In this bulletin:

• Cheney asks Musharraf to fight al-Qaida
• Pakistani Governor Calls For Negotiations With Taliban
• Pakistan must clamp down on Afghan border: Canada
• Canada to give new Afghan reconstruction aid
• British troops to be sent to Afghanistan
• Turkey to increase troops' strength in Afghanistan
• Dr. Spanta inaugurated Steering Committee on Regional Cooperation
• The Mysterious Mullah Omar
• World Bank grants Afghanistan millions
• Is Pakistan Doing All It Should to Secure Its Afghan Border?
• Afghanistan 'winnable' - Campbell
• AFGHANISTAN: President pressured to sign controversial amnesty bill
• ormer Afghan warlords rally for amnesty

Cheney asks Musharraf to fight al-Qaida

Islamabad (AP 2.26.07) - Underscoring growing alarm in the West at how militants have regained ground in Afghanistan and Pakistan, Vice President Dick Cheney on Monday sought Pakistani aid to help counter al-Qaida's efforts to regroup, officials said.

However, President Gen. Pervez Musharraf insisted his forces have already "done the maximum" possible against extremists in their territory — and insisted that other allies also shoulder responsibility in the U.S.-led war on terrorism.

Cheney, accompanied by CIA deputy director Steve Kappes, made an unannounced stop in Pakistan en route to Afghanistan, where snow prevented him from reaching Kabul for talks with Afghan President Hamid Karzai.

The vice president made no public comment in Pakistan, but a senior aide to Musharraf said they held detailed talks, including a one-on-one lunch of more than an hour.

"Cheney expressed U.S. apprehensions of regrouping of al-Qaida in the tribal areas and called for concerted efforts in countering the threat," Musharraf's office said.

He also "expressed serious U.S. concerns on the intelligence being picked up of an impending Taliban and al-Qaida 'spring offensive' against allied forces in Afghanistan," the statement said.

The Musharraf aide, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he is not an official spokesman, said the two men "exchanged ideas and suggestions" on improving cooperation against terrorism. However, he said Cheney made no specific demands.

U.S. and British officials praise Pakistan publicly for its role in arresting al-Qaida suspects after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks in the United States and for a string of bloody operations against militants along the border.

Five years after the Taliban's ouster from power, however, militants have regained ground in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

There are signs of U.S. and NATO frustration at Musharraf's limited success in disrupting Pakistan-based Taliban fighters, who are expected to step up raids into Afghanistan in coming months, and in trapping Taliban and al-Qaida leaders suspected of holing up in tribal areas of Pakistan near the border.

The Bush administration wants Musharraf to be more aggressive in hunting al-Qaida operatives, and has raised the possibility that the U.S. Congress could cut aid to Pakistan unless it takes tougher steps.

"The Pakistanis remain committed to doing everything possible to fight al-Qaida, but having said that, we also know that there's a lot more that needs to be done," presidential spokesman Tony Snow said.

Cheney's visit was kept secret until the last moment for security reasons. He landed at a military base outside Islamabad and then took a helicopter to the presidential palace.

On Sunday, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said the U.S. was working with Pakistan, Afghanistan and other countries to combat al-Qaida "worldwide and on the Afghan border. "I don't doubt that al-Qaida has tried to regenerate some of its leadership," she said on ABC's "This Week" program.

Musharraf complains that Pakistan is being unfairly singled out for blame for problems rooted in the U.S.-sponsored battle against the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan in the 1980s. He also says there is no evidence that al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden or the Taliban's Mullah Omar are on Pakistani soil.

On Monday, Musharraf told Cheney that Pakistan "has done the maximum in the fight against terrorism and "joint efforts" were needed if the fight was to succeed.

"The president emphasized that most of the Taliban activities originated from Afghanistan and the solution of the issue also lies within that country," his office said. The more than 50,000 NATO and U.S. troops in Afghanistan as well as Afghan security forces also share responsibility for policing the border, Musharraf added.

The president also expressed concern about proposed U.S. legislation that would link Washington's generous military aid to a certification by President Bush that Pakistan is doing its best to counter Taliban operations in Pakistan and secure its frontier. U.S. officials have said they expect to persuade Democrats to drop the link before the bill, which passed the House in January, becomes law.

In September, Musharraf struck a deal with tribal leaders in the North Waziristan area in which they are supposed to curb militant activities.

Critics say the deal has effectively ceded control of the area to pro-Taliban militants and allowed them to step up recruitment and cross-border attacks. Musharraf defended the accord as "the way forward," his office said.

Pakistani officials acknowledge the deal has not been properly implemented, but argue that large-scale military action was alienating moderate tribesmen. The U.S. is helping fund a development program designed to persuade tribal leaders to turn against the militants.

In Afghanistan, Cheney landed at Bagram Air Base, about 30 miles north of Kabul. He had planned to travel to Kabul, likely by military helicopter, but a steady snowfall made the trip unsafe, and it was canceled, said Khaleeq Ahmad, a spokesman for Karzai.

Cheney and Karzai had been expected to talk about security along the Afghan-Pakistan border and the expected increase in violence by militants as spring thaws mountain snows.

The United States has 27,000 troops in Afghanistan. About 14,000 are part of the 35,000-member NATO force commanded by U.S. Gen. Dan McNeill. At Bagram, Cheney met with McNeill and Maj. Gen. David M. Rodriguez — the commander of U.S. troops — to discuss military operations, the security situation and reconstruction, said Maj. William G. Mitchell, a U.S. military spokesman.

Pakistani Governor Calls For Negotiations With Taliban

Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty - February 24, 2007 -- A Pakistani governor says Afghanistan and its Western allies should negotiate peace with the Taliban.

Ovais Ahmad Ghani, the governor of Pakistan's Baluchistan Province, says radical groups will gain strength if fighting was not stopped in Afghanistan.

Located in southwestern Pakistan, Baluchistan is often called a refuge for Taliban leaders. Ghani denied those allegations, calling them a ploy to "malign and defame Pakistan."

Pakistan must clamp down on Afghan border: Canada

Ottawa (Reuters) - Canada told Pakistan on Monday it had improve the control of its border with Afghanistan to stop the flow of militants seeking to attack NATO troops.

The comments by Prime Minister Stephen Harper represented the first time Canada has publicly criticized Pakistan for not doing enough to block Taliban fighters from crossing its mountainous border into Afghanistan.

"We will concede that the Pakistan situation remains a long-term problem and we do need better efforts from Pakistan on that problem, not just for the security of Afghanistan but for the security of the region," Harper told reporters.

Canada has 2,500 troops in the southern Afghan city of Kandahar who clashed frequently with Taliban militants in 2006. So far, 44 Canadian soldiers and a diplomat have been killed, most of them last year.

Separately, Vice President Dick Cheney on Monday urged Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf to step up efforts to combat a new Taliban offensive in Afghanistan.

Musharraf says Taliban fighters do operate from Pakistan, but says the militants' leaders are in Afghanistan.

Harper's comments came after he announced a two-year reconstruction and development package for Afghanistan which would be worth up to C$200 million ($170 million).

Opposition parties have complained that Canada spends too much time fighting the Taliban and not enough helping to rebuild the war-shattered country.

Canada to give new Afghan reconstruction aid

POSTED: 1936 GMT (0336 HKT), February 26, 2007

TORONTO, Ontario (AP) -- Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper announced a new $172 million reconstruction aid package for Afghanistan on Monday -- heeding calls to focus on aid as well as security.

Harper's announcement comes as Canada marked its one-year anniversary of its mission in Kandahar, the former Taliban stronghold. Opposition parties in Parliament have criticized Harper's Conservative government for focusing too much on security at the expense of reconstruction aid.

Harper said they initially focused on security because it was the first time forces attempted to stabilize all of the southern region.

"We're now in a position because of the success of the security to make additional commitments on reconstruction and development," Harper said. "These are hard-won gains by the military."

The new funding, to be disbursed this year and next, will flow to five areas: governance and development ($103 million); counter-narcotics ($25 million); policing ($17 million); de-mining ($17 million); and road construction ($8.6 million).

The funding is in addition to the $860 million Canada already has pledged for reconstruction.

Harper's announcement comes as the Afghan winter draws to a close and Canadian soldiers prepare to combat another spring offensive by Taliban fighters. Britain's defense secretary on Monday announced the deployment of 1,400 extra troops to Afghanistan to tackle the threatened Taliban spring offensive.

There are some 2,500 Canadian soldiers fighting alongside Afghan, American and other NATO forces trying to weed out Taliban fighters in southern Afghanistan. Canada has suffered 44 fatalities -- 36 last year. Most occurred after NATO troops moved into the south early last summer.

NATO's former commander in Afghanistan, British Gen. David Richards, has warned that Afghans could rebel against foreign troops unless they see a tangible difference in their lives soon. Harper's government will table a progress report on the mission in Afghanistan in Parliament later Monday.

Opposition Liberal Leader Stephane Dion has said the military needs to work more closely with Canada's development workers and diplomats to make tangible progress in the Kandahar region.

Dion says Canadian military spending in the south has outpaced its aid contribution by nine times, and that four-fifths of those aid dollars are being spent outside the Kandahar region.

The former ruling Liberal party made the original decision to send troops into Afghanistan after declining to send troops to Iraq.

Canadians have been concerned about the human toll in Afghanistan. Canadians are accustomed to having their soldiers serve as peacekeepers, but this mission has proven especially dangerous.

British troops to be sent to Afghanistan

London (AP) – Britain’s Defence secretary on Monday announced the deployment of 1,400 extra troops to Afghanistan, bolstering NATO's mission to oust the resurgent Taliban only days after Prime Minister Tony Blair disclosed plans to trim British forces in Iraq.

The deployment will bring British troop levels in Afghanistan to around 7,700 until 2009, meaning Britain will have more forces based there than in Iraq for the first time since the 2003 Iraq invasion. Blair said Wednesday Britain would soon reduce numbers in Iraq to 5,500.

Defense Secretary Des Browne had already authorized deployment of an extra 800 troops to the region on Feb. 1. But some NATO countries refused to contribute new combat troops during a summit in Seville, Spain, earlier this month.

"It is increasingly clear, that at present, when it comes to the most demanding tasks in the most challenging parts of Afghanistan, only a small number of key allies are prepared to step forward," Defense Secretary Des Browne told the House of Commons.

Lawmakers in Britain, the United States, Canada and other nations with troops in southern Afghanistan have been angered by the reluctance of some European allies to commit extra troops to the 35,500-strong NATO force, and in particular to allow their soldiers to be deployed to the Taliban's heartland in the south and east.

Both France and Germany raised doubts about the need for more troops during the NATO conference.

Britain currently has around 5,500 troops in Afghanistan, mainly based in the volatile southern province of Helmand, a Taliban stronghold and center of the country's opium trade.

Browne said the extra 1,400 troops would form a battalion charged with roving across a swathe of southern Afghanistan, mounting attacks on Taliban targets and responding to insurgent offensives.

The soldiers will work across the provinces of Helmand, Kandahar, Uruzgan, Zabul and in the sparsely populated desert region of Nimroz — which borders eastern Iran — and in the mountain region of Daikondi, he said.

Deploying in Nimroz will mean Britain has a presence close to Iran's western and eastern borders. Blair said Wednesday remaining troops in southern Iraq would be responsible for securing stretches of Iraq's frontier with western Iran.

Browne acknowledged Britain, the United States and others were "shouldering a greater burden than we like" in leading the alliance's mission to tackle Taliban fighters and extend the reach of President Hamid Karzai's Kabul government.

But he told lawmakers that failing to deploy additional combat troops posed "too great a risk to progress achieved" so far by the mission.

Opposition Conservative lawmaker Liam Fox said the failure of several NATO countries to match the commitment shown by Britain, the United States, Canada and the Netherlands, called the future of the alliance into question.

"If NATO is to exist and flourish in the future, this is not a tenable position," Fox told lawmakers during the session. However, NATO Secretary-General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer said Monday he believed alliance members were aiding the mission.

"I do not share the analysis that other nations are not stepping up to the plate because we have seen many allies ... announcing or making effective an increase in their contribution," he said.

Turkey to increase troops' strength in Afghanistan

KABUL, Feb 26 (Pajhwok Afghan News): Turkish Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul on Monday said his country would construct a modern hospital in Kabul.

Addressing a joint news conference with Foreign Minister Dr Rangin Dadfar Spanta here, the Turkish FM said work on the hospital would be completed by the end of the current year.

He said Turkey would increase the number of its troops under the NATO peacekeeping force to 1,000 from the current 800 in the coming spring.

Spanta appreciated Turkey's commitment to the reconstruction and security in Afghanistan. He told journalists the two countries had signed 21 agreements and MoUs in different sectors.

Earlier, the Turkish FM also paid a visit to the central Maidan Wardak province, where he performed groundbreaking ceremony of a police training centre.

Dr. Spanta inaugurated Steering Committee on Regional Cooperation

Posted On: Feb 25, 2007

In a special meeting attending by Afghan senior officials, representatives of Kabul-based international community Afghanistan’s minister of foreign affairs Dr. Spanta inaugurated “Steering Committee on Regional Cooperation” (SCRC) at the Ministry.

 In his opening remark Dr. Spanta described strengthening regional cooperation as one of the objectives and principles of Afghanistan’s foreign policy and expressed his wish the SCRC to provide the means to translate this objective into concrete results.  His speech was followed by comments/intervention  by Prof. Naderi, Pres. Karzai’s Senior economic advisor, members of the Afghan cabinet and foreign representatives present at the meeting.  Dr Spanta also launched “Regional Cooperation” section of the Ministry’s website.

The Mysterious Mullah Omar

Tracing the elusive footsteps of the Taliban's Supreme Leader—and bracing for what may be their bloodiest drive yet

By Sami Yousafzai and Ron Moreau - Newsweek Magazine

March 5, 2007 issue - There's no mistaking the thrill in Ghul Agha Akhund's voice. The Taliban field commander, speaking by mobile phone from his redoubt in Afghanistan's Helmand province, says the militants' covert network of couriers has brought him a vital message. It's a dark photocopy of a handwritten note, just seven lines to congratulate the group's fighting forces on "getting even with the infidel invaders" last year and to urge them to launch "a more intensive jihad" this year. But Ghul Agha views the scrap of paper as an almost sacred artifact: it bears the signature of the Taliban's Supreme Leader, Mullah Mohammed Omar. "This message from our leader is like tonic medicine," the chieftain says. "It makes us stronger."

In fact, he's doubly excited. This is the second communication he's gotten from Mullah Omar this year—after not one word since the U.S.-led 2001 invasion. (Although not all the information in this report can be independently verified, it came from sources who have proved reliable in the past, and the details are consistent with the established facts.) This January, Ghul Agha received an audiocassette of Mullah Omar praising the virtue of self-sacrifice. "Carry out your Islamic responsibilities as I carry out mine," the officer quotes the tape as saying. "Don't look for promotions or benefits. Just serve the jihad." The message electrified Ghul Agha. "For the last few years, we heard only rumors about Mullah Omar," he says. "Now we hear from him directly!" The commander and his men are energetically preparing to launch an offensive as soon as the snow melts; he hopes this year they will cut off the provincial capital.

Mullah Omar has emerged from the shadows, his field officers say, and with his inspiration they're planning a military push against U.S.-led forces like never before. NEWSWEEK has viewed a new recruiting video in which the Taliban's most notoriously cruel commander, the one-legged Mullah Dadullah Akhund, addresses an audience of some 400 men who are described as trained suicide bombers, ready to die on his order. "Our suicide bombers are countless," he says in a videotaped response to questions from NEWSWEEK. "Hundreds have already registered their names, and hundreds more are on the waiting list." Those claims, while impossible to verify, can't be discounted, either. In an interview that aired on Al-Jazeera last week, Dadullah claimed to have more than 6,000 armed guerrillas in underground hideouts and other staging areas, awaiting the moment to strike. "The attack is imminent," he told the Arabic TV channel.

Western forces are certainly bracing for one. Thousands of reinforcements have deployed to Afghanistan, bringing the Coalition's total armed strength to nearly 50,000, including 15,500 Americans in NATO's ranks and 11,000 others under direct U.S. command. NATO's chief spokes-man in Kabul, Col. Tom Collins, says his force intends to head off the militants' assault with pre-emptive attacks against Taliban strongholds and sanctuaries in Helmand and Uruzgan provinces. The Coalition, with its enormous superiority in firepower, sees no way the Taliban can capture and hold any significant target. "They may hold a small place for days," Collins allows, "but they'll get run out at a high cost." An estimated 3,000 Taliban fighters died in last year's engagements alone. But replacing those losses has been easy—thanks largely to the 47-year-old Mullah Omar.

To Westerners his appeal all but defies explanation. He was always an unprepossessing figure, even during the late 1990s, when he and his followers ruled most of Afghanistan. He seldom gave speeches on the radio, let alone in public, and he traveled out of his home province, Kandahar, to visit Kabul only once. Those who have met him describe him as a seemingly humble—though intelligent—village preacher, shy, inarticulate and utterly lacking in charisma. His manner is awkward, even childlike at times. In the 1980s he enlisted in the fight against the Soviet occupation, which cost him his right eye in a 1989 rocket attack and kept him from completing his religious education. As a result he has always called himself a talib, a "seeker of knowledge"—and his followers became known as the Taliban.

The group's recruiters owe much of their continued success to his saintly reputation. To his followers, Omar stands in bold contrast to the corrupt thugs who have returned to control many parts of Afghanistan and to the foreign-influenced Kabul government. In 1994 Mullah Omar rose to prominence by organizing the Taliban as a vigilante force to fight warlords who had been kidnapping, raping and strong-arming the civilians of Kandahar ever since the Soviets left. While local leaders are nowhere near as rapacious as they once were, villagers complain of some of the same sleazy behavior—crime, corruption, immorality. Omar, by contrast, "looks at things in black and white. There is no middle ground for him," says Rahimullah Yusufzai, a Peshawar-based journalist and expert on the Taliban. "No one has ever found fault with his Islamic character," says Nek Mohammed, one of Omar's former aides.

The Supreme Leader probably never knew what his guest Osama bin Laden was planning in 2001. All the same, Omar rejected America's demand after September 11 that he hand over the Qaeda leader—even though that refusal led directly to the U.S. invasion. "That principled decision enhanced his position among his followers," says Yusufzai. "But to others it shows he's simply stupid and too rigid."

After the Taliban's fall, Omar effectively vanished. His whereabouts were a mystery to everyone including his three wives and nine children, who heard nothing from him even indirectly for a solid year, according to Zabibullah, a senior Taliban official. (Last year one of the wives finally rejoined Omar at his present hideout, Zabibullah says.) Still, Omar did not quit the jihad. As his men regrouped, he gradually emerged from hiding and in 2004 began traveling from camp to camp in remote Taliban-held areas, riding on the back of a motorbike to rally his old troops and recruit new ones. One of the reasons he was able to avoid capture was that few people aside from his close followers know his face. He has always refused to let anyone take his picture, citing Islamic strictures against creating idols. Photos identified as Mullah Omar have circulated in recent years, but the clearest shots proved to be hoaxes or cases of mistaken identity.

Only a few trusted assistants know where the fugitive leader is now. U.S. officials refuse to discuss what they know of his whereabouts and actions, beyond admitting that he's still in charge. "The hard-core Taliban leadership is Mullah Omar and his 27 to 30 subcommanders," says Collins. Afghan President Hamid Karzai has repeatedly charged that Omar is holed up in the Pakistan city of Quetta, protected by Pakistan's military spy agency, Inter-Services Intelligence. That claim was backed up (probably under duress) by Mohammad Hanafi, a reputed Taliban spokesman, after his capture by Afghan forces last month.

Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf denies the allegation, calling Karzai "ignorant" of what's happening inside Af-ghanistan. Taliban commanders and political operatives, who admit to frequently visiting Pakistan themselves, agree with Musharraf. "Baseless lies," Dadullah told NEWSWEEK. "He is not there [in Pakistan] in any city." Dadullah and others say they believe he's safely ensconced deep in the remote and rugged mountains of Uruzgan province, where he once lived.

Wherever he's hidden, Omar is closer than ever to many of his followers—not only to long-neglected fighters like Ghul Agha, but even to members of the Taliban's ruling council, the Shura. In the past, according to Mullah Rahman, the group's deputy commander in Zabul province, it could take six weeks for senior Taliban officials to send a message to the leader and get a reply. Now, thanks to the Taliban's military gains and growing network of messengers and mobile phones, the Shura can send Omar a question and get his answer within 24 hours. The leader communicates only via two top aides: former Defense minister Mullah Obaidullah and Mullah Barader, an old friend and one of the first mullahs to join the fledgling Taliban in 1994. Even those two do not see him face to face, instead passing messages by word of mouth, audiotape or handwritten notes. They relay Omar's directives and pep talks to the appropriate Shura members, who in turn disseminate them through the chain of command.

The Supreme Leader tends to focus on moral questions, leaving most military and financial matters to his deputies. His recent communiqués assert that Afghans have a duty under Islam to fight the foreign "invaders" and their "puppets" in Kabul because they will not leave Afghanistan "peacefully." At the same time, he urges his fighters to spare the lives of Afghans who have no part in the conflict. Last year's epidemic of suicide bombings killed more than two dozen foreign troops, but also killed and maimed hundreds of Afghan civilians. "Avoid operations that cause death and injury to innocent people," Omar said in a message marking the end of Ramadan this past December. "We are obliged to target only our enemy."

His word is law—or so his followers say. "No one can or dares to challenge Mullah Omar," says Zabibullah. Last year, for example, he dismissed his Ghazni province commander for "selfishness." And yet not every order is followed. Suicide bombings have continued to rock Kandahar. Dadullah says such attacks are no more than a prelude to bigger things soon to come. "With new war tactics, we possibly will get control of a provincial capital," he told NEWSWEEK. Commander Momin Ahmed, a heavy-set Taliban subcommander in Ghazni province, says provincial commanders have been promised detachments of 30 suicide bombers apiece from the batches of new recruits.

Most Coalition officers shrug at such threats. The militants suffered horrendous casualties last year while failing to stop the spread of NATO control into southern Afghanistan. In a single battle last September for the village of Panjwayi in Kandahar, the Taliban lost more than 500 men. At the same time, Afghan civilians are heartily fed up with all parties. They despise the Karzai government's weakness and corruption; they blame the Coalition for the collateral damage caused by its massive firepower; they don't want Mullah Omar's lightning-rod fighting forces anywhere near their homes. The guerrillas have little to no chance of ever regaining power though force of arms. What they do have in abundance is stubbornness—just like their leader, Mullah Omar. "We respect him even more than we did five years ago," says Ghul Agha. "He refuses to give up, no matter what the odds." That's not the message most Afghan civilians want to hear.

World Bank grants Afghanistan millions

Press TV (Iran) - Sun, 25 Feb 2007 - The World Bank has approved a grant of 25 million U.S. dollars to Afghanistan to help rebuild the war-torn country.

The grant will be used in improving infrastructure facilities and encouraging private sector provision of land services and facilities like water and communications, Daily Anis reported.

A strong private sector would provide the foundation for economic growth, long-term prosperity and economic sustainability, according to the statement issued by the Washington-based lending agency.

The World Bank has contributed 1.6 billion U.S. dollars, a major part of it as soft loans, to post-Taliban Afghanistan over the past five years.

Is Pakistan Doing All It Should to Secure Its Afghan Border?

Discussants:Bill Roggio, Kathy Gannon, February 26, 2007

Last year, as NATO forces battled a resurgent Taliban in Afghanistan, the country witnessed the highest number of combat-related deaths since the U.S.- led invasion in 2001. With the 2006 death toll reaching four thousand and concern that winter's end will bring more clashes with the Taliban, security along the Pakistan border has come under increasing scrutiny. The government of Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf has been accused of failing to clamp down on militants taking refuge in its semi-autonomous tribal areas and making incursions across the Afghan border.

Bill Roggio, a widely published journalist who has embedded with t troops in Iraq and Afghanistan and authors the Fourth Rail blog, debates former CFR Fellow Kathy Gannon, author of I is for Infidel and a longtime AP correspondent currently living in Pakistan, about whether Pakistan is doing all it should to secure its Afghan border.

Kathy Gannon

To call the suggestion that Pakistan is doing all it can to secure its Afghan border “laughable” oversimplifies the complexity of the tribal region that borders Pakistan and Afghanistan; the nature of the Pakistani military that Washington has chosen to partner with; as well as the nature of Washington’s other partners in Afghanistan, those so-called Afghan warlords, who are powerbrokers in Kabul, influencing appointment of governors, ministers, and police chiefs and driving the country into the anarchy that gave rise to the Taliban.

Pakistan’s border with Afghanistan is 2,430 kilometers. Sealing or “securing” the border would require a Berlin-wall style construction and a half-a-million strong army (at least) to patrol it 24/7. Controlling the border regions are a logistical and military nightmare, an impossibility. Pacifying the tribesmen of this area, who have no ideological grudge with the Taliban, also can’t be done militarily. Thus the need for agreements, but they too will fail without political will.

Thus the much bigger issue is Washington’s choice of partners in Pakistan and in Afghanistan. The institutional and political changes that will bring stability to both sides of the Durand line that separates Pakistan and Afghanistan depends on who is running those countries.

In Pakistan, Washington has partnered with the military, having learned nothing from history. The last time it partnered with the military was with [former dictator] Zia-ul Haq, who embraced and nurtured Islamic extremists. President Pervez Musharraf might not want Islamic extremists to dictate governance but he wants the military in power, and in Pakistan that means a partnership with the country’s Islamic right wing. That’s a fact of life in Pakistan.

It was on Musharraf’s watch that the religious extremists in Pakistan for the first time in the country’s history took political control of one province, are a partner in another, and constitute the official opposition at the federal level. They are there because Musharraf wanted to sideline the mainstream political parties.

The military, of which Musharraf is a product, is inspired by jihad and has created, nurtured, and funded a cadre of jihadists that operates outside its ranks to wage its covert attacks, usually against India, but also to advance its causes elsewhere.

What the Pakistan military hasn’t figured out, though Musharraf might be getting the idea, is that it can’t control the religious extremists it uses. But that doesn’t mean the military has stopped using them. It hasn’t.

Musharraf might not want them here in Pakistan but he and his military are worried about Indian influence in Afghanistan. They feel the Afghan government is unfriendly to Pakistan. The military doesn’t know any other way to play its games, whether at home or abroad and it somehow always gets Washington on its side.

In Afghanistan it’s no better. Washington’s partners are the likes of Abdur Rasul Sayyaf, Burhanuddin Rabbani, Mohammed Fahim, Atta Mohammed, Rashid Dostum. They are extremist in their views, have militias of their own, and wield considerable power, often deciding key appointments including governors and police chiefs who allow the drug trade to flourish as well as protect and nurture corruption that has frustrated attempts to build a strong solid police force.

Worse still, these are the men who brought Osama bin Laden to Afghanistan in early 1996 and gave him refuge when Sudan forced him to leave because of U.S.pressure.

When they last ruled Afghanistan, terrorist training camps at places like Darunta, Farmada, Tora Bora, and Khost all flourished under their patronage. The Taliban didn’t bring bin Laden to Afghanistan or start the terrorist training camps, they inherited them from the mujahedeen who are back in power today. Their return to power by the international community, and freedom to pursue their lawless ways has frustrated ordinary Afghans. It has stripped Afghans of their faith in their government and in the international community that supports it. That means even if they aren’t working against the government, they are no longer working with it. This, not the border region, is at the heart of why Afghanistan’s anti-government insurgency thrives today.

Bill Roggio -

The answer to the question is absolutely not. Afghanistan certainly has its share of internal problems, ranging from bad governance, to rampant corruption, to warlords and drug lords, to radical Islamists and Afghan Taliban. Nonetheless, the military and suicide attacks within the country are largely fueled by Taliban, al-Qaeda and Hizb-i-Islami fighters operating from inside Pakistan.

First, the deaths in Afghanistan over the course of 2006 need to be put into proper context. Well over 80 percent of 4,000 killed were Taliban fighters, and hundreds of those killed have been repatriated to the Pakistani tribal areas. The overwhelming majority of the casualties in Afghanistan occurred in provinces that directly border Pakistan's tribal areas and Baluchistan .

Large swaths of western and southern Pakistan serve as Taliban and al-Qaeda sanctuaries. The Federally Administered Tribal Agencies of North and South Waziristan, as well as Bajaur, serve as Taliban and al-Qaeda sanctuaries and command posts. These agencies host both specialized al-Qaeda camps and camps for Taliban foot soldiers. In South Waziristan, Taliban commander Baitullah Mehsud, who is believed to be behind the wave of suicide killings across Pakistan, maintains an army of up to 30,000 fighters alone. He is but one of over a dozen powerful Taliban commanders. Quetta serves as a Taliban command and control center, as well as a place for fighters to rest, recuperate and recover from battlefield injuries. Major Taliban and related Islamist terrorist organizations run significant recruiting drives in the Federally Administered Tribal Agency, Northwest Frontier Province and Baluchistan.

The fall of western Pakistanis confirmed by both NATO commanders on the ground in Afghanistan, and the Pakistani press. NATO commanders and the Pakistani press have repeatedly reported large and small formations of Taliban fighters crossing the border to engage Afghan and NATO forces, attack district and province centers, and thwart reconstruction projects. NATO forces routinely engage these battalion-sized formations crossing the border. NATO has also begun to shell Taliban forces across the Pakistani border.

Lieutenant General Karl Eikenberry, the outgoing NATO commander in Afghanistan, has called for strikes against Taliban positions inside Pakistan. This sentiment has been repeated, both on and off the record, by numerous military and intelligence officers familiar with the situation inside Pakistan.

The root of this problem can be directly traced back to Pakistan's failure to subdue the Taliban and al-Qaeda during operations which began in 2004. After the Pakistani Army took serious casualties (the real number is unknown, but intelligence sources estimate upwards of 3,000) during fighting in South Waziristan, the government signed a secret deal in the spring of 2006 that essentially ceded control to the Taliban.

Afterwards, the Taliban violated the terms of the agreement and established a parallel government, opened recruiting offices, continued to shelter foreign terrorists, dispensed its own brand of sharia justice and assassinated pro-government tribal leaders. The North Waziristan Accord followed shortly afterward in September of 2006. Since then, cross border attacks have increased by 300 percent, and the violence in both Afghanistan and Pakistan has skyrocketed. The Pakistani government seeks to cut more deals akin to the Waziristan Accord, and give the Taliban great control over not only the tribal areas, but the entire Northwest Frontier Province. Given that Pakistan's response has been to cede territory to the Taliban while cross border attacks increase in Afghanistan, the notion that Pakistanis doing all it can to secure its border with Afghanistan is laughable.

Afghanistan 'winnable' - Campbell

BBC News / Sunday, 25 February 2007 - The military campaign in Afghanistan is "winnable", Liberal Democrat leader Sir Menzies Campbell has said. Speaking on BBC's Sunday AM, he said it was a difficult situation, but the country could gain stability.

He spoke after news that Britain's 5,600 troops in the country were due to be boosted, possibly by 1,000.

Deployment in Afghanistan had had a "clear set of political objectives," but resources were needed to fulfil military objectives, Sir Menzies said. The British troops are part of Nato's International Security Assistance Force.

Defence Secretary Des Browne confirmed last week more troops would be sent, but added a statement would be made in the Commons on Monday. The increase comes days after Prime Minister Tony Blair announced troops in Iraq would be reduced this year by 1,600.

Sir Menzies said Afghanistan was difficult, with "ferocious" fighting, and that some people said it is was dangerous as the Korean War.

"But there is no doubt that this is in a different category altogether from Iraq and it is somewhere where we should be putting resources to bring about, as far as we can, a successful conclusion," he said.

He added: "I think it is winnable: that's the judgement of the senior commanders. "But there's no doubt that there is a clear set of political objectives. What we need are clear military objectives but also, of course, fundamentally we need adequate resources so we can achieve both these military and political objectives".

After Mr Browne confirmed more troops would be sent to Afghanistan, the Tories said it showed British forces were too "overstretched" to carry out duties in both there and in Iraq.

Britain has recently revamped its operations in Afghanistan to put most manpower into Helmand province in the south, where the fighting is at its most fierce.

The 1,300 troops currently in Kabul will come out of that region shortly. The majority of those will go south to Helmand, except for about 400 who will leave Afghanistan.

The remaining 5,200 troops in the country will be bolstered by the expected extra 1,000 troops, making the UK force in Afghanistan 6,200-strong.

AFGHANISTAN: President pressured to sign controversial amnesty bill

KABUL, 26 February 2007 (IRIN) - Afghan President Hamid Karzai is under pressure to sign a controversial amnesty bill approved by the country’s national assembly last week. The bill provides sweeping immunity for those guilty of war crimes committed over the past two and a half decades of conflict in the country.

The 49-year-old Afghan leader had earlier decided not to sign the bill, but pressure for him to sign the document into law has been steadily rising. However, the 12-point bill must also be harmonised with the country’s constitution.

“The President would amend it [the bill] in a way that should not violate the country’s constitution or Sharia law,” Asif Naang, a spokesman for Afghanistan’s State Minister for Parliamentary Affairs, told IRIN on Sunday.

On Friday, more than 25,000 people rallied in the capital, Kabul, calling on Karzai to approve the bill. If signed by the president and made law, the bill would effectively shield those accused of serious human rights violations, many of them former Mujahideen (Afghan resistance fighters) who fought Jihad (a holy war) against the Soviet invasion in 1980s.

Former Mujahideen leaders - including second Vice-President Karim Khalili, Minister of Water and Energy Ismael Khan, former Defence Minister Qaseem Fahim and former Afghan president Burhanudin Rabani - took part in Friday’s rally, sending a clear message that the Mujahideen still wield significant power in the country.

Supporters of the bill have called it a trust-building mechanism that would encourage various factions in post-Taliban Afghanistan to work closer together in building peace and stability for the country.

Others were even more vocal. “Those who oppose the bill, in fact, oppose Islam and reconciliation,” Abdul Raab Rasoul Sayaf, an MP and former Mujahideen leader, said.

However, lawmakers, rights groups and the international community object to the bill. “We call on the President to decline the bill,” Kabir Ranjbar, a member of Afghanistan’s Lower House, said.

Ranjbar and other MPs have criticised the amnesty saying not only would it contravene the country’s constitution, but also the rights of thousands of Afghan victims.

Karzai has said he will only act in accordance with the constitution, adding that no one, including himself, could grant blanket immunity to war criminals.

“The President is in a difficult position,” Nasrullah Aabid, a Kabul University lecturer, said. “From one side, his second deputy and some cabinet members have put pressure on him to sign the bill, while on the other hand the United Nations, rights groups and many others want him to decline it.”

If Karzai declines the bill, there is likely to be trouble from its supporters. And if he accepts the bill, there is a possibility of protests by victims of war crimes.

Ahmad Nadir Nadiri, spokesman for Afghanistan’s Human Rights Commission, said the government must not ignore the millions of silent victims of wars and violence in Afghanistan who expect justice and fairness. “It is upon the government of Afghanistan to ensure both security and implement justice,” he said.

On 31 January, the country’s 249-seat lower house initiated the amnesty-for-all bill in defiant reaction to a Human Rights Watch (HRW) report in which Karzai’s government was called upon to prosecute all those accused of mass human rights violations and war crimes in the country.

The international watchdog named some of those who, according to the organisation, had committed widespread violence during decades of war in Afghanistan.

The controversial bill, which criticised the HRW report, was approved by the upper house of Afghanistan’s national assembly on 20 February, bringing it one step closer to becoming a law.

Under the country’s constitution, if Karzai refuses to sign the bill, it will revert to the Lower House where it will require a two-third majority to overrule the President and come into effect.

Around 80,000 civilians were killed in Kabul alone during the internal fighting between various Mujahideen groups in the 1990s after the Soviets pulled out of the country in 1989. Many others were kidnapped, mutilated or raped between 1992 and 1996 as the country plunged into a chaotic civil war.

Former Afghan warlords rally for amnesty

Kabul - CSM - In one corner of a soccer stadium that has seen both athletic contests and executions stands a poster some 20 feet tall of Afghanistan's president, Hamid Karzai. Perhaps appropriately, Feda Mohammad Mujahid has turned away from it.

The 25,000 Afghans crowded into this bare concrete oval hoist up different posters of stern-faced mujahideen commanders who first fought the Soviets, and then each other, before joining with America to oust the Taliban in 2001.

To Mr. Mujahid, wrapped in a white scarf against the winter chill, these are the heroes of Afghanistan's "holy wars," not war criminals. So he has come here to rail against Mr. Karzai and the tyranny of Western nations, which have opposed an Afghan bill that would grant the mujahideen amnesty for war crimes committed during the past 25 years.

"This is a mujahideen nation," he says, as nearby loudspeakers crackle with speeches of defiance. "We want the law of Islam, and the government of mujahideen."

Away from the teeming streets around the stadium, the attitudes of average Afghans take on a different air. Many express frustration that former military leaders who killed thousands and destroyed Kabul in a four-year civil war might never be brought to justice. Yet in a country still divided by tribes, tongues, and traditions, Friday's rally sent a clear message - that even now, Afghanistan's onetime warlords alone have the power to muster the masses.

In this rally, "you saw their continuing ability to mobilize people and to potentially influence politics," says Paul Fishstein, director of the Afghanistan Research and Evaluation Unit, an independent analysis organization here.

Some see amnesty as political ployThe bill itself, which was recently approved by both houses of Afghanistan's parliament, has attracted international attention largely because it has been portrayed as a self-serving political ploy. Those likely to benefit most from the legislation are legislators and government officials themselves, many of whom are former mujahideen who stepped into the political vacuum following the fall of the Taliban.

Among the speakers at Friday's event were members of parliament, the vice president, the president's top security adviser, an army chief of staff, and an energy minister.

To them, amnesty does offer a measure of self-preservation. The momentum for warlord amnesty here began after the execution of former Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein, a onetime US ally.

Former mujahideen members of parliament "thought that there might be a day that maybe they will face the same thing that Saddam Hussein faced," says Najibullah Kabuli, a member of the lower house of the Afghan parliament, the Wolesi Jirga, who abstained from voting on the amnesty bill because he thinks it is too broad.

"Didn't the US support the mujahideen?" asks protester Abdul Malik, noting how the mujahideen, too, were allies of the United States during the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in 1979.

Even after the fall of the Taliban, the international community could have taken a stronger stand against allowing former warlords into politics, says Mr. Kabuli, the member of parliament. For a country that has been at war for 25 years, "it was not possible to have a government that was free of war criminals," he says. "But it was possible for the government to have fewer of these."

As the political winds have shifted from a focus purely on stability to issues of human rights and good governance, former mujahideen have emerged as an easy target.

A report by Human Rights Watch, for instance, called for several members of the government to be tried for war crimes.

"Human Rights Watch should consider the stability of Afghanistan, otherwise Afghanistan will go toward crisis again," cried security adviser Mohammed Qasim Fahim. "This country we have today was created by the holy war, by the mujahideen, and by their sacrifices."

In this conviction lies the warlords' greatest power. In a nation with a tribal heritage and a history of endless foreign interventions and abandonments, Afghans have come to trust only on those closest to them. As a result, warlords are able to mobilize unshakable support though regional or ethnic alliances.

Protesters say amnesty brings unityFor those who slogged through the mud of Kabul's soccer stadium, thrusting frenzied fists into the air and bearing massive posters of commanders around the field in a triumphal march, the amnesty is partially an act of healing these historic rifts. Mujahideen commanders who once turned Kabul to rubble in their attempts to kill each other were now standing side by side.

"This is a war-torn country," says Mujahid, his hands folded behind his back, counting crimson prayer beads. "We have suffered a lot and we don't want to fight each other again."

"Let's forget about the past and think about a prosperous future," he says. "We want to be united."

A peaceful protest is a part of that message, some say. "We want to show the people of the world that one day we were evil to each other, but we can be peaceful, too," says Mr. Malik.

However, many Afghans and experts alike are skeptical. "These things tend to be cyclical - there tend to be alliances of convenience," says Mr. Fishstein.

Far from the echoes of the soccer stadium, Kabul resident Mohammad Ewaz sits on a stone wall in the hills high above the Kabul plains. In the amber light of late afternoon, he sips his tea, taking a break from the new wall he and his friends are building a few feet away.

Farther down the slope, the remnants of shattered houses, destroyed in the civil war, emerge from the hillside. "This is the work of the people who are asking for amnesty," he says.

"If they are really intending to bring unity, then it is a good idea," he adds. "But if it is just words and nothing else, then I don't think that it is a useful thing."

[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.]