In this bulletin:
- Commanders seek more forces in Afghanistan
- Governors oppose border fencing
- Border fencing a conspiracy: Taliban
- MacKay tells Pakistan to seek alternatives to mining border
- Afghan and Canadian FMs visited Canadian and Afghan troops in Kandahar
- Concerns about security continue to follow MacKay on Afghanistan trip
- Canada's new government announces funding to help women and reconstruction in Kandahar - 2007-01-08 News Release
- Civilian aid helps Afghan war effort
- Press Conference by Chris Alexander, Deputy Special Representative of the UN Secretary-General
- UNODC WELCOMES DEVELOPMENT DRIVE TO TACKLE OPIUM PRODUCTION
- Karzai turns down Pak scholarships offer for Afghan students
- Pakistan has gone the ‘extra mile’ in Afghanistan
- Gates, Rice expected to visit NATO this month for talks on Afghanistan, Kosovo
- Dr. Spanta letter to his Iraqi counterpart regarding execution of former Iraqi Officials - Posted On MoFA site: Jan 07, 2007
- AREU cautions against 'hasty' privatisation
- Indian Director of 'Kabul Express' Apologizes to Afghan's Hazaras
- Taliban tyranny and plight of Afghan women
- World: Former CIA Analyst Says West Misunderstands Al-Qaeda
Commanders seek more forces in Afghanistan
David Wood, Baltimore Sun | January 8, 2007
KABUL, Afghanistan -- Taliban forces, shattered and ejected from Afghanistan by the US military five years ago, are poised for a major offensive against US troops and undermanned NATO forces. This has prompted US commanders here to issue an urgent appeal for a new US Marine Corps battalion to reinforce the American positions.
NATO's 30,000 troops in Afghanistan are supposed to have taken responsibility for security operations. But Taliban attacks have risen sharply, and senior US officers here describe the NATO operation as weak, hobbled by a shortage of manpower and equipment, and by restrictions put on the troops by their capitals.
The accelerating war here and the critical need for troops complicate the crumbling security picture across the region -- from Afghanistan, where the United States chose to strike back after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, to Iraq, where US troops, in almost four years of fighting, have been unable to establish basic security and quell a bloody sectarian war.
President Bush is expected to announce this week the dispatch of thousands of additional troops to Iraq as a stopgap measure. Such an order, Pentagon officials say, would strain the Army and Marine Corps as they man both wars.
A US Army battalion fighting in a critical area of eastern Afghanistan is due to be withdrawn within weeks to deploy to Iraq.
Army Brigadier General Anthony J. Tata and other US commanders say that will happen as the Taliban is expected to unleash a campaign to cut the vital road between Kabul and Kandahar.
The official said the Taliban intend to seize Kandahar, Afghanistan's second-largest city, where the group was organized in the 1990s. "We anticipate significant events there next spring," Tata said.
At stake, in both Iraq and Afghanistan, is the key US strategic imperative of preventing Al Qaeda and Taliban forces from establishing terrorist havens, as Afghanistan was in the late 1990s when Al Qaeda launched operations to bomb US embassies and warships, and eventually hatched the Sept. 11 plot.
"This could be a pivotal year" for US and NATO forces in Afghanistan, said General James T. Conway, commandant of the Marine Corps, after a series of recent briefings here. "I don't think they see that they are near defeat or anything. I just think they sense they are vulnerable to inroads being made" against what had been a relatively stable country.
Despite the presence of about 30,000 NATO troops -- roughly 10 percent short of what its member nations had pledged to provide -- Taliban attacks on US, allied, and Afghan forces more than tripled in the past year, from 1,632 in 2005 to 5,388 in 2006, US officials say.
Suicide bomb attacks increased from 18 in 2005 to 116 in 2006. Direct-fire attacks also more than tripled, from three per day in 2005 to more than 10 per day in 2006.
With NATO unable or unwilling to stem the rising violence, the Taliban are pressing their advantage.
Rather than withdrawing to regroup over the winter, intelligence officials and combat commanders said, the Taliban forces -- clad in new cold-weather boots and fleece jackets -- are fighting through the bitter cold months.
"It is bleak," said Colonel Chris Haas, commander of the Joint Special Operations Task Force in Afghanistan.
Conway said US commanders understand that the Afghan war is an "economy of force" operation, a military term for a mission that is given minimal resources because it is a secondary priority, in this case behind Iraq. Nevertheless, Conway said, he favored dispatching a Marine battalion here.
The Taliban are also building up forces in southern Afghanistan. US special forces teams have found logistics bases and a field hospital for as many as 900 Taliban fighters in the area of Lashkar Gah.
Governors oppose border fencing
KABUL, Jan 9 (Pajhwok Afghan News): Governors of the nine provinces, sharing border with Pakistan, have rejected the fencing and mining proposal and said the step would divide the people and tribes straddling the border instead of proving helpful in discouraging cross-border infiltration of terrorists.
They believed any unilateral effort on part of the Pakistani government might jeopardise relations between the two countries as well as sabotage the efforts to convene the Peace Jirga agreed upon between President Karzai and his Pakistani counterpart Pervez Musharraf in Washington in September last.
Instead of erecting the fence and dividing the people living alongside the Durand Line, Pakistan should destroy sanctuaries and training camps of terrorists on the other side of the divide, suggested the governors.
Shalizai Didar, Governor of the eastern Kunar province, believed to be the hideout of fugitive Taliban and al-Qaeda elements, said people on both sides of the border were against the fencing and mining.
He said the road leading to Chitral had been blocked due to the recent snowfall and hundreds of Chitralis were using the Kunar route to reach the Mohmand Agency and other parts of Pakistan's NWFP.
Governor of the neighbouring Nuristan province Tamim Nuristani said people in Pakistan's Chitral and the Nuristan province had blood relations with each other.
How could they accept the fencing and mining of the border when they did not recognise the Durand Line, he questioned. Nuristani also referred to the problems existing between the United States and Mexico and said they did not ponder such a proposal like mining and fencing.
Nangarhar Governor Gul Agha Sherzai said the issue would come under discussion in the upcoming Peace Jirga. Sherzai said the provincial government had the same stance as adopted by the central government and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
Speaking to Pajhwok Afghan News, Governor of the restive Helmand province Asadullah Wafa said the decision to fence the border would create negative effects on convening of the Peace Jirga.
Governor of the neighbouring Zabul province Dilbar Jan Arman said the decision was reflective of the double standard used by the Pakistani government vis--vis Afghanistan. The fencing would divide families and tribes like Achakzai, Baloch, Kakar, Gurbaz, Noorzai and Shamalzai.
Speaking on the issue, Asadullah Khalid, Governor of Kandahar province, bordering the Balochistan province of Pakistan, said the neighbouring country wanted to sabotage the Peace Jirga.
He said the Afghan government had conducted a lot of homework, but the Pakistani government was trying to postpone the Jirga by using one pretext or another.
Dr Akram Khpalwak, Governor of the southeastern Paktika province, said terrorism could only be rooted by striking at its roots. He said Pakistan should stop harbouring terrorists instead of fencing the border.
Governor of the neighbouring Khost province Arsala Jamal said mining or fencing
the border was no solution to the problem. At the same time, it was violation
of the Geneva Convention and would also endanger the lives of innocent people.
Rahmatullah Rahmat, Governor of Paktia, also termed the mining proposal a pretext used by the Pakistani government to postpone the Peace Jirga.
He said people and tribes straddling the border were opposed to the Pakistan decision and thousands of people staged protest demonstration in the Aryub Zazai district of the province the other day.
The mining proposal was first floated by Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf last year. However, Afghanistan did not agree. About a fortnight back, Pakistan's Foreign Ministry announced that they would go for the mining and fencing with or without Afghanistan. The announcement created uproar in the Afghan media and the government instantly rejected it, saying the step would divide the people living on the two sides of the border.
Javid Hamim/Hashmi/Zabulai
Border fencing a conspiracy: Taliban
Pajhwok News Agency - 01/08/2007 By Abdul Mueed Hashmi
JALALABAD - Following the Afghan government, the anti-government Taliban also rejected the border-fencing proposal and said it would separate the people of Afghanistan and Pakistan living on the two sides of the Durand Line.
In an interview with Pajhwok Afghan News, Taliban spokesman Dr Hanif dubbed the border fencing proposal as a conspiracy hatched by the imperialists. He said their movement had roots in the masses and Taliban would resist each and every measure which is not acceptable to the people of Afghanistan.
The imperialists wanted to achieve their nefarious designs by using Pakistan, said Hanif while referring to the fencing and mining of the border.
He said fencing the border was tantamount to changing the destinies of the people of the two countries, and Pakistan was doing so at the behest of the 'infidel forces'.
Regarding the strong opposition by the Afghan government to the border fencing proposal, Hanif said the government had its own axe to grind.
The Karzai-led government is covertly supporting the idea and its opposition to the fencing proposal was superficial, said the spokesman. He added Shaukat Aziz's statement, terming his trip to Kabul as successful, bear testimony to the fact.
He claimed decision about the border fencing was taken during a meeting among US President George Bush, President Hamid Karzai and his Pakistani counterpart Pervez Musharraf in Washington in September last year.
Asked if Pakistan started the unilateral fencing of the border, Hanif said people of the two countries would not allow them to erect the fence or plant mines on the border.
MacKay tells Pakistan to seek alternatives to mining border
ISLAMABAD, Pakistan (AP) - Canada does not support Pakistan's plans to mine parts of its frontier with Afghanistan to combat cross-border movement by Taliban and al-Qaida guerrillas, Foreign Affairs Minister Peter MacKay said Tuesday.
Canada's opposition to the proposed Pakistani plan is based on its obligations under the Ottawa Treaty that bans the laying of landmines, said MacKay, who arrived in Pakistan late from Afghanistan.
Some 2,500 Canadian troops are in Afghanistan, most stationed in southern Kandahar province where they are helping battle a stubborn Taliban insurgency. At least 44 Canadian soldiers have been killed in Afghanistan since they began their mission there in 2002.
MacKay said at a joint news conference with his Pakistani counterpart, Khursheed Kasuri, that he offered Canada's help in surveying the rugged and porous border, such as aerial reconnaissance, training of border guards and a delivery of satellite telephones.
"We want to be co-operative and we want to be constructive in coming forward with solutions that we think are better alternatives," MacKay said.
Kasuri said that Pakistan would "give consideration" to the Canadian suggestions. But, he added: "We are not backtracking on our desire to control the border."
Pakistan announced last week that it would plant mines and build barbed-wire fences at selected areas along its long border with Afghanistan to combat cross-border movement by the guerrillas. Pakistan is not a signatory of the Ottawa Treaty that bans landmines.
Afghan officials have denounced the proposed mining of the border, saying it would not prevent illegal crossings and only hinder free travel by ethnic groups who live on both sides of the frontier.
Pakistan severed ties with the Taliban to become a U.S. ally in the war against terrorism following the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks against the United States.
The mining of the frontier is seen as an attempt to stave off western criticism that it is not doing enough to stop the cross-border insurgency.
MacKay said that Pakistan has made "great sacrifices and great strides" in efforts to control its border with Afghanistan. But he added that it was not Pakistan's job alone to stop the Taliban and other combatants from moving across the border.
"Nobody in the international community, in my view, would indicate with any degree of fairness that this is Pakistan's problem alone," MacKay said. "That's not reasonable."
Rebel violence has been particularly high in southern and southeastern Afghanistan in areas along the Pakistani border. In 2006, violence in Afghanistan killed an estimated 4,000 people in the deadliest year since the U.S.-led coalition swept the Taliban from power.
Afghan and Canadian FMs visited Canadian and Afghan troops in Kandahar
Afghan MoFA release - Posted On: Jan 09, 2007
Afghan Foreign Minister Dr. Spanta and his visiting Canadian Counterpart, Mr. Mackay arrived in the Southern Afghan city, Kandahar and jointly visited Afghan and Canadian troops based in the city. During the visit the two ministers also discussed issues of mutual concern and interest, including Canada’s ongoing involvement in the reconstruction, stabilization and democratization process in Afghanistan.
Concerns about security continue to follow MacKay on Afghanistan trip
8, 2007 - By: BILL GRAVELAND
Colonel Fred Lewis says working closely with the terrorist group is drug lords and black marketeers who don't favour a stable government.
KANDAHAR, Afghanistan (CP) - Foreign Affairs Minister Peter MacKay spent a lot of time talking about provincial reconstruction in Kandahar on Monday but the focus as he wrapped up his two-day visit here kept sliding back to security and the Taliban.
That focus became even sharper late Monday afternoon as two rockets were fired at the base just as the minister was set to leave for Pakistan. MacKay's flight remained on hold for about 15 minutes before finally taking off.
"Well, I prefer to focus on the positive but I'm not (going) to be naive. There are practical challenges that we still face, not the least of which is the movement of insurgents who come across the border," MacKay acknowledged at a news conference about 45 minutes before the attack.
"Insurgents who seem to take refuge, to rearm, to retrain inside Pakistan. That's part of the challenge," he said.
Earlier in the day MacKay, along with Afghanistan Foreign Minister Rangin Dadfar Spanta, took their entourage to the headquarters of the provincial reconstruction team in Kandahar city. MacKay announced Canada would contribute $10 million toward the salaries of Afghan police officers and presented the provincial police chief with 1,500 police jackets and 2,500 pairs of winter gloves.
But even as MacKay was being briefed on the progress of provincial reconstruction there were concerns being expressed about the future of Afghanistan and what will happen if Canada pulls out prematurely.
"Our biggest problem is security," said Asadullah Khalid, governor of Kandahar province, who narrowly escaped an attempt on his life by a suicide bomber a few months ago.
"All people are suffering from this type of activity from suicide bombers, from landmines and from other things. But I'm thinking first for (the safety) of civilians," he said.
His concerns were echoed by Spanta, who was visiting Kandahar for the first time in 30 years. "We have some difficulties because a small minority of terrorists and their supporters-they are very loud," said Spanta.
"And they convey their distraction message to the community. The absolute majority of Afghans is for the presence of the project to eliminate terrorism in this part of our world," he added.
Spanta isn't worried that Canada will pull its support out of Afghanistan prematurely. It is essential a Canadian presence remain, he said, in order to help his country stand on its own two feet.
"We have two choices. We eliminate terrorist groups or terrorist groups eliminate our democracy and peaceful life in this war," he said.
MacKay was quick to reassure the Afghan people that Canada was here for the long haul and had no intention of leaving yet. "We're very committed to this. There won't be abandonment. There won't be withdrawal," he said.
The next stop on MacKay's tour is Pakistan, where he intends to have a "blunt talk" with President Pervez Musharraf over border concerns.
The fact that Taliban are living and training just inside the Pakistan border and then slipping into Afghanistan to attack coalition forces has been a sore point between the two countries.
"I'm not going to pre-empt what we will discuss in Islamabad, but certainly the issue of the border is one that has been what I would describe as the weak underbelly of our ability to bring stability to the south," said MacKay.
"The control of movement across the border is something that has to be brought to heel." MacKay also intends to urge the Pakistani president not to turn to additional landmines as a way of controlling those who may be attempting to cross on foot. "I certainly intend to relay to the president Canada's position with respect to the use of certain elements to control movement," he said.
Canada's new government announces funding to help women and reconstruction in Kandahar - 2007-01-08 News Release
Montreal, Quebec — The Honourable Josée Verner, Minister of International Cooperation and Minister for La Francophonie and Official Languages, accompanied by the Honourable Michael Fortier, Minister of Public Works and Government Services and Minister responsible for Greater Montreal, today announced that Canada’s New Government will provide $1.75 million to UNICEF for two projects supporting maternal health and women’s literacy in Afghanistan’s Kandahar Province. The Minister also announced a $11.5 million Accelerated District Reconstruction Program to speed up reconstruction and development efforts throughout Kandahar Province. The announcement was made during a press conference hosted by UNICEF Canada.
“Today, Canada’s New Government is providing two important contributions for Afghanistan that will improve the lives of Afghan women and ensure critical infrastructure is developed in Kandahar,” said Minister Verner. “Our contribution to UNICEF helps to address critical issues facing Afghan women: maternal death in childbirth, and illiteracy. And our significant investment in the reconstruction program will ensure the Kandahar region gets the infrastructure it needs sooner.”
Today’s funding will support UNICEF in establishing a residential obstetric care facility in Kandahar City as well as to expand its literacy program throughout the province.
Nigel Fisher, President and CEO of UNICEF Canada, has previously worked on the ground in Afghanistan overseeing UN humanitarian operations. “The Canadian contribution announced today supports initiatives that are nothing short of vital. Providing mothers with the care they need to ensure the safe delivery of their babies, and supporting literacy and education initiatives for girls and women are two of the best investments we can make in ensuring the survival, health and well-being of women and children in Afghanistan.”
In a separate initiative, Canada will contribute $11.5 million, over two years, to the Accelerated District Reconstruction Program. This will help to speed up the construction and rehabilitation of roads, aqueducts, sanitation infrastructure, as well as refurbishing schools and clinics throughout Kandahar Province.
Today’s announcement is part of Canada’s total contribution of nearly $1 billion over 10 years aimed at reconstruction, reducing poverty and strengthening Afghanistan’s governance, all of which are key elements in stabilizing the country and the region. For more information on Canada’s programming in Afghanistan, please refer to CIDA’s website at www.acdi-cida.gc.ca/afghanistan-e.
Civilian aid helps Afghan war effort
The Gazette editorial - Tuesday, January 09, 2007
Critics of the Canadian mission in Afghanistan keep saying military combat power will not win the battle for the hearts and minds of the Afghan people. That's correct, and it is encouraging to see that our government is working on the reconstruction part of the package as well.
Fundamentally, we should all remember that nothing will make Afghans really welcome the presence of thousands of foreigners, many of them armed with heavy weapons, wandering around the country. In that sense, there's no real chance of winning hearts and minds.
But consider a news report from the eastern city of Khost, where a roadside bomb Sunday killed newborn twins, their mother, and her mother. The same day in Helmand province, motorcycle-borne shooters killed a school principal. It is evident from such stories that the Taliban are not interested in hearts and minds, but only in making the country ungovernable.
Such terror tactics can intimidate the population into abject servility to fanatics - that has happened before in Afghanistan. The whole world has a stake in making sure that it doesn't happen again.
Part of the response to such tactics involves firepower. Part does not. So it is good to know that this week, while Canadian soldiers continue operations, this country is also emphasizing aid to the civil power and the population. One Canadian cabinet minister announced $10 million to help pay Afghan police salaries. Another announced $1.4 million for a literacy program and $350,000 for obstetric care. Last week, another announced a gift of 560 wheelchairs for a country with no shortage of maimed men, women and children.
"Rebuilding" the country is pointless, not to say impossible, except behind a strong shield of military and security protection. Canada and other Western countries involved in Afghanistan need to make the two kinds of effort in parallel. In small ways and in big ones, that's what is happening now.
Press Conference by Chris Alexander, Deputy Special Representative of the UN Secretary-General - Kabul – 8 January 2007
Senior PIO: A belated Eid Mubarek to you and your families if I haven’t spoken to you already so far this year. We are very fortunate to be joined today by Chris Alexander, UNAMA’s Deputy Special Representative of the Secretary-General in Afghanistan. Chris will be making a few remarks about the events of last year and then looking forward to the year ahead. We will take questions after Chris’s opening comments and with that I’ll hand over to Chris.
DSRSG: Thank you Aleem and Eid Mubarek to you all. It’s great to be with you in 2007 and thank you for braving the cold and the snow to join us at UNAMA. The start of a new year is an appropriate time to reflect on the achievements and challenges of last year and to look ahead to some of our shared priorities for this coming year.
Without doubt 2006 will be remembered as a challenging for Afghanistan. The story that we have all had to tell and the reporting that you have done has been dominated by the insurgency which has considerably slowed the pace of progress towards the goals Afghanistan has set for itself and the goals for which it has enormous international support. But, whatever the challenges, Afghan and international forces made some important progress in 2006. The job is far from completed, much remains to be done, but there is a clear picture as we enter 2007 with regard to the shape of the insurgency, the causes of the insurgency and the solutions for this insurgency.
One of the highlights of 2006 was the growth in the size and the quality of Afghanistan’s own national security forces – the Afghan National Police and the Afghan National Army. We in UNAMA believe that one of the keys to success on security in 2007 will be increased focus on the training and equipping of Afghan Security forces. We have also at the same time emphasised that overcoming and talking this insurgency will require not only a military and security effort, but a stronger focus on development; on improved governance; on regional diplomacy and on dealing with the very complex problem of the emerging narcotics industry in this country.
The most tragic aspect of this insurgency, of this violence, has been the toll this has exacted in terms of civilian casualties – in terms of lives of Afghans that have been ended, interrupted or ruined through injury by the violence initiated by insurgents and the violent conflict that obviously Afghan and international security forces are caught up.
Our position on this has been very clear and it will remain clear this year and in subsequent years. All parties to this conflict must do everything in their power to avoid the loss or injury to human life, without exception. The reality of this insurgency is that the number one target of the insurgent groups themselves has been innocent Afghan civilians. By our reckoning in 2006 there were 124 suicide bombings organised by insurgents and they resulted in the death or injury of hundreds of Afghans. The impact of these attacks on civilians is what leads us to term these attacks terrorist attacks and those responsible for them must be held accountable for the tragic loss of life that they have brought about.
But innocent Afghans have also perished as a result of military operations and we very much welcome NATO’s recent assurances that in 2007 they too will be focused on doing everything in their power to avoid losses of innocent lives. But our job is to remain close to the people of Afghanistan and we in the United Nations will remain absolutely vigilant in monitoring the humanitarian impact of military and insurgent operations on Afghanistan’s civilian population.
In 2006 there was some useful dialogue between Afghanistan and Pakistan on the issue of insurgency, on the cross-border nature of the causes of this violence. An important tri-partite commission, including the senior representatives of the military from both countries and ISAF met several times and intensified its work in 2006 and we saw real cooperation in road building with Pakistani support; in healthcare with Pakistani support, towards the eradication of polio from both countries.
But we also saw mutual recriminations expressed by both the Government of Afghanistan and Pakistan and the intensity and volume of the recriminations in some respects increased and grew louder during the year. This war of words, this rhetorical contest between two Governments, between two partners in this region must end. Pointing fingers leads nowhere, when what we really need, what Afghanistan most needs is constructive engagement and joint action to tackle a very serious security challenge.
I would draw all of your attention, at the beginning of 2007, to United Nations Security Council Resolution that bears the number 1267. The list of terrorist leaders established by resolution 1267 came into being in 1999. The only figures on this list in 1999 were Taliban leaders – this was before September 11 and this was quite a long time before any leaders of al Qaeda were added to the list. Resolution 1267 which has been renewed every year since 1999 requires all states to freeze the assets; or prevent the entry into or transit through their territories of the people appearing on this list. It requires all states to prevent the direct or indirect supply, sale or transfer of military equipment to these individuals. I don’t need to point out to any of you that resolution 1267 as it relates to the Taliban leadership is not so far being implemented. Of the 142 Taliban leaders on this list, only a handful have been captured, reconciled or their whereabouts otherwise established.
Mullah Akhtar Mohammad Osmani passed away in a military operation in December 2006 was one of the leaders on that list. But many other leaders of the Taliban remain at large and continue to organise, plan and carry out terrorist activities in this country and this region. One of our hopes for 2007 is that this year can be a time of improved implementation of what we consider to be a very important United Nations Security Council resolution 1267.
Above and beyond violence and terrorism, we look back on 2006 as a time of achievement, a year in which Afghans showed their determination to continue to move their country forward and achieved more in their villages, in their cities, in their institutions than is generally recognised around the world. The Afghan economy continued to grow at a strong pace. International institutions estimate growth in 2006 to have been from eight and fourteen percent. We do not have a final figure, but either way, it was strong, amongst the strongest in this region and in the world.
One of the prominent stories of 2006 was the emergence of the private sector – water bottling factories, more investment by global companies like Coca Cola, like Siemens, the growth of wireless networks and of the construction industry.
And all through 2006, a new National Assembly began to give legitimate voice to the concerns of ordinary Afghans, of Afghans who are engaged in, interested in, concerned about the future direction of their country. And let’s not forget the achievements that mean most to Afghanistan – the grassroots level – where most Afghans live. By the end of 2006, over 17,000 rural communities across this country had been reached by the National Solidarity Programme, one of the most successful rural development programmes launched anywhere in the world in past decades.
And let’s not forget that 2006 was the year of the Afghanistan Compact when the entire international community comprising over sixty countries, many prominent international institutions came together to commit themselves to five more years of unique partnership in the cause of Afghanistan’s transition.
What has been the UN’s role in all of this? To give you a few examples. In the past year UNICEF has helped nearly three million Afghan children with schoolbooks and other learning materials. The WFP has provided support and in many cases a real lifeline to over five millions Afghans suffering from droughts, flooding and other forms of food insecurity and vulnerability. UNHCR in Afghanistan has helped over 150,000 Afghans return home and has provided them with food and materials for shelter. These Afghans came back to the country, to the Afghanistan of 2006. This was after four million of their predecessors had returned, often into conditions of insecurity with which we are all too familiar from last year. They came anyway, they believe in the future and they have started to rebuild. The World Health Organisation has lead efforts to vaccinate millions of Afghan children against deadly childhood diseases, including polio.
UNAMA opened three new offices in 2006, two of them in the south and south-east of the country. All are helping us play a vital part in engaging more closely and more intensively with the communities and the population that matter to the future of this country.
Looking forward to the year ahead, UNAMA will continue the expansion of our operations into new provinces. We think that our presence with the Afghan Government, alongside civil society and NGOs can act as a catalyst for development and for stability.
Our overriding priority for 2007 is to strengthen the rule of law and to help the institutions of this country improve standards of governance. These issues have an enormous direct and indirect impact on development, on insurgency and indeed on Afghanistan drug trade and corruption. Continuing reform of the Ministry of the Interior and of the national police will be an imperative throughout 2007. As will be the strengthening of the Attorney-General’s Office and the courts system in general.
Without an Attorney-General and prosecutorial system that are professional, above corruption we will not see the rule of law established in Afghanistan. The good news is that thanks to new leadership and thanks to political will in the Afghan Government and in the international community these goals can now, quite probably, be achieved.
Another priority will be helping the Government to implement the recently launched Action Plan on Peace, Justice and Reconciliation. Many of you will have seen the launch of that action plan by President Karzai which we would count amongst the highlights of political life in the country in the past calendar year.
By this launch and by this speech, President Karzai and the whole Government have shown their commitment to recognise the suffering of victims of war and other human rights abuses from all the errors of conflict. They have also demonstrated that those responsible for human rights abuses in the past may yet have to face criminal justice in the future. And all of this is vital if we are to truly overcome a legacy of conflict and do our duty to victims and end the impunity, which continue to blight the lives of Afghans in many parts of this country.
In 2007 UN agencies, the whole UN family will very carefully, but very energetically continue the patient work of reconstruction and recovery. From building roads to building schools and from strengthening institutions to delivering humanitarian assistance. The United Nations has been in Afghanistan for fifty years and our commitment to Afghanistan remains absolutely solid. We are determined to build on the progress in 2006, to implement the Afghanistan Compact and to cement peace, stability and improvements to the lives of all Afghans.
Our message to the Afghan people and to the international community in 2007 is that Afghanistan cannot only weather the storm, Afghanistan can succeed. We look forward to continuing all of our work in close partnership with you and with the Afghan people in 2007.
Questions and Answers:
Question - DPA: You described 2006 as a challenging year but many people are saying that 2007 will be more violent and that the Taliban will increase their activities [inaudible]... secondly your comments on the Pakistani proposal to mine the border, what can the UN actually do to prevent this?
DSRSG: It too early to predict what the trend will be in violence in 2007. Remember last year almost everyone was wrong in their predictions. We do know that some of the factors driving the insurgency, making the insurgency worse, have not been addressed. Institutions inside Afghanistan are still weak and both inside Afghanistan and outside Afghanistan there are sanctuaries that support the insurgency. But we understand this insurgency much better as 2007 begins. Both the Afghan and international partners have very good information on how the Taliban is operating, on how Haqqani and his network is operating, on how Hiz-be-Islami and Hekmatyar are operating and that can help us no matter what in 2007. Our challenge and our priority in 2007 will be to make those responsible for initiating violence, accountable for that violence, for what they are doing. And look at the last several months, there has been significant decline in the number of attacks and security incidents in Afghanistan. Look at the number of suicide attacks in Kandahar compared to previous months. This is not just because of cold winter weather, progress is possible, and these networks are driving the insurgency are not omnipotent, they are very strong and with good cooperative work they can be defeated. Our messages for the two governments most involved in cooperation against the insurgency - Afghanistan and Pakistan - is to focus more on facts and necessary actions and less rhetoric point scoring on public statements. When someone makes a statement that Mullah Omer is living outside of Kandahar and has never stepped foot in Pakistan since 1995, this is not a true statement. It does not help us focus on reality and build trust. When someone says that there is an uprising of Pashtoon people against the government in Kabul, this not true. The support for Taliban in Afghanistan has measured as little as three percent. The truth is that these networks are operating in both Afghanistan and Pakistan that the leaders spend time in both countries and law enforcement and even military action is required wherever they are located.
Follow up question: what is your position on the fencing?
DSRSG: The fencing will not contribute to better security in either country in our view. In fact, the United Nations and most of the countries of the world are convinced that laying land mines is a very serous threat to the human security of the population that live nearby the places where the mines are laid. We regret the decision of the government of Pakistan to proceed with the laying of land mines and we call up on both governments to strengthening their commitment to cooperative solutions to the security problems that this region faces.
Question - VOA: (Translated from Dari) As you earlier mentioned that Taliban insurgents are operating and crossing both sides of the border and you also mentioned that out of 142 suspected Taliban and Al Qaeda members listed on the UN Security Resolution 1267, have not yet been arrested. Do you mean that these wanted leaders are in Pakistan and the government of Pakistan has not been cooperative in this regard?
DSRSG: The reason why so many are still at large because the lack of international cooperation yes. It because of insufficient capability to do the difficult work of locating and ultimately arresting these people that is required. Pakistan has taken steps against some of the people on the list and even arrested some of those on the list. And most experts would agree that others on the list were in Pakistan for at least part of 2006. We are calling on everyone to attach priority to this resolution, which means acting against these leaders wherever they are found. And Pakistan has given on many occasions the assurance that if these leaders are found in Pakistan action will be taken. We are all counting on them be true to that statement of intend. And in our view there is more work to be done in and around Quetta and else where.
Question - All India Radio: Pakistan has not signed the Ottawa convention, what can the international community do to stop Pakistan laying land mines on the border?
DSRSG: Those countries that still use land mines are on the minority in the world. Afghanistan is a signatory to the Ottawa convention and to the associated protocols. And I hope all the nations of world of the world can convince Pakistan and other countries that have not signed the Ottawa convention of the threat and danger to ordinary human beings that land mines presents. We also hope that Pakistan in future prefers collaborative and cooperative solutions to the security challenges that are agreed with Afghanistan rather than unilateral steps.
Question - Aina TV: (Translated from Dari) Achieving to peace and stability has other ways too and Afghanistan sees this in bringing [more] pressure from the international community on Pakistan to drop its support to the Taliban. The United Nations and UNAMA has always ignored it and did not address it. It means either the United Nations did not say that Pakistan is not supporting the Taliban or the United Nations does not take it seriously. What measure will you take in 2007 for Pakistan to stop its support for Taliban?
DSRSG: It is a very important fact. I said in 2006 on several occasions, that government of Pakistan is opposed to Talibanisation and that it will take law enforcement steps and even military steps against the Taliban. At the same time we read Pakistani newspapers, we watch Pakistani television; we know that there are people inside Pakistan and outside of government that support the Taliban. And we are very concerned by this, because these voices are supporting terrorist organisations that are causing insecurity and violence on a significant scale in Afghanistan. And we will do in our power to see that the international community supports Pakistan in standing against the Taliban network and other terrorist networks that are operating in Afghanistan. But Afghanistan cannot just sit and wait for the international to do something. There are ways that making the insurgency weaker that Afghanistan can control. Strengthening institutions particularly in the south and south east can help to overcome the insurgency, stronger police and army can help to overcome these weak opponents militarily and strong measures to arrest drug traffickers and drug related corruptions in the government can help to overcome the insurgency. So we in Afghanistan, the government of Afghanistan, the people of Afghanistan and UNAMA, we need to focus first and foremost on the factors we can influence, that we can change. If just wait for something to happen outside of Afghanistan, we may just watch the violence get worse. But I think you can also agree that United Nations in our reports, in our statements has been as frank and as clear as anyone describing the cross border nature of this insurgency. If not we can give you some reading materials!
Question - New York Times: Will the United Nations Security Council bring pressure on the Pakistani authorities to implement resolution 1267 in 2007?
DSRSG: One of the reasons I raised the 1267 resolution is that many of you may remember that the Security Council was here in Afghanistan towards the end of 2006 - in November. One the recommendations that you can see in their report, which is on the internet, relates to this resolution. And in the wake of that report, we have the responsibility to support the United Nations and the international community in updating and ensuring better implementation of this resolution. And let’s be clear, that some of the people on the list like Governor Muneeb, the Governor of Urozgan and Mullah Salam Rocketi have reconciled themselves. There are others, who are demonstrably important leaders of the violent extremist Taliban movement today who are not on the list and probably should be
Question - IRIN: There were three key issues 2006 – security, corruption and the booming drug trade. What measures will you take if these challenges remain unaddressed in 2007? What plans are in place?
DSRSG: Our shared objective is to improve the lives of the Afghan people. All of the things you describe make it harder and slower to do so. As the analysis of UNODC (United Nations Office for Drugs and Crime) and the World Bank has shown opium production does not make the population or the farmers rich. On the contrary - it makes them indebted, impoverished and intimidated. All of the factors you mention – insurgency, corruption and opium production also make Government institutions weaker. They undermine Government authority and they undermine civil society. So the answer is very simple. But, even if these dangers, these challenges are still with us in 2007, there is a very strong determination on the part of the United Nations and all of Afghanistan’s partners to find a solution. We can overcome these obstacles to development. Opium poppies are not growing very much in peaceful parts of Afghanistan where there is strong governance and rule of law. It is growing in the largest quantities where the Taliban is strong. Suicide bombings are not inevitable. We saw how some good police work in Kabul made them much less of a factor in this city. And we saw in early December how some success in Kandahar by Afghan institutions has made that city safer for the past month. There is no reason why we can’t have more success like this.
Question - Hindu Kush news agency (translated from Dari): As you repeatedly say, there are some people in Pakistan who are supporting the Taliban and he would like to know from you, as a UN representative why don’t you tell the United Nations to take action against the Pakistani Government to prevent them from supporting the Taliban. Will there be a decision by the UN to take any action against the Pakistani Government in 2007 in this regard? The second part of the question relates to some of the people who are in the 1267 list, adopted by the Security Council. Can you specifically say those names, who are those people?
DSRSG: We are the United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan. We are supporting a transition and nation-building in this country. We are encouraging all Afghanistan’s neighbours to be partners in building peace and stability here. The statements that I have made, the statements that Tom Koenigs has made, the reports we have issued, I think stand on their own merits.
On your question on the list, for example, Mullah Dadullah is not on the list and he is the most obvious candidate. But there are probably other candidates too. Thank You.
UNODC WELCOMES DEVELOPMENT DRIVE TO TACKLE OPIUM PRODUCTION
The United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) welcomed President Karzai’s decision in early January to allocate US$ 76 million for reconstruction projects in all districts located near the border with Pakistan. 600 projects in 88 border districts will focus on rebuilding of infrastructure facilities and investments for local people.
If we want to influence farmers not to cultivate opium poppy, we must offer alternative sources of licit income and employment opportunities,” said Christina Oguz, the new head of the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime in Afghanistan.
“These development projects will help provide viable alternative to planting opium poppy this year and are a key part of the overall strategy to tackle this issue. With the exception of Nangarhar, the eastern border provinces are not major opium producers – but we must not be complacent,” said Oguz.
Many of Afghanistan’s poor do not cultivate opium, but many migrate seasonally to work in areas where opium is grown, if they lack alternative income prospects.
“These labourers are in dire need of sufficient income to support their families. Health facilities, schools, irrigation, electricity, roads and other social and economic infrastructure investments are crucial for creating a variety of licit work opportunities for them, including outside farming,” said Oguz.
Every season over two million labourers are needed – in addition to the farmers themselves – to lance the opium capsules. Last year, in the eastern region alone, 124,000 labourers received their income from working in poppy fields.
In the long run, only economic development, in combination with functioning democratic institutions at central and local level will help Afghanistan to solve the opium problem. It is important for the Government of Afghanistan to support those governors, district administrators and elders now who are against opium poppy cultivation.
”Tribal chiefs and elders like those who gathered recently in Paktiya province to discuss the harms of narcotic drugs and call for alternative livelihoods should now be rewarded with investments in their districts,” said Oguz.
Karzai turns down Pak scholarships offer for Afghan students
Kabul, Jan 09: President Hamid Karzai on Monday said that he had turned down an offer of 1000 scholarships for Afghan students by Pakistan.
The offer was made by visiting Pakistan Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz last Thursday during two-hour conversation between the two leaders, he disclosed this to his Council of Ministers.
According to the spokesman of the Council of Ministers who briefed the media, Karzai said, "I told the Pakistan Prime Minister that you should first stop torching and destroying our schools. Our innocent children should not be martyred. The question of scholarships, or any assistance in the field of education, comes after that."
At a joint press conference that followed Karzai-Aziz meeting, neither side made any reference to this, for only agreements were alluded to.
But the replies that the two leaders gave on the crucial issues of border fencing and mining by Pakistan and on the Afghan proposal for a peace jirga, made it amply clear that Afghan-Pak perceptions on the vital issue of security were far apart.
Afghanistan is yet to give an official reaction to the news filtering in yesterday that fencing of the border by Pakistan had commenced.
In the absence of this, Karzai's decision to make public his conversation with Aziz and his dismissing of the Pakistan scholarships offer, is being considered a riposte here.
Defence Minister Abdul Rahim Wardak told the Cabinet "the Afghan National Army, with the cooperation of the people, will give a reply to the enemy's subversive activities."
Pakistan has gone the ‘extra mile’ in Afghanistan
By Khalid Hasan, Daily Times (Pakistan) Monday, January 08, 2007
WASHINGTON: “We have been the target of a whisper campaign that we are not doing enough, but no one has yet defined what enough is,” Tariq Azim Khan, Pakistan’s minister of state for information, told the Washington Post, when questioned about the border infiltration dispute with Afghanistan.
“We have gone the extra mile, and we have lost many troops. This is a joint fight and a joint struggle, but we can only look after our side of the border. The Afghans have to look after their side, too,” he told Pamela Constable of the Post in Islamabad.
Asked about Pakistan’s latest proposal to lay mines and string barbed wire along parts of the 1,500-mile border with Afghanistan, which some observers see as either cynical or far-fetched, Azim said, “If people take the legal routes, there will be no problem. They will be clearly marked. Our intention is to go after those who want to move illegally.” He compared Pakistan’s plan to the strenuous efforts made by US authorities to stop illegal immigrants crossing from Mexico. The minister noted that in addition to insurgent fighters, drug traffickers use hidden routes to bring opium out of Afghanistan, which produces 90 percent of the world’s heroin supply. He suggested that drug-related groups, who are powerful in southern Afghanistan, could be using their influence against the border-sealing plan.
The Post report published on Sunday said that the “contretemps” is the latest sour note in a deteriorating relationship between two staunch US allies that are linked by the common threat of terrorism but divided by bitter cross-charges of failing to curb a growing Islamic insurgency that operates on both sides of the border. Karzai has said that the plan “will not prevent terrorism, but it will divide the two nations.” The tension has persisted despite a series of high-level meetings between Karzai and senior Pakistani officials, including the two-day visit by Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz to the Afghan capital this week and a private session with President Bush at the White House in September that brought Karzai together with Pakistani President General Pervez Musharraf.
The Post quoted the head of South Asia at the State Department, Richard Boucher, who said two weeks ago during a visit to Canada, “The Taliban have been able to use those areas for sanctuary and for command and control and for regrouping and supply.” At the same time, he noted that Pakistani authorities had historically not “held sway” in the tribal regions. The report said Pakistani officials maintain that they have tried every possible means of reining in the fighters, first sending about 80,000 army troops to the restive border areas and then negotiating agreements with tribal leaders who pledged to control or eject armed Islamic groups. Both efforts have met with major problems.
According to Constable, “The information minister and other Pakistani officials insist that it is very much in Pakistan’s interest to have Afghanistan become stable and peaceful, in part because Pakistan is tired of hosting several million refugees from years of Afghan conflict and is worried that renewed turmoil could send a new flood of people fleeing across the border.”
Gates, Rice expected to visit NATO this month for talks on Afghanistan, Kosovo
The Associated Press - Monday, January 8, 2007
BRUSSELS, Belgium - U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates is expected next week to pay his first visit to NATO headquarters since taking office last month for talks likely to focus on Afghanistan and Kosovo, officials said Monday.
An extraordinary meeting of NATO foreign ministers, including U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, is also tentatively scheduled for Jan. 26, said alliance officials. They spoke on condition of anonymity because the meetings have not yet been officially announced.
The foreign ministers' meeting is also likely to be attended by representatives of Australia, Sweden and other non-NATO nations that contribute to the NATO-led force in Afghanistan, the officials said.
The talks are expected to follow up decisions at a November NATO summit in Latvia that called for closer coordination between military and civilian operations in Afghanistan to ensure battlefield gains are quickly followed by development, helping to build local support.
Ministers are likely to take forward the idea of creating an international "contact group" to coordinate the efforts of NATO, the European Union, U.N. and other international organizations along with the Afghan government and non-governmental aid organizations.
Gates will be making his first visit to Brussels since replacing Donald Rumsfeld as U.S. defense secretary. His talks with senior NATO civilian and military officials come as the alliance's 32,000-strong force in Afghanistan prepares for the expected intensification of clashes with the spring thaw.
Kosovo is also expected to loom large, as the alliance's 16,000-strong peacekeeping force braces for possible unrest following the release of a U.N. report on the province's aspirations for independence from Serbia.
U.N. envoy Martti Ahtisaari is due to make his final recommendation on the province's future shortly after the Jan. 21 elections in Serbia. A NATO diplomat said Ahtisaari may brief the United States, Russia and European nations in Vienna on his recommendations on Jan. 26.
Kosovo has been administered by a U.N. mission since mid-1999, when NATO launched an air war to halt a crackdown by Serb forces on separatist ethnic Albanian rebels. The province's ethnic Albanian majority wants full independence in the face of Serbian opposition — provoking fears of renewed violence.
NATO's commander in Kosovo pledged that his troops will respond strongly to anyone threatening security in the province. "KFOR will respond strongly against individuals or groups of individuals tempted to undermine peace and security, and I know that the people of Kosovo back up my determination," Lt. Gen. Roland Kather told reporters in Pristina.
The NATO foreign ministers are also expected to meet counterparts from the EU for talks that will focus on the Middle East, including Lebanon were European troops are taking a lead role in the U.N. peacekeeping force.
Dr. Spanta letter to his Iraqi counterpart regarding execution of former Iraqi Officials - Posted On MoFA site: Jan 07, 2007
In a letter to his Iraqi’s counterpart, Afghanistan’s Minister of Foreign Affairs, Dr. Spanta described execution of former Iraqi officials as possible weapons at the hands of extremists to further bring suffering upon Iraqi people. Referring to fundamental place of forgiveness in Islam, Afghan Foreign Minister expressed his wish to see a peaceful and stable Iraq.
AREU cautions against 'hasty' privatisation
KABUL, Jan 8 (Pajhwok Afghan News): The Afghanistan Research and Evaluation Unit (AREU) has asked the government to focus upon structural reforms instead of rushing towards privatisation of the state-owned enterprises.
A paper released by the AREU on Monday, said the government should reform the laws on investment, improve security and build the infrastructure to attract more investment from the private sector.
The statement said hasty privatisation would not only fail to achieve the desired results but also render about 15,000 people jobless. For this purpose, the government should concentrate upon improving the law and order situation and performance of the units scheduled to be presented for auction.
Improvement in security and condition of the state-owned enterprises would generate more revenues after some time as compared to their privatization at the moment.
But Finance Ministry's spokesman Aziz Shams said there was no haste in the privatisation process. He said everything was going smoothly and all possible efforts were being made to ensure transparency in the process.
Shams said four of the 65 state-owned companies had been sold to private sector through a transparent auction process so far, while 11 more enterprises would be presented for auction in the days ahead.
Indian Director of 'Kabul Express' Apologizes to Afghan's Hazaras
RFE/RL 01/09/2007 - Kabir Khan, the director of the Indian-made film "Kabul Express," has apologized to the Hazaras in Afghanistan for comments in his movie that he claims are not part of his original production, Kabul-based Tolu Television reported on January 6.
Afghanistan's Ministry of Information and Culture on January 3 criticized "humiliating scenes" in the film "Kabul Express" and decided to ban it in Afghanistan for offensive language toward one of Afghanistan's tribes.
Khan said the pirate copies of the film on sale in Kabul are not authentic, charging that they were imported from Pakistan. "I have heard that the film 'Kabul Express' hurt my Afghan brothers... I will soon send real copies of this film to Afghanistan and you will not see the names of any tribes in it.
If you still feel uncomfortable watching it, I apologize to the Hazara tribe," Khan said. The Pakistani Embassy in Kabul has rejected charges that the pirate copies of "Kabul Express" in Afghanistan came from Pakistan.
Taliban tyranny and plight of Afghan women
By Rekha Pathak – Organizer, (India) Jan. 07
Freedom is fundamental right for any person. It carves the personality of any person. Not only for a person, but also it is necessary for every living being. But now-a-days, Afghan women’s position is quite different. They want freedom and equality for their survival, but have no opportunity for education. They can’t do anything they want. Their own husband, father and brothers think that freedom is not good for women. When the US and Britain ousted the Taliban from Afghanistan, they said that they would remove women’s miseries. But five years later, their position is getting worse.
Education gives us capacity to think about any matter; it gives us capacity of judgement. But in Afghanistan, women have no right to go to school, though some women teach and learn secretly. In Kabul, if someone kills a female teacher, he gets 50,000 Afghanis. Such miserable condition is prevalent not only for those women who are teaching, but also for those women who are in non-governmental organisations, working on literacy and advocacy projects, and are in media.
Media and press are the medium for people, which give freedom to write or to give their opinion about any social, political, or economical issue. But a woman in Afghanistan, Farzana Samimi, who works in a television as a presenter anchor, for a weekly programme on women’s issue, is the target of constant threats. There, a third of districts are now without girl’s school, due to attacks on teachers and students by the Taliban and anti-government elements. Nilab Mobarez, a 45-year-old doctor, who stood recently as vice-presidential candidate, says: “Every day women are sacrificing themselves for their family or tribe. We still do not have the judicial system to resolve this.” 28-year-old Malalai Joya, the youngest and most famous of all the women in the Afghan Parliament, who stood up against oppressive traditions, received number of assassination threats, but she is still prepared to work for the upliftment of women through government and international organisations.
A woman who had to work in secret in an underground school in Herat during the Taliban regime is now able to speak out against her enemies in Parliament. However, she is still under protection because Taliban are threatening her with dire consequences.
There is no democracy, no security, and no women’s rights. Therefore, there is no fundamental change in the situation of women and all these activities are being committed despite many efforts by the US. The Taliban are continuing with their crimes in a different way. When the US and Britain ousted the Taliban from Afghanistan in November 2001, wife of the British Prime Minister Tony Blair, Cherie Blair said: “We need to help Afghan women in bringing their voice back, so they can create a better Afghanistan that we all want to see.” But after five years, what is the position of the women there?
There are many women who are forced by Taliban to marry with the person of their choice. The principal of the women’s police academy, Homera Dakik, was forced to marry 10 years ago with the head of the Taliban secret services. Her father refused, but they kidnapped her. She spent four years in that family but during that time she experienced only terrible mental torture. After the Taliban fell, her father gave shape to her dream—which was her freedom. But there are many other Homeras who are forced to live in such situation.
After the fall of the Taliban, women were happy. They dreamt of a change in their position. But now they have great fear as things are not going in the right direction. Many women are struggling with their life alone because they are badly treated by their husband. One Kochai says: “I don’t want that my children see all these things. So with my children I am living separately.” But they face shadow of fear every night. Many ordinary women and working women are threatened by the Taliban that they are spies of the government. They threaten them, “Don’t work and if they don’t listen, then they will be kidnapped and killed.”
This is the plight of Afghan women, who have no right and who die many time before death.
(The author is a research scholar, English Department, Ch. Devi Lal University, Sirsa, Haryana.)
World: Former CIA Analyst Says West Misunderstands Al-Qaeda
WASHINGTON, January 8, 2007 (RFE/RL) -- Michael Scheuer is a 22-year veteran of the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), where for six years he was in charge of the search for Al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden. While in the CIA, Scheuer anonymously authored two books critical of how Western governments were waging the "war on terror." He resigned in 2004 and is now a terrorism analyst for CBS News. RFE/RL correspondent Heather Maher asked him to assess the fight against Al-Qaeda.
RFE/RL: For several years you were the head of the CIA unit charged with capturing Osama bin Laden. How do you judge current efforts to find him?
Michael Scheuer: I think the current efforts to capture Osama bin Laden are probably the best we can make -- but in a situation where it's almost impossible to expect success. Bin Laden lives in an area that has the most difficult topography on earth. He lives among a population that is very loyal to him, as a hero in the Islamic world.
But I think most importantly, American forces there and NATO forces are more engaged on a day-to-day basis trying to make sure [that Afghan] President [Hamid] Karzai's government survives than they are in chasing Osama bin Laden. The tide has really turned against us in Afghanistan, and it seems to me very unreasonable to expect to capture or kill Osama bin Laden in the foreseeable future.
RFE/RL: Yet for years, U.S. President George W. Bush has characterized bin Laden's capture as an important victory in the war on terror.
Scheuer: Well, he is certainly the symbol of a war, a war that really had very little to do with terrorism. American political leaders on both sides of the aisle have really not come to grips yet, five years later, with what this war is about. They continue to say that bin Laden and Al-Qaeda and its allies are focused on destroying America and its democracy, its freedom, [its] gender equality. And really this war has very, very little to do with any of that. It has to do with what the West and the United States do in the Islamic world.
And so because of our misunderstanding of the enemy's motivation and his intent, we have greatly underestimated the difficulty of attacking him and destroying him before we get attacked again.
RFE/RL: It sounds like you think the Bush administration is making some serious mistakes in how they are waging the war on terror and the hunt for Al-Qaeda figures like bin Laden.
Scheuer: Well, I think the whole war effort so far has been a mistake, in the sense that we're slowly becoming [like] Israel, in that the only options we have open to ourselves are military and intelligence operations.
Bin Laden has never been focused at all on Western civilization, as such. His ability to rally Muslims to his side is dependent almost solely on the perception in the Islamic world that Western foreign policy is an attack on Islam and the followers of Islam.
RFE/RL: Has the United States created more of a target with its invasion of Iraq?
Scheuer: Certainly we have, and not intentionally. I'm not one that thinks that we have leaders who are eager for this war.
But we just don't have leaders with the courage to stand up and understand that it's our presence more than anything else in the Islamic world that motivates the enemy, and Iraq was really a turning point in the war on Al-Qaeda and its allies.
I'm not at all an expert on Iraq or whatever threat was posed by [former Iraqi President] Saddam Hussein. But the sad reality of it is that the invasion of Iraq turned Al-Qaeda and Osama bin Laden from a man and an organization into a philosophy and a movement. And now we're faced with an Islamic militancy around the world that is far greater than it was on [September 11, 2001,] and almost certainly durable enough to sustain an eventual loss of Osama bin Laden or Ayman al-Zawahiri.
RFE/RL: Do you foresee more attacks on the United States or in the West on the scale of the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks in New York and Washington?
Scheuer: Oh, I think greater than 9/11. I don't think it will happen in Europe, but I do think it will happen in the United States. Bin Laden has been very clear that each of Al-Qaeda's attacks on America will be greater than the last, and I think the only reason we haven't seen an attack so far is that he doesn't have that attack prepared. But when he does, he will use it. And try to get us out of the way, which of course is his main goal.
America is not his main enemy. His main enemies are the Al-Saud family in Saudi Arabia, the Mubarak regime in Egypt, and Israel.
RFE/RL: Explain a bit about what you mean by that.
Scheuer: The primary goal of Al-Qaeda and the movement it has tried to inspire around the world has been to create Islamic governments in the Islamic world that govern according to their religion. And bin Laden's view on this is that those governments -- the government of Egypt, the government of Saudi Arabia, the government of Jordan, Algeria, right down the line -- only survive because the United States protects them, and Europe protects them. Either with money, diplomatic and political support, or military protection.
And bin Laden's goal has been to simply hurt the United States enough to force us to look at home, to take care of things here, and thereby prevent us from supporting those governments, which he -- and I think the vast majority of Muslims -- regard as oppressive police states.
Once America is removed from that sort of support, Al-Qaeda intends to focus on removing those governments, eliminating Israel, and the third step, further down the road: settling scores with what the Sunni world regards as heretics in the Shi'ite part of the Islamic world. So his vision for the world, and the vision they're pursuing, is a very clear and orderly one, at least from their perspective.
RFE/RL: Tell me about the book you're working on, it's called "From Pandora's Box: America And Militant Islam After Iraq." What does that title mean?
Scheuer: Well, the Bush administration, the media, [and] the Democrats have talked a lot about the unintended consequences of invading Iraq. And the book is basically an effort to say: yes, there have been unintended consequences -- but they weren't unpredictable consequences.
What I'm trying to describe in the book is that we just have a simple failure here to understand our enemy and the world we deal with.
RFE/RL: And the use of the phrase "after Iraq" refers to a time when the United States is no longer in that country?
Scheuer: The book is written because I think we're defeated in Iraq. I think we're simply looking for a way to be graceful about the exit, but it's going to be very clear to our opponents in the Islamic world that they've defeated the second superpower.
They defeated the Soviet Union in Afghanistan; they've defeated us in Iraq; and it looks very likely that they'll defeat us in Afghanistan. And so Iraq, for all intents and purposes, as far as our enemies are concerned, is over.
RFE/RL: What do you see as Pakistan's role? Obviously President Pervez Musharraf is seen as an ally of the West and someone whom Bush keeps very close, but a lot of observers say there are many things going on in Pakistan that Musharraf turns a blind eye to.
Scheuer: One of the great misunderstandings in the United States -- and in Western European governments, and European governments generally, I suppose -- is to believe that every country's national interests are identical with ours. Certainly that's a malady in Washington.
The truth, I think, is America has probably never had a better ally than President Musharraf. What he's done to date in terms of allowing us to expand our presence in Pakistan; permission for over-flights of aircraft; his assistance to the CIA, especially, in capturing senior Al-Qaeda members in Pakistani cities; and, for the first time in Pakistan's history, sending the conventional armed forces into the border areas to try to capture some of the Al-Qaeda fighters -- which brought Pakistan to the brink of civil war -- is an astounding record of support for America.
Basically what Musharraf has done -- nothing has been in the interest of Pakistan. And I think he's just simply to the point -- and I think from his perspective, correctly so -- that we've stayed too long in Afghanistan, we haven't accomplished our goal. And he has to begin to look out more for Pakistan's national interests and its survival as a stable political entity.
RFE/RL: I'd like to switch to a different topic in the war on terror. You agree with the practice of rendition, is that right?
Scheuer: Yes. Well, in a sense, I was the, or one of the authors of the practice, and I think it's been, at least for the United States, the single most productive and positive counterterrorism operation that we have waged, at least in the last 30 years.
RFE/RL: Do you say that because of the quality of information the United States has gotten from people it has taken to third countries for interrogation?
Scheuer: No. You know that's one of the major misunderstandings of the media. I have been totally ineffective in trying to explain how the program was set up.
The program was set up initially to make sure that we removed people who were a threat to the United States or our allies from the street and had them incarcerated. The second goal was to seize from them at the moment of their arrest whatever paper documents or electronic documents that they had with them, or in their apartment, or in their vehicle, at the time. Those were the two goals. Interrogation was never really an important goal. Primarily because we know that Al-Qaeda's fighters are trained to fabricate information, or to give us a lot of accurate information that turns out to be dated and therefore not useful after it's been investigated.
The reason people were taken elsewhere than the United States was not for interrogation, but because President [Bill] Clinton at the time, along with his national security [aides], Richard Clarke and Sandy Berger, did not want to bring those people to the United States, and directed us -- the CIA -- to take them where they were wanted for illegal action, which turned out to be in Egypt or another Arab country. But the agency itself always preferred to take people into U.S. custody for reasons that were basically institutional protection.
We knew at the end of the day that this would become a very unpopular program because of where these people were taken.
RFE/RL: So the U.S. decision to open secret overseas facilities and keep people for indefinite periods of time -- that was something that developed after you put together the initial rendition program?
Scheuer: It was. Whatever was involved in those prisons -- that was a Bush administration decision to not put these people into the regular U.S. judicial system.
And the truth of the matter is that for both the Clinton administration and the Bush administration, American law makes it very difficult to put these people into our judicial system because most of the time, they're arrested by foreign governments, and we cannot vouch whether they were roughed up by those foreign governments, whether their documents were tampered with, whether their hard drives or floppy disks were tampered with.
And so what I think we're really seeing here is a lack of willpower on the part of American politicians to find a way to accommodate this process to the American judicial system.
RFE/RL: You decided to end your career at the CIA earlier than you originally planned to. Was it difficult to resign?
Scheuer: I resigned from the agency with much regret. I had intended to work there for 30 years and then retire, or longer if I could. And I had nothing to complain about regarding the agency. Indeed the agency asked me to stay when I decided to resign.
I resigned because I thought the 9/11 commission had thoroughly failed America by not finding anyone responsible for anything before 9/11. The amount of individual negligence and culpability at the highest levels of the American government was completely whitewashed by the 9/11 commission. And I resigned because I wanted to speak out on those issues.
My feeling since I have left has been that I have not had any influence at all on that particular debate. I think I've had a bit of influence through my books and writings on trying to convince people that the war we're fighting against, Al-Qaedaism, is a more serious problem than we have imagined to date. And that it has much more to do with religion than anyone in power is willing to talk about. I seem to have an equal number of detractors on the right and on the left, and perhaps that is suggests that I have at least said something that's getting some attention.
RFE/RL: Can I ask what your political affiliation is?
Scheuer: I've been a Republican all my life. I've never voted for a Democrat. I think my father would reach out from the grave if I did and throttle me. But that doesn't have anything to do with American security. I don't think the Bush administration has had a more pointed or eager critic than myself.
[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.] |
