pakistan with support from UNHCR will pass the 2 million mark today following the resumption of the registration operation after the break for Ashura and Muharram.

The 2 million people registered since the start of the exercise in October 2006 account for over 80 percent of the target population of 2.4 million Afghans in Pakistan. Nearly 65 percent of those registered are in North West Frontier Province (NWFP); 20 percent in Balochistan; 10 percent in Punjab/Islamabad; 5 percent in Sindh and the rest in Pakistan-administered Kashmir (AJK).

Registration is conducted by Pakistan's National Database and Registration Authority (NADRA) with help from the Commissionerate for Afghan Refugees (CAR) and UNHCR.

The exercise has been completed in large parts of the country. It is scheduled to finish by mid-February in the remaining sites in Islamabad, NWFP and Balochistan.

Only Afghans who were counted in the Pakistan government census of February/March 2005 are eligible for registration. Those registered receive Proof of Registration (POR) cards that recognize them as Afghan citizens temporarily living in Pakistan. The PoR cards have a validity of three years.

UNHCR estimates that some 2.4 million Afghans remain in Pakistan, 70 percent of them women, children and the elderly. Approximately 60 percent are living in Pakistan's cities and towns, while the remainder live in 85 refugee villages and settlements, mostly in NWFP and Balochistan.

UNHCR, in close cooperation with the governments of Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Iran, has supported major voluntary repatriation movements since 2002. Over the past five years, 4.8 million Afghans have returned home, predominantly from Iran and Pakistan. A total of 3.7 million of them returned with UNHCR assistance. Of these, 2.8 million have returned from Pakistan.

To assist the policies, planning and implementation of voluntary repatriation programmes, UNHCR and the governments have established Tripartite Commissions which meet on a regular basis. The next Tripartite Commission meeting with Afghanistan and Pakistan is set for 6-7 February in Lahore, Pakistan.

After four years of exceptionally high repatriation levels, the assisted return figures (139,000) in 2006 from both Pakistan and Iran decreased significantly. In UNHCR's view, there are three main factors contributing to this trend – the fact that 80 percent of the remaining Afghan population in those two countries has now been in exile for more than 20 years; the limited absorption capacity of Afghanistan's economy; and the recent rise in insecurity in provinces from where many Afghans originate.

"Pak's help is crucial in winning Afghan war"

Washington, Feb 1 (ANI): A conservative US think tank's official has advised the US administration to put "pressure" on Pakistan to ensure that the Taliban find "no safe haven within its borders", else, according to her, American plans to stem the growing Taliban insurgency in Afghanistan will have only limited impact.

Lisa Curtis of the conservative think tank Heritage Foundation, said that the effectiveness of US' policy towards Pakistan over the next few years would largely determine whether the US prevails in the global war on terror.

The Pakistan-Afghanistan border area is one of the "most dangerous terrorist safe havens in the world", she said and added that although Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf deserved credit for apprehending hundreds of Qaeda operatives, the continued presence of the Taliban and Qaeda terrorists along the border posed a "threat to American interests and the US relations with Pakistan".

"It would be politically risky for Musharraf to crack down on the Taliban as they were assisted by Pakistan security services in the 1990s, and still has close ties to some intelligence officers and religious parties. Musharraf has to contend with a growing perception that he is doing US bidding in the war on terror at the expenseof his country's interests. US officials understand Musharraf's constraints, but they are increasingly frustrated by the continued cross-border movement of Taliban forces," the Daily Times quoted her as saying.

She further said: "Public debate on limiting US assistance to Pakistan could actually weaken Musharraf's hand in convincing his military commanders that the US is a reliable partner. Islamabad has been most responsive in the past to targeted, hard-headed diplomacy. Only this type of tough diplomacy will persuade Islamabad that the US will remain in Afghanistan until the Taliban are defeated."

According to her, US officials should take a more direct role in mediating differences between Kabul and Islamabad. Part of this effort involves encouraging both sides to pursue the development of cross-border tribal jirgas, she said and added that failure to fully confront Pakistan's reluctance to crack down on the Taliban would have disastrous implications for the war on terror. (ANI)

Facts on the ground in Pakistan

Pakistani officials are angrily rebutting charges their country is providing a sanctuary for al-Qaida and Taliban, while attacks by Islamic extremists there suggests that they may not see Pakistan as a safe haven, either.

By Shaun Waterman in Washington, DC for ISN Security Watch (01/02/07)

In briefings in the past few days in Washington and Brussels, Pakistani officials have lashed out at their critics, arguing that, since 11 September 2001, they have apprehended hundreds of al-Qaida and Taliban fighters, and suffered more than 1,000 military and civilian casualties as a result.

"We are already standing on our head, what else can we do?" asked Pakistani Ambassador to Washington Mahmud Ali Durrani last week in a briefing here for the Urdu language media. ISN Security Watch was provided with translated quotes by a reporter who was present.

"We have gone beyond our capacity to help [in] the war against terror," Durrani complained, referring to his government's support for the United States. "We are even helping those who say that we are not doing anything."

Durrani said he did not understand US media criticisms of Pakistani efforts. "They say that we are not doing anything. Then they also report that suicide bombers have killed Pakistani soldiers. If we are not doing anything, why are they killing our soldiers?" he asked. "If we are supporting them, why are they killing our people?"

In Brussels on Tuesday, Pakistani Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz told lawmakers from the NATO countries assembled for the North Atlantic Council that criticism of Pakistani efforts in the lawless tribal areas on its remote and mountainous Afghan frontier was "baseless," according to an account carried by the semi-official Associated Press of Pakistan.

"It is time for all of us and not just for Pakistan to do more to help Afghanistan," the agency quoted Aziz as saying. "The problem lies within Afghanistan and so does the solution."

Last week, it might have been easy to dismiss this as the kind of injured posturing that has typified Pakistan's response to even the mildest of suggestions that there might be sympathy for al-Qaida and Taliban extremists in the country.

But a series of terror attacks since the weekend, beginning with a suicide bombing at the Marriott hotel in Islamabad on Friday - and significantly including sectarian attacks on Shia worshippers during the holiest day on their religious calendar - strongly suggests that violent Islamic extremists are doing their best to undermine and destabilize the Pakistani government.

That is not the behavior of a movement that believes its allies and protectors are in power. The targets of the weekend's violence are significant in this context. Just the day after Friday's attack in the capital, another suicide bomber blew himself up outside a Shia mosque in Peshawar in Pakistan's remote northwest, killing 15 and wounding at least 30 others - mostly police officers.

Then on Monday, the second-to-last day of Muhurram, the festival of mourning observed mainly by Shi'ites, a third suicide bomber killed a police officer protecting a Shia religious procession and a bystander in Dera Ismail Khan, another northwestern city, and rocket fire injured 11 worshippers at another Shia mosque in the region.

Ashura, the climax of Muhurram, was marked on Tuesday by the usual parades, but authorities were on high alert. In Islamabad, the marches took place "inside a ring of steel of the kind last seen during the visit of [heir to the British throne] Prince Charles and [his wife] Camilla," wrote Guardian blogger Declan Walsh. In both Islamabad and Karachi, thousands of police and intelligence agents were backed up by rifle-wielding snipers on rooftops, with armored cars and tanks in reserve.

There is nothing new, alas, about sectarian violence in Pakistan. Violent Sunni Islamic extremist groups have a long history of attacks against Shiites, and more than 2,000 people have died in religious violence there over the past 20 years - the vast majority of them in such attacks, according to the International Crisis Group.

And without any formal claims of responsibility as yet, it is hard to trace the lineaments of culpability through the tangled skein of extremist networks operating in the country. Sunni extremists unconnected to al-Qaida and the Taliban may have carried out the attacks for their own reasons.

But the timing, on the heels of Pakistani military strikes against Taliban- and al-Qaida-linked targets in the tribal areas, is highly suggestive; and analysts have long noted the extensive links between the three types of extremist groups in Pakistan: Taliban-linked fighters in the northwest; jihadis dedicated to expelling India from the part of disputed Kashmir it controls; and religiously and socially motivated sectarians in the Pakistani heartland.

In sum, the attacks look very much like an effort by the extremists to ferment sectarian conflict - perhaps inspired by the success of a similar strategy in Iraq - as a way of destabilizing the government in revenge for its renewed assaults on their leaders.

So it is perhaps understandable that senior Pakistani officials - some of whom have personally been the target of assassination attempts by al-Qaida-linked extremists - were a little upset by recent public comments from the US government about the terror group's leaders enjoying "a secure hideout" in Pakistan.

"We believe that instead of looking for scapegoats it would be more desirable to increase cooperation, especially real time intelligence sharing, rather than resorting to public pronouncements, which only embolden the enemy," Aziz told the NATO lawmakers in a thinly veiled swipe at recent congressional testimony from US Director of National Intelligence John Negroponte.

Afghan officials have complained for years that they regularly provided intelligence to Islamabad on the whereabouts, satellite telephone numbers and vehicle registrations of Taliban leaders based in the Pakistani city of Quetta, but that no action was taken against them.

Pakistani officials, for their part, have retorted that the information was stale and useless by the time they got it.

Relations between the two countries are tense, and after a trip this week to the region, GOP Congressman David Hobson, Republican-Ohio, noted that poor chemistry between their leaders was impeding progress against the Taliban insurgency US and NATO forces were facing in Afghanistan.

"There also needs to be some resolution [of] the personal tensions between [Pakistani] President [Pervez] Musharraf and [Afghan President Hamid] Karzai," he told reporters at a briefing Tuesday.

So obvious are the tensions over cross border infiltration that they have even become a subject for humor. Karzai, who became a father for the first time last week, "is blaming the Pakistanis" for the birth, one diplomat joked. "It is [cross-border] infiltration."

In an effort to improve intelligence cooperation between the two wary neighbors, the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan last week opened a joint operations center staffed by intelligence officials from NATO and the Pakistani and Afghan militaries.

Aziz also told NATO lawmakers that "Availability of better technological capabilities, which we are seeking from Western countries, would improve our surveillance as well as interdiction capabilities" on the border with Afghanistan.

He said that over 80,000 Pakistan military and paramilitary personnel had been deployed on the long border to stop cross-border infiltration.

Aziz added Pakistan was proceeding with plans for selective fencing of certain routes across the border that he said were heavily used by drug traffickers and other "miscreants." In the past, officials have said they planned to use landmines in some areas, too.

But the border is almost by its nature porous. It is not recognized by the Afghan government or by the Pashtun tribes whose land it divides; it encompasses - especially in the tribal regions - some of the most remote and inaccessible terrain on the face of the earth; and it separates three million Afghan refugees, many living in chaotic, sprawling refugee camps, from their homeland.

Durrani said that 15-20,000 people crossed the two main border posts in the northwest every day. "How can we know which of these bearded Afghans are ordinary citizens and who are Taliban?" he asked.

But the mention of the refugee issue is also a not very coded reference to what a close Musharraf ally this week called America's "original sin" in the region - abandoning Afghanistan to bloody chaos after US and Pakistani-backed Islamic holy warriors had forced the Soviet Union out of there in the 1980s.

"The United States is blaming Pakistan for its own mistakes," Pakistani Senator Mushahid Hussain, chairman of the Pakistani parliament's foreign relations committee and a leader of the ruling Muslim League, told a forum in Washington on Monday.

This resentment is widespread among Pakistani officials and it is corrosive of their ability to really take ownership of the issue of extremism. As long as they continue to see the problem as someone else's "fault" they will find it hard to confront.

Shaun Waterman is a senior writer and analyst for ISN Security Watch. He is a UK journalist based in Washington, DC, covering homeland and national security for United Press International.

An Afghan’s Path From Ally of U.S. to Drug Suspect

By JAMES RISEN – The New York Times

WASHINGTON, Feb. 1 — In April 2005, federal law enforcement officials summoned reporters to a Manhattan news conference to announce the capture of an Afghan drug lord and Taliban ally. While boasting that he was a big catch — the Asian counterpart of the Colombian cocaine legend Pablo Escobar — the officials left out some puzzling details, including why the Afghan, Haji Bashir Noorzai, had risked arrest by coming to New York.

Now, with Mr. Noorzai’s case likely to come to trial this year, a fuller story about the American government’s dealings with him is emerging.

Soon after the invasion of Afghanistan in 2001, Mr. Noorzai agreed to cooperate with American officials, who hoped he could lead them to hidden Taliban weapons and leaders, according to current and former government officials and Mr. Noorzai’s American lawyer. The relationship soured, but American officials tried to renew it in 2004. A year later, Mr. Noorzai was secretly indicted and lured to New York, where he was arrested after nearly two weeks of talks with law enforcement and counterterrorism officials in a hotel.

In fighting the war on terrorism, government officials have often accepted trade-offs in developing relationships with informants with questionable backgrounds who might prove useful. As with Mr. Noorzai, it is often not clear whether the benefits outweigh the costs.

The government’s shifting views of Mr. Noorzai — from sought-after ally to notorious global criminal — parallels its evolving perspective on Afghanistan’s heroin trade.

In the first years after the United States invasion in late 2001, military and intelligence officials mostly chose to ignore opium production and instead dealt freely with warlords, including drug traffickers who promised information about members of the Taliban and Al Qaeda or offered security in the chaotic countryside. But in more recent years, as poppy production has soared and financed a revived Taliban insurgency that is threatening the country’s stability, the Americans have begun to take some more aggressive steps.

“In Afghanistan, finding terrorists has always trumped chasing drug traffickers,” said Bobby Charles, the former top counternarcotics official at the State Department.

He and other officials acknowledge that the United States initially may have had little choice other than to turn to tribal leaders with murky motives for help in bringing order to an essentially lawless society. But Mr. Charles pushed for the Bush administration to recognize suspected drug lords like Mr. Noorzai as a long-term security issue. “If we do not now take a hard second look at counternarcotics,” he said, “we will not get a third look.”

Administration officials say that they are working to develop a more effective drug strategy in Afghanistan, which now accounts for 82 percent of the world’s opium cultivation, according to a United Nations report last September. That could include broader eradication programs, alternative crop development and cracking down on drug lords, but any such efforts are complicated by fears that they could increase instability.

Federal prosecutors in New York handling Mr. Noorzai’s case refused to comment for this article, as did spokesmen for the Drug Enforcement Administration, Central Intelligence Agency and United States Central Command.

Mr. Noorzai, who has been held in a New York jail for nearly two years, has pleaded not guilty to charges that he smuggled heroin into New York and denies any involvement in drug trafficking. His New York lawyer, Ivan Fisher, argues that the arrest hurt the government’s ability to gain information about the escalating Taliban insurgency.

“Haji Bashir has been making efforts to reach working agreements with the Americans in Afghanistan since the 1990s,” Mr. Fisher said.

Several intelligence, counterterrorism and law enforcement officials confirm that American officials met repeatedly with Mr. Noorzai over the years. Because they provided few details about the substance of the talks, it is difficult to determine how useful Mr. Noorzai’s cooperation proved to be. He was not paid for his information, and the relationship was considered more informal, the officials said.

At times, there was confusion within the government about what to do with Mr. Noorzai. In 2002, while he was talking to the American officials in Afghanistan, a team at C.I.A. headquarters assigned to identify targets to capture or kill in Afghanistan wanted to put him on its list, one former intelligence official said. Like others, he would only speak on condition of anonymity because such discussions were classified.

The C.I.A. team was blocked, the former official recalled. Although he never received an explanation, the former official said that the Defense Department officials and American military commanders viewed counternarcotics efforts in Afghanistan at the time as a form of “mission creep” that would distract from the fight against terrorism.

Mr. Noorzai, a wealthy tribal leader in his mid-40s who lived with three wives and 13 children in Quetta, Pakistan, and also owns homes in Afghanistan and the United Arab Emirates, is from the same region that helped produce the Taliban. A native of Kandahar Province, he was a mujahedeen commander fighting the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan in the 1980s. In 1990, according to his lawyer, he agreed to help track down Stinger missiles provided to the Afghan resistance by the C.I.A.; agency officials were worried about their possible use by terrorists.

D.E.A. officials say that at the same time, Mr. Noorzai was a major figure in the Afghan drug trade, controlling poppy fields that supplied a significant share of the world’s heroin. He was also an early financial backer of the Taliban. Agency officials say he provided demolition materials, weapons and manpower in exchange for protection for his opium crops, heroin labs, smuggling routes and followers.

Mr. Noorzai was in Quetta when the Sept. 11 attacks occurred, and he returned soon after to Afghanistan, according to his lawyer. In November 2001, he met with men he described as American military officials at Spinboldak, near the Afghan-Pakistani border, Mr. Fisher said. Small teams of United States Special Forces and intelligence officers were in Afghanistan at the time, seeking the support of tribal leaders.

Mr. Noorzai was taken to Kandahar, where he was detained and questioned for six days by the Americans about Taliban officials and operations, his lawyer said. He agreed to work with them and was freed, and in late January 2002 he handed over 15 truckloads of weapons, including about 400 antiaircraft missiles, that had been hidden by the Taliban in his tribe’s territory, Mr. Fisher said.

Mr. Noorzai also offered to act as an intermediary between Taliban leaders and the Americans, his lawyer said. Mr. Noorzai said he helped persuade the Taliban’s former foreign minister, Wakil Ahmad Mutawakil — the son of the mullah in Mr. Noorzai’s hometown — to meet with the Americans. In February 2002, the Taliban official surrendered after what press accounts described as extensive negotiations and was sent to the prison at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba. He was freed in 2005.

Mr. Noorzai also persuaded a local tribal figure, Haji Birqet, to return to Afghanistan from Pakistan, the lawyer said. But he said the Americans, falsely warned that Mr. Birqet and Mr. Noorzai were plotting to attack United States forces, killed Mr. Birqet and wounded several family members in a raid on his compound.

Saying that his credibility had been hurt by the imprisonment of Mr. Mutawakil and that he was angered by the attack on Mr. Birqet, Mr. Noorzai broke off contact with the Americans and fled to his home in Pakistan, according to Mr. Fisher.

The government officials could not confirm whether Mr. Noorzai had in fact played a role in those negotiations. There may be another explanation for his exile, however. In May 2002, one of his tribal commanders was killed in an American raid along a drug-smuggling route that the Americans suspected was used to help the Taliban, and Mr. Noorzai may have feared for his own safety.

Nearly two years later, in January 2004, Mr. Charles, the State Department official, proposed placing him on President Bush’s list of foreign narcotics kingpins, for the most wanted drug lords around the world.

At that time, Mr. Charles recalled in an interview, no Afghan heroin traffickers were on the list, which he thought was a glaring omission. He suggested three names, including Mr. Noorzai’s, but said his recommendation was met with an awkward silence during an interagency meeting. He said there was resistance to placing Afghans on the list because countering the drug trade there was not an administration priority. Mr. Charles persisted, and in June 2004, Mr. Noorzai became the first Afghan on the list.

Two months later, a team of American contractors working for the Federal Bureau of Investigation contacted Mr. Noorzai and arranged a series of meetings with him in Pakistan and Dubai, according to several government officials and Mr. Noorzai’s lawyer. They wanted to win his cooperation and learn about Al Qaeda’s financial network and perhaps the whereabouts of the former Taliban leader Mullah Muhammad Omar. The Americans met with Mr. Noorzai, but the talks fizzled because F.B.I. agents who were supposed to join them were unable to do so, one official said.

In 2005, the contractors, by then working for the D.E.A., reconnected with Mr. Noorzai and once again met with him in Dubai.

This time, however, the objective had changed. Mr. Noorzai had secretly been indicted by a federal grand jury in New York on drug smuggling charges in January 2005. Now the contractors needed to persuade Mr. Noorzai to come to the United States.

Mr. Fisher said the Americans were particularly interested in gaining Mr. Noorzai’s help in tracking the flow of money to the Taliban and Al Qaeda. They were seeking information about Mullah Omar and other Taliban figures. The Americans asked Mr. Noorzai to come to the United States to meet with their superiors, he added.

Mr. Noorzai’s lawyer said his client agreed to make the trip only after receiving assurances that he would not be arrested. Mr. Fisher also says that he has obtained transcripts from tape recordings made by the government at the sessions.

Mr. Noorzai flew to New York in April 2005 and was taken to an Embassy Suites hotel, where he was questioned for 13 days before being arrested, his lawyer said.

Mr. Noorzai has been charged with conspiring to import more than $50 million worth of heroin from Afghanistan and Pakistan into the United States and other countries. The indictment says that he imported heroin to New York in the late 1990s and that unnamed co-conspirators also did so in 2001 and 2002.

Carlotta Gall contributed reporting from Kabul.

Destroying poppies isn't path to Afghan stability

Anne Applebaum - is a columnist for the Washington Post

NATO is fighting a war to eradicate opium from Afghanistan. Western governments are spending hundreds of millions of dollars bulldozing poppy fields, building up counternarcotics squads, and financing alternative crops. Chemical spraying may begin as early as this spring.

Opium exports account for somewhere between one-third and two-thirds of the country's gross domestic product, depending on whose statistics you believe. The biggest producers are in the southern provinces, where the Taliban is at its strongest, and no wonder: Every time a poppy field is destroyed, a poor person becomes poorer - and more likely to support the Taliban against the Western forces who wrecked his crops. Yet little changes: The amount of land dedicated to poppy production grew last year by more than 60 percent.

Hamid Karzai, the Afghan president, has called opium a "cancer" worse than terrorism - and crop-spraying may make things worse. Not only will it cause environmental and health damage, but also it will feel to the local population like a military attack, as Western planes drop poisonous chemicals from the sky.

Most depressing is that the Afghan poppy crisis doesn't have to exist at all. Look at the history of Turkey. Turkey, too, had a long tradition of poppy cultivation. Turkey, too, worried that poppy eradication could "bring down the government." Turkey was identified as the main source of the heroin sold in the West. Just like in Afghanistan, a ban was tried, and it failed.

As a result, in 1974 the Turks, with American and U.N. support, began licensing poppy cultivation for the purpose of producing morphine, codeine and other legal opiates. Legal factories were built to replace the illegal ones. Farmers registered to grow poppies, and they paid taxes. You couldn't tell that from the latest White House drug strategy report - which devotes several pages to Afghanistan but doesn't mention Turkey - but the U.S. government still supports the Turkish program, even requiring U.S. drug companies to purchase 80 percent of what the legal documents euphemistically refer to as "narcotic raw materials" from the two traditional producers, Turkey and India.

Why not add Afghanistan to this list? The only good arguments against doing so - as opposed to the silly, politically correct "just say no" arguments - are technical: that the same weak or nonexistent bureaucracy will be no better at licensing poppy fields than it has been at destroying them, or that some of the raw material will still fall into the hands of the drug cartels. Yet some of these issues can be resolved, by building processing factories at the local level and working within local power structures. Even if the program succeeds in stopping only half of the drug trade, a huge chunk of Afghanistan's economy will still emerge from the gray market; the power of the drug barons will be reduced; and, most important, Western money will have been visibly spent helping Afghan farmers survive, instead of destroying their livelihoods.

Besides, things really could get worse. It isn't so hard to imagine, two or three years down the line, yet another emergency presidential speech, calling for a "surge" of troops to southern Afghanistan - where impoverished villagers, having turned against the West, are joining the Taliban in droves. Before we get there, maybe it's worth letting some legal poppies bloom.

Contact Anne Applebaum at applebaumanne@washpost.com.

[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.]