In this bulletin:

• Taliban Puts Afghan Boy in Suicide Vest
• Afghanistan's opium battle will take years: govt
• Fighting drugs in Afghanistan a long-term job: US, British officials
• Aid failings 'hit Afghan progress'
• U.S. to investigate allegations of prisoner abuse in Afghanistan
• Iran condemns killing of innocent people in Afghanistan
• Pakistan condemns civilian killings
• USAID grants $8m for Afghanistan
• Britain to Meet Obligations in Afghanistan: Brown
• Danish defence minister visits Afghanistan
• Majority of Poles oppose Afghanistan mission
• ISAF troops discover IED factory, detain 13
• Bulgarians replace Romanians at Kandahar Air Field
• Living a lie over Afghanistan
• Canucks, Afghan troops forging tight bonds
• Border tensions could exacerbate war in Afghanistan
• Out-of-Afghanistan rumblings on the Hill
• Stoking Talibanisation
• Al-Qaeda ready for conditional talks
• Afghans resist camp closure, forced return to Afghanistan
• Afghan tourism sector picking up’
• Woman gives birth to five

Taliban Puts Afghan Boy in Suicide Vest

By JASON STRAZIUSO 06.25.07, AP

The story of a 6-year-old Afghan boy who says he thwarted an effort by Taliban militants to trick him into being a suicide bomber provoked tears and anger at a meeting of tribal leaders.

The account from Juma Gul, a dirt-caked child who collects scrap metal for money, left American soldiers dumbfounded that a youngster could be sent on such a mission. Afghan troops crowded around the boy to call him a hero.

Though the Taliban dismissed the story as propaganda, at a time when U.S. and NATO forces are under increasing criticism over civilian casualties, both Afghan tribal elders and U.S. military officers said they were convinced by his dramatic account.

Juma said that sometime last month Taliban fighters forced him to wear a vest they said would spray out flowers when he touched a button. He said they told him that when he saw American soldiers, "throw your body at them."

The militants cornered Juma in a Taliban-controlled district in southern Afghanistan's Ghazni province. Their target was an impoverished youngster being raised by an older sister - but also one who proved too street-smart for their plan.

"When they first put the vest on my body I didn't know what to think, but then I felt the bomb," Juma told The Associated Press as he ate lamb and rice after being introduced to the elders at this joint U.S.-Afghan base in Ghazni. "After I figured out it was a bomb, I went to the Afghan soldiers for help."

While Juma's story could not be independently verified, local government leaders backed his account and the U.S. and NATO military missions said they believed his story.

Abdul Rahim Deciwal, the chief administrator for Juma's village of Athul, brought the boy and an older brother, Dad Gul, to a weekend meeting between Afghan elders and U.S. Army Col. Martin P. Schweitzer. Schweitzer called the Taliban's attempt "a cowardly act."

As Deciwal told Juma's story, 20 Afghan elders repeatedly clicked their tongues in sadness and disapproval. When the boy and his brother were brought in, several of the turban-wearing men welled up, wiping their eyes with handkerchiefs.

"If anybody has a heart, then how can you control yourself (before) these kids?" Deciwal said in broken English.

Wallets quickly opened, and the boys were handed $60 in American and Afghan currency - a good chunk of money in a country where teachers and police earn $70 a month.

Afghan officials described the boys as extremely poor, and Juma said he is being raised by his sister because his father works in a bakery in Pakistan and his mother lives and does domestic work in another village.

"I think the boy is intelligent," Deciwal said. "When he comes from the enemy he found a checkpoint of the ANA (Afghan National Army), and he asked the ANA: 'Hey, can you help me? Somebody gave me this jacket and I don't know what's inside but maybe something bad.'" Lt. Col. George Graff, a father of five who attended the meeting, also teared up.

"Relating to them as a father and trying to fathom somebody using one of my children for that kind of a purpose, jeez, it just tore me up," said Graff, a National Guard soldier from St. George, Utah. "The depths that these people will go to get what they want, which is power for themselves - it's just disgusting."

A Taliban spokesman, Qari Yousef Ahmadi, denied the militant group uses child fighters, saying it has hundreds of adults ready for suicide missions.

"We don't need to use a child," Ahmadi told the AP by satellite phone. "It's against Islamic law, it's against humanitarian law. This is just propaganda against the Taliban."

However, a gory Taliban video that surfaced in April showed militants instructing a boy of about 12 as he beheaded an alleged traitor with a large knife. U.N. officials condemned the act as a war crime.

Fidgety but smiling during all the attention, Juma told the AP that he had been scared when he was surrounded by Taliban fighters. He cupped his hands together to show the size of the bomb, then ran his hands along his waist to show where it was on his body.

A fan of soccer, Juma said his favorite subject in school is Pashto, his native language, but he also showed off a little English, shyly counting "1, 2, 3" before breaking out in an oversize smile.

Raised in a country where birthdays are not always carefully tracked, Juma said he is 4. But he looks older and Afghan officials said he is about 6. His brother appears to be a year or so older.

Their village lies in Ghazni province's Andar district, a Taliban stronghold targeted this month in a joint Afghan-U.S. operation. The region remains dangerous and Afghan elders worry for Juma's safety.

Maj. John Thomas, a spokesman for NATO's International Security Assistance Force, said he was "a bit skeptical" about Juma's story at first, "but everything I've heard makes me more and more comfortable."

Thomas said the case would force soldiers to think twice before assuming children are safe.

"This is one incident. We hope it doesn't repeat itself. But it gives us reason to pause, to be extra careful," he said. "We want to publicize this as much as we can to the Afghan people so that they can protect their children from these killers."

Col. Sayed Waqef Shah, a religious and cultural affairs officer for the Afghan army, wiped away tears after seeing Juma. "Whenever I see this kind of action from the Taliban, if I am able to arrest them, I'll kill them on the spot," he said.

Haji Niaz Mohammad, one of the elders at the gathering, said he hoped "God makes the Afghan government strong" so it can defeat the Taliban. "They are the enemy of Muslims and the enemy of the children," he said, shaking his fists in anger.

Afghanistan's opium battle will take years: govt

06-26-2007, 10h14 KABUL (AFP) - Afghanistan's government said Tuesday there is no silver bullet to halt the country's booming opium production, which is financing the Taliban insurgency.

But the country's counter-narcotics minister, speaking at an event to mark the United Nations day against drug use and trafficking, vowed that the police and judiciary would soon start to effectively tackle the problem.

The UN released overnight its 2007 World Drug Report, which revealed a 49 percent leap last year in Afghanistan's production of opium, the raw ingredient of heroin.

It also reiterated that the country supplied 92 percent of the world's opium.

"The issue of narcotics is a problem that cannot be solved in a year or two," said the minister, Habibullah Qaderi.

"Afghanistan is a war-torn country," he said. "There is no proper infrastructure, there is no proper roads... each and every thing has fallen apart."

But he added that "as development takes place, as police reform grows (and) the judicial system improves, I can guarantee that there will be certainly in the future a reduction in the drugs problem."

The government was not considering using chemicals to eradicate opium poppy fields, he added. "Aerial and ground spraying were discussed last year and the Afghan government refused. There has not been discussion about it again," he said.

The United States has been pushing such methods but the Afghan government has resisted, in part because of concerns about its implications for peoples' health and livelihoods.

US ambassador William Wood told the event that about 10 percent of the heroin in his country was from Afghanistan and if this increased, Washington would consider a more "forceful response".

He did not elaborate but said this would be "based on consensus with the government of Afghanistan and international community."

According to the UN report, about 62 percent of Afghanistan's opium crop, worth about three billion dollars a year, comes from the south of the country, where Taliban insurgents are the strongest.

"Narcotics are directly linked to terrorists. Drugs provide part of terrorists' expenses," presidential spokesman Karim Rahimi told journalists at a separate briefing.

"Taking into consideration the demand and supply, the issue of drugs is an international problem and not only Afghanistan's," he said.

Fighting drugs in Afghanistan a long-term job: US, British officials

Published: Tuesday June 26, 2007 - Fighting drug trafficking in Afghanistan will be long and difficult because of the opium trade's significant role in the national economy, US and British officials said Monday.

"The fightback is going to be a long and difficult one and we must be realistic in our expectations of progress," said Kim Howells, Britain's minister of State at the Foreign and Commonwealth Office.

"Nothing can solve the drugs problem overnight. It's a complex problem that requires a complex solution," added Howells in a joint press conference with White House Office of National Drug Control Policy director John Walters.

"We have to be candid about what is achievable," said Walters, whose government is concerned about drug money fueling Afghanistan's Taliban rebels.

According to Howells, drugs cannot be eradicated "without helping create legal alternatives for rural communities, nor can you arrest traffickers if no criminal justice system exists to give them a fair and regular trial."

Afghanistan is the world's top producer of opium, the raw material for heroin, and its economy is largely dependant on illegal drug revenues.

According to United Nations statistics, Afghanistan in 2006 grew a record 6,100 tons of opium, and a march report by the UN Office on Drugs and Crime predicts even more opium will be grown this year in the country's areas of conflict.

Aid failings 'hit Afghan progress'

By David Loyn BBC developing world correspondent, Afghanistan 26 June 2007

More than five years after the defeat of the Taleban in Afghanistan, the failure of international aid to make a difference to Afghanistan is now having serious security consequences.

A recent Red Cross report showed that the worsening conflict in the south is now spreading to the north and west, alongside an upsurge of suicide bombing in Kabul.

The amount of money promised per head for Afghanistan was far lower than in other recent post-conflict countries, and too little of it has gone into increasing the capacity of the Afghan government to run things for itself.

In a report more than a year ago, the World Bank warned of the dangers of an 'aid juggernaut', a parallel world operating outside the government economy, with Afghans not even able to bid for major infrastructure contracts, such as roads.

The quality of much of what has been delivered remains very low. In schools where lots of money has been spent and the project signed off as functioning and open, girls are still being taught in tents in the mud.

There have been some successes. President Hamid Karzai often reminds audiences that 40,000 Afghan babies would not be alive today but for improvements in Afghan health care. And some aid is successfully going through the state for basic services.

One in 10 Afghan teachers have their salaries paid by British taxpayers, but to the teachers their pay packets are not earmarked as 'foreign aid' - they come from the Afghan Education department.

Similarly, some small rural schemes - drainage, clinics, small power projects and schools are now being built through the National Solidarity Programme. That is a fund managed and distributed through the Afghan government, with almost all of the money coming from international donors.

There have recently been some indications that the Americans, the biggest spenders in Afghanistan, are beginning to see the sense in these kinds of programmes, and planning to put more of their aid money through the government.

Changing policy in this direction is a slow process, although the theory at least is now US doctrine.

Building up the institutions of the state is after all a central part of fighting insurgencies, according to the new counter-insurgency manual being used by US forces - the first written since the end of the Vietnam War.

The manual even emphasises that the new state does not have to do things especially well: "The host nation doing something tolerably is normally better than us (the United States) doing it well."

But the doctrine has not yet worked through to changing the culture of how to spend aid money, either through USAid, or the Pentagon which runs its own aid programme.

Most international officials, aid workers and consultants in Afghanistan live a hermetically sealed life - advised not to step outside by armed security guards, and often working at very high salaries on very short-term contracts.

So too much of the money earmarked for aid to Afghanistan actually goes straight back to donor countries.

The Chief of Staff at the Afghan Counter-Narcotics Ministry, Abbie Aryan, condemned the culture of "champagne and caviar consultants" who come to Afghanistan and "deliver nothing".

There is still no internationally agreed strategy on how to tackle the drugs problem.

Britain plays a lead role in trying to stop the cultivation of opium poppies, and Mr Aryan says that large amounts of British money have been wasted on things that the Afghans do not need.

He agreed to talk to the BBC on the record because of a growing concern in the Afghan government that the international community is only paying lip service to the idea that Afghanistan should determine aid priorities for itself.

Rather than responding to Afghan concerns, and helping to fund an eradication coordination unit, when the Counter Narcotics Ministry wanted to set one up, the British government is instead funding a project for aerial photography that will cost more than $10m.

The Director of Survey and Monitoring at the ministry, Engineer Mohammad Ibrahim Azhar, told the BBC that when the project was first proposed, the Minister Habibullah Qaderi asked the British why they could not use a local plane, or at least provide equipment that would still be there when the project finished.

Instead the contract is with a British firm, with two British engineers running it in Kabul.

Mr Aryan said: "Our minister is concerned about this. We are constantly telling the British that you are supposed to be providing us with tools to fight narcotics, rather than all this luxury stuff, which we didn't ask for and didn't need."

The minister is reported to have asked the British why they could not have made the money available for Afghanistan to employ people to survey the poppy-growing areas on the ground.

The Deputy Minister of Counter Narcotics, General Khodaidad, is very supportive of the British position, but several other sources in the ministry have expressed concern about British priorities.

Mr Aryan says that the aerial photographs replicate material already available from the US, UN and British systems: "We can just look at the photo and say 'Wow, a five million dollar photo'."

Other concerns have been raised over a fund designed to provide alternative livelihoods for poppy farmers. Of $70m earmarked for this project, little more than $1m has actually been spent.

Afghan officials blame bureaucratic obstacles put in the way of spending the money. The UK Foreign Office admitted that there have been "teething problems", for a fund that is operating "in a challenging environment".

Behind the criticism over spending lies a more serious concern that the counter-narcotics policy is not working.

Poppy cultivation in Afghanistan is on the increase again, and rising fastest in areas under British control. A number of officials believe that the problem is now out of control, and that the international community has lost the war on drugs.

British policy towards Afghanistan is now undergoing its most radical review since the fall of the Taleban in 2001. There is a big increase of staff in Kabul, including a doubling of diplomats on the political side, directly engaged in relations with the Afghan government.

The review will include security, drug control policies, and development spending under a new ambassador, Sir Sherard Cowper-Coles. He told the BBC that Afghanistan is now "one of Britain's top foreign policy priorities".

U.S. to investigate allegations of prisoner abuse in Afghanistan

June 26, 2007, 3:00AM Associated Press

KABUL, Afghanistan — U.S. military officials opened an investigation into allegations that American and Afghan soldiers threatened to drag an Afghan detainee from a car earlier this month, NATO said Monday.

The German news magazine Focus reported Sunday that two of its journalists embedded with troops from the 82nd Airborne Division in Ghazni province witnessed the alleged incident on June 10.

The magazine said the suspect was detained during the search of a village by a patrol led by an Afghan soldier. When the suspect refused to talk, the platoon leader tied one end of a rope to the his foot and the other end to a vehicle, then threatened to drag the man, the magazine said.

Focus said the Afghan soldier had an American soldier start the motor. After idling for two minutes, it was shut off and the suspect was set free, the magazine reported.

U.S. and Afghan military officials are conducting a formal investigation into the allegations, NATO's International Security Assistance Force said.

"This alleged behavior goes against everything the U.S. military stands for and believes in," said Army Col. Martin P. Schweitzer, commander of U.S. forces in the region where the alleged incident occurred. "We take these accusations very seriously."

The U.S. soldier in question has been removed from his post, pending the outcome of the investigation, ISAF said.

Iran condemns killing of innocent people in Afghanistan

Tehran, June 26, IRNA - Foreign Ministry spokesman Mohammad-Ali Hosseini here Tuesday condemned killing of innocent people in Afghanistan's Helmand province. Hosseini was speaking to IRNA on bombardment of southern Afghanistan's Helmand province by NATO forces and killing of students. "Targetting innocent women, men and children is condemned," he said.

"It is regretful that five years after (collapse of Taliban), we still witness massacre of innocent people in Afghanistan by blind attacks of Western states," he added.

He stated, "Nearly 100 innocent children and individuals were massacred in Afghanistan over the past week." On news reports that Abdolmalek Rigi, leader of the terrorist group Jundollah had been wounded, Hosseini said, "Local Pakistani officials as well as our local officials have confirmed he has been wounded."

Pakistan condemns civilian killings

Daily Times, Jume 26, 2007 - ISLAMABAD: The Foreign Office has condemned the killing of civilians during recent attacks in North Waziristan from across the border in Afghanistan and asked NATO to be more careful in its operations.

“NATO should be careful while operating near the border,” Foreign Office spokeswoman Tasneem Aslam said at a weekly briefing on Monday. “Any action to be taken inside Pakistan should be taken by the Pakistani forces.”

Aslam said that NATO and Pakistani forces had enhanced coordination in counterterror operations and to stop “unwanted elements” crossing the Pak-Afghan border. She acknowledged that the forces had been operating in difficult

circumstances and sometimes there could be a lack of coordination due to fighting near the border and crossing of Taliban. She said that China had not formally protested to Pakistan and only “showed concern” at the kidnapping of Chinese citizens by students of Jamia Hafsa. She said that Chinese embassy officials had been in touch during the crisis and the relations between the two countries would not be affected.

She said Pakistan had formally asked the Organisation of the Islamic Conference (OIC) to adopt a clear-cut stance on the knighting of author Salman Rushdie. “We have formally approached the OIC to take a position on it (Rushdie affair),” she said in response to a question. However, she said that Pakistan had no plan to approach the UN, as there was no mechanism to move the world body in such matters.

Aslam said that Pakistan was disappointed with the British government’s decision to knight the writer of The Satanic Verses and persisting with it despite protests by Muslims the world over. She said the government of Pakistan had made its position clear to the UK. “As regards other Muslim countries, we do not comment,” she said.

Asked if the Rushdie affair would affect Pak-UK relations, she said, “We are disappointed as it could affect our efforts to bring religions and civilizations closer,” and efforts to fight extremism.

The FO spokeswoman confirmed that some German nationals had been arrested by the Pakistani authorities but refused to share details about them. She said that the German embassy had been informed about the arrests.

Aslam said that talks on Wullar Barrage had been rescheduled for August 21 and 22 on India’s request. She vowed that the schedule of talks on other issues would not be affected by the postponement of the parleys on Wullar Barrage.

She said it was “unfortunate” that relatives of missing Indian soldiers had made “certain statements” about Indian prisoners in Pakistan. She said that a committee comprising retired judges had already been set up to look into the affairs of prisoners in the two countries, and Pakistan was eager to make the committee functional at the earliest.

Aslam said that Pakistan had let the relatives visit 10 jails in Pakistan out of “human consideration”. She said that India had not shared with Pakistan the

investigation into the Samjhota train tragedy.

USAID grants $8m for Afghanistan

Tuesday June 26, 2007 (1628 PST) - KABUL, June 26 (Online): The United States Agency for International Development (USAID) is providing an initial $8 million contribution to the Good Performers Initiative as part of the Afghan governments Counter Narcotics Trust Fund (CNTF).

The new grant would be administered by the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), with the Ministry of Counter-Narcotics coordinating and managing the initiative, the USAID said the other day.

The objective of the USAID contribution to the Counter-Narcotics Trust Fund through the Good Performers' Initiative is to support continued progress towards poppy elimination and maintenance of poppy free provinces through the provision of financial support for priority development projects. In a press release, the USAID said funds in the Good Performers Initiative would be used to finance projects in provinces that were poppy-free or had met criteria that clearly showed they had either achieved success in reducing opium poppy production or had established systems to do so.

The projects funded under the Good Performers Initiative will reinforce the success of the Government of Afghanistan National Drug Control Strategy by rewarding provinces that show initiative in reducing opium production, the release said.

Activities funded through the Good Performers Initiative are agreed upon by the provincial governor and the Provincial Development Council, where available, in accordance with their Provincial Development Plan and formally approved by the CNTF Management Board.

Britain to Meet Obligations in Afghanistan: Brown

LONDON, June 26 Asia Pulse - Gordon Brown, elected unopposed as new head of Britain's ruling Labour Party, has promised London will meet its obligations in Afghanistan, Iraq and the Middle East.

Replacing outgoing Prime Minister Tony Blair as leader of the governing party, the 56-year-old Scot pledged a foreign policy which recognised the elimination of terrorism was as much a struggle of ideas as a military campaign.

All poised to take over as prime minister on Wednesday, Brown promised at a conference of the Labour Party in Manchester on Sunday he would try to fashion "the strongest multilateral response" to dealing with the scourge of extremism and terrorism.

After his ceremonial crowning, the long-time Chancellor of the Exchequer characterised himself as a "conviction politician guided by values of duty, honesty, hard work, family and respect for others. I am ready to serve."

In a well-measured acceptance speech, he went on to acknowledge the increasingly unpopular Iraq war had caused deep divisions in the UK. "In Iraq, which all of us accept has been a divisive issue for our party and our country, in Afghanistan and in the Middle East, we will meet our international obligations. We will learn lessons that need to be learned."

The next prime minister assured London would pursue a foreign policy mirroring the reality that more that military might was needed to isolate and defeat terrorist extremism.

"It is also a struggle of ideas and ideals that in the coming years will be waged and won for hearts and minds at home and round the world," Brown maintained. (Pajhwok Afghan News)

Danish defence minister visits Afghanistan

Jun 26, 2007, 10:19 GMT South Asia News

Copenhagen - Danish Defence Minister Soren Gade Tuesday visited Danish troops in southern Afghanistan, Danish TV2 News reported. Gade was slated to visit Kandahar and the southern province of Helmand, the report said.

Earlier this month, Gade said he expected that foreign troops should be prepared to remain in Afghanistan for at least 10 years.

Denmark recently approved to redeploy troops from southern Iraq to Afghanistan, increasing the Danish contingent from some 450 troops to 650 this autumn. The redeployment decision was backed by the government and main opposition parties.

Denmark was in August to withdraw its 500-strong contingent from southern Iraq as Baghdad takes charge of security. 2007 dpa - Deutsche Presse-Agentur

Majority of Poles oppose Afghanistan mission

Jun 26, 2007, 12:15 GMT South Asia News

Warsaw - Nearly 80 per cent of Poles oppose the deployment of some 1,100 Polish troops as part of the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) in Afghanistan, according to an opinion poll published Tuesday.

Seventy-eight per cent of respondents opposed the dangerous mission, compared to only 17 per cent who voiced support, the independent Warsaw-based CBOS pollsters found.

A 71-per-cent majority of Poles also doubt the presence of NATO forces in Afghanistan will bring peace to the country.

Public opposition to the presence of some 900 Polish troops in the US-led multinational forces in Iraq also remains strong at 81 per cent, according to CBOS' findings. 2007 dpa - Deutsche Presse-Agentur

ISAF troops discover IED factory, detain 13

ISAF Release # 2007-476 26 June 2007 - TARIN KOWT, Afghanistan (June 26) – ISAF soldiers discovered an improvised explosive device factory here that may have played a role in the suicide attack a week ago in Chowreh district.

Based on cooperation from the local population, ISAF soldiers from Task Force Uruzgan searched the alleged quala—castle—in the town and detained 13 insurgents involved in bomb-making.

Soldiers found materials to make IEDs inside the quala, such as fuses, explosives and a vehicle that could be used in a suicide attack.

Bulgarians replace Romanians at Kandahar Air Field

ISAF Release # 2007-475 25 June 2007 - KANDAHAR AIR FIELD, Afghanistan (June 26) – The 1st Bulgarian Tower Company replaced the 2nd Romanian Infantry Company as the Kandahar Air Field Force Protection element during a transfer-of-authority ceremony here June 20.

Capt. Petko Tsankov Tsanev succeeded Capt. Decebel Niculescu as commander of the KAF Tower Company force protection element, responsible for ensuring the security of the largest ISAF installation.

“During the next six months the 1st Bulgarian Tower Company will provide security for Kandahar Air Field,” Tsanev said. “We will execute our tasks with professionalism, honor and dignity.”

In addressing the audience, Stevens said, “It’s an honor today to host this transfer of authority between two magnificent units representing Romania and Bulgaria. Two nations that are NATO members who are committed to our international mission in Afghanistan and who proudly stand and fight alongside coalition forces in the war against terrorism.”

“You have shown that the people of Romania, who themselves felt the dagger of tyranny at their throat, are the strongest fighters for those who are still seeking democracy,” Stevens added.

Living a lie over Afghanistan

Tue, June 26, 2007 By Jordan Michael Smith

The controversy over the proposed (but ultimately unsuccessful) removal of ribbon-shaped decals from Toronto city vehicles showing support for Canadian troops in Afghanistan underscores how unpopular this war is becoming.

Canada wants out. That's the message of a June 10 poll by Decima Research. Only 1 in 4 Canucks believe Canada should stay in Afghanistan longer than February 2009, even if "that is necessary to complete our goals there." Sixty-seven percent think "we need to do our best to accomplish progress in Afghanistan but that we must stick to the deadline and get our troops out."

The poll also shows that most Canadians think we're doing a good job rebuilding Afghanistan, but that we're not doing such a good job of battling terrorism.

Let's get something straight here. The real internationalists are those who want to stay in Afghanistan. They believe Canada, as a wealthy, safe country, should continue to rebuild a nation that has been marred by civil war, even if that means Canada suffers casualties. Such casualties, they think, are outweighed by the number of Afghan lives Canada is saving.

The isolationists, the ones who are only concerned with Canada's immediate interests, are among the ones who want out. Remember that most Canadians think Afghanistan is being rebuilt, they just don't think Canada is benefiting.

I don't doubt that among those who think we should leave are those who think Canada is just killing Afghans and not helping the country, though the poll shows they're in the minority. But they are wrong.

A Johns Hopkins University study shows the mortality rate in Afghanistan has decreased to the point where 40,000 babies per year have been saved since the Taliban was toppled.

Liberal Leader Stephane Dion in April, in the House: "As long as our NATO allies believe Canada's commitment in Kandahar to be open-ended, they will never prepare for our departure ... Canadians do not want an open-ended war ... By February 2009, we will have served the people of (Afghanistan) for seven years ...We will have served them in a full combat role for three years, in the most dangerous part of the country."

There are many ways to interpret Dion's ideas, but internationalism is not one of them.

Internationalism is not 'we will help you for a while' or 'we will help you as long as we don't take casualties.' It is, 'we will do whatever we can to help you beat the Taliban.' It is looking at the cost/benefit of us being in Afghanistan. And there is simply no way one can think the number of civilians we kill is too big a cost for the benefit of saving 40,000 babies a year.

If Canadians want a change in strategy, focusing less on military measures, that's one thing. It happens to be the position I hold -- every civilian we kill makes things harder, and the Americans, especially, rely on air strikes far too often.

But abandoning Afghanistan is not a change in strategy; it's an abandonment of strategy. Canadians want to leave because they are uncomfortable taking casualties in a foreign country with slow, hard-to-measure progress.

If Canadians don't want to take the internationalist position, they should at least be honest with themselves. Canadians want to look after themselves. They shouldn't fancy themselves humanitarians for abandoning Afghanistan to a medieval theocracy. That we can be both internationalists and isolationists is impossible. It's a lie, and one for which I want no part.

Canucks, Afghan troops forging tight bonds

Tue, June 26, 2007 By STEPHANIE LEVITZ, CP

KANDAHAR, Afghanistan — On the first night Capt. Bryce Morawiec met his Afghan National Army counterpart on the rocky hillside of Ma’sum Ghar, he pulled out a tattered photo of his family that he kept in the pocket of his military uniform to show his new colleague.

Capt. Safiullah admired it, then offered to show Morawiec a picture of his own. He reached into his pocket and whipped out a cellphone, flipped it open and pressed play on a digital movie.

“I just sat back, and I thought, 'oh the irony, this is great,' ” said Morawiec, a member of the Operational Mentor Liaison Team working alongside the Afghan soldiers in Afghanistan. “I am going to have a great time here.”

Four months later and the two soldiers are thick as thieves, throwing parties for the birth of Morawiec’s son, and grieving together the loss of both Afghan and Canadian troops.

The growing bond between the liaison team and the Afghan troops under its tutelage has come about since Afghan President Hamid Karzai complained of a communication breakdown between coalition and Afghan soldiers, a problem he holds responsible for the mounting civilian death toll over the last two months.

The point of this unique collaboration — a first for Canadian troops abroad — is for the mentor liaison team to be the link between Afghan soldiers and Canadian battle groups, using the local knowledge of the former and the power of the latter to fight insurgents on the ground.

“How it looks on the ground is sometimes pretty confusing, but it works,” said Capt. Stephen Good, who acted as the liaison between the Afghan army’s second battalion and India Company during the recent Operation Season, a joint effort to route out insurgents targeting police checkpoints in Zhari district.

Video of the four-hour firefight of Operation Season shows Afghan and Canadian troops squatting in wadis, planning the phases of the operation. Air strikes were eventually called in to end the battle. Fifteen Taliban were killed and the operation was heralded as a success by the military.

Good says he doesn’t see the communication problems raised by Karzai.

“It’s always two-way communication,” he said. ”Almost every day I’m in with the company commander; we’re talking future operations, where they see everything going.”

Members of the mentor liaison team and the Afghan army live, eat, and sleep together when they work at Ma’sum Ghar, about 40 km west of Kandahar. But all are aware it’s a tenuous bond, thanks to the constant motion of army life. New Canadians rotate in every six months. Afghan soldiers get transferred. Soldiers from both sides get killed.

“I was going to write a letter to Canada to ask if Col. Eyre could stay another year, but I was worried about his family,” joked Gen. Khair Mohammad of the 1st Brigade of the Afghan National Army.

Lt.-Col. Wayne Eyre, commanding officer of the liaison team, and Mohammed have worked together for three months, since Canada took over mentoring brigade headquarters from the Americans. They meet almost daily, going over upcoming operations and discussing concerns.

Eyre called it an increasingly rewarding and fascinating job, one that requires him to draw upon all he knows of Afghan culture and history, coupled with his Canadian military training.

“We can’t mirror-image ourselves,” he said. “To try and create an army in our own image, exactly like us, with the same sort of western standards, thought processes and the like, is not going to work here.”

Safiullah, the weapons commander being mentored by Morawiec, said the benefits of learning battle tactics and operations from Canadians has been immeasurable, but it’s the larger picture he’s glad to have seen.

“We are all human beings,” he said through an interpreter. “Canadians love their families, they love their children and wives. And we too love our children and our wives.”

The state of Canada’s mission in Afghanistan rests on a eventual parliamentary decision on whether to leave on the NATO-mandated deadline of February 2009, or remain in the country in some form.

Gen. Rick Hillier, chief of Canada’s defence staff, has said that training the Afghan army as the deadline approaches has become Canada’s top priority.

“What we need are people,” said Eyre. “Robust mentoring. At the end of the day, we equip the man, not man the equipment.”

Five kandaks, the Afghan term for battalion, currently make up the Afghan National Army command for Kandahar and Uruzgan provinces, 1st Brigade. In July, Uruzgan will receive its own.

A full brigade of five kandaks would have 3,200 soldiers, but the fighting force of 1st Brigade now sits at around 2,300. Eyre is optimistic the number will rise to at least 3,000 by 2009.

The numbers don’t mean much to some local Afghans, who are skeptical about the Afghan army’s ability to fight on its own, now or by 2009.

“If an operation is going to be started at any village, if the ANA takes the support of NATO or ISAF, then they can operate that village,” said Noor Ahmed, 32. “The ANA at least has to get training for 10 to 15 years more, then they could stand up at their feet.”

Mohammad, the commander of 1st Brigade, is keenly aware of the shortcomings facing his soldiers.

“We have a lot of training experts, all the soldiers being trained by OMLT, but we have some problems,” he said. “We don’t have modern vehicles, weapons, air support. If we had these things we’d be able to conduct operations.”

Canada isn’t responsible for outfitting the Afghan army. That falls to the Americans, though Hillier has opened the door to providing some supplies.

“I don’t think we’ll be able by (2009) to provide security by ourselves to the people of Kandahar,” said Mohammad. “Myself and the people of Afghanistan are asking the people of Canada to stay for longer in Afghanistan.”

Border tensions could exacerbate war in Afghanistan

Harry Sterling – Freelance, 20 June 2007 Edmonton Journal

The Afghan and Pakistani authorities seem to have forgotten just who their real enemy is. They increasingly seem determined to play the blame game, each accusing the other of not doing enough in the war against the resurgent Taliban.

The deteriorating situation between them reached the point recently where their soldiers clashed with each other along their joint border, despite being ostensible allies in the fight against Mullah Omar's Taliban and Osama bin Laden's al-Qaida.

If the sporadic tension between Afghanistan and Pakistan were to worsen, it could have serious implications for countries like Canada with troops in Afghanistan.

While both sides blamed the other for recent attacks along the border in Paktia province, the confrontations are not simply about disagreements over the placement of border posts and the disputed installation of security fences by Pakistan, the latter strongly opposed by the government of President Hamid Karzai in Kabul.

It's also very much about historical differences and rivalries existing since British colonial officials in India arbitrarily established the Durand Line in 1893 as the border between Afghanistan and what became Pakistan in 1947.

Afghanistan has never accepted the Durand Line as a legitimate border. All Afghan governments, including the communist and Taliban administrations of the 1980s and early '90s, have refused to acknowledge an artificial border which effectively divides the Pashtun people, who've traditionally inhabited an area encompassing much of southern and eastern Afghanistan and Pakistan's fractious northwest frontier region.

Afghanistan felt so strongly about the border that it was the only country that voted against Pakistan joining the United Nations. The Pashtuns themselves regard the border as little more than an irritating inconvenience. Tens of thousands cross it every day to visit relatives or to do business on the other side, including smuggling illicit goods.

But to Pakistan, concerned over secessionist threats posed by Baluch and Sindh separatists, the border is very real, even if Pakistan has never had any true authority over its supposed fellow countrymen living in a region where the rule of the gun prevails over the rule of law.

The predominantly Pashtun population of the area, especially in North and South Waziristan, regard the Punjabi-speaking central government essentially as interlopers in their ultra-conservative region.

For their part, Afghans are convinced Pakistan wants to control Afghanistan, whether through proxies like the Taliban or by manipulating Afghanistan's various rival groups to create instability that weakens Kabul's power over its 34 provinces, especially those along the border with Pakistan. The fact that it was Pakistan which backed the creation of the Taliban -- with financial aid from the United States and Saudi Arabia that enabled it to control most of Afghanistan from 1996 to late 2001 -- only reinforced suspicions of Pakistan's long-term intentions towards their country.

Those suspicions further increased when Pakistan became a sanctuary for resurgent Taliban forces and a staging area for their infiltration into Afghanistan.

The Afghans insist Pakistan isn't doing enough to end the use of its territory by the Taliban, even claiming elements in the Musharraf government, particularly the military's Inter-Services Intelligence Agency, ISI, are actually aiding the Taliban. Afghan authorities maintain ISI knows where every Taliban training camp is located in Pakistan, but does nothing about it.

The continued infiltration of Taliban from Pakistan reached the point where Karzai publicly presented a list of addresses of Taliban leaders allegedly being sheltered in Pakistan to President Pervez Musharraf, resulting in the latter denouncing Karzai for trying to blame Pakistan for Karzai's own failed policies.

In a recent interview, Musharraf implicitly called Karzai a liar for claiming Pakistan was assisting the Taliban. To compound matters, the increased bad blood between Karzai and Musharraf is occurring when both are confronting growing challenges to their own rule.

Karzai is now faced with an unholy alliance of former mujahedeen leaders, warlords, ex-communists and other power brokers -- some from his own government -- who want to marginalize him and reduce his power. Because of his failure to create jobs and ensure security, and because of widespread corruption, Karzai's popularity is eroding. The controversial killing of Afghan civilians by American and coalition forces has further undermined Karzai's standing.

For his part, Musharraf is confronted by growing opposition to his rule by pro-Taliban Pakistanis and militant Islamic fundamentalists, as well as by much of the middle class who've turned on him since he tried to oust the country's independent-minded chief justice on dubious grounds.

Facing growing opposition, it would be suicidal for Musharraf to move more forcefully against the Taliban in Pakistan's frontier region or pro-Taliban Pashtuns there. But his inaction would mean the well-financed Taliban (and al-Qaida) could continue to infiltrate insurgents and suicide bombers unimpeded.

The Taliban's recent ability to launch attacks in western and northern Afghanistan has created fears the Karzai government is increasingly vulnerable.

The Afghan senate's call for negotiations with the Taliban and a cessation of coalition military operations against the Taliban, combined with the growing vulnerability of both Karzai and Musharraf, suggest the fighting in Afghanistan may be entering a highly uncertain period with totally unpredictable consequences for coalition forces, including Canadian.

Harry Sterling, a former diplomat, is an Ottawa-based commentator

Out-of-Afghanistan rumblings on the Hill

By Roxana Tiron June 26, 2007

When they won control of Congress in November, Democrats pressed their case to withdraw troops from Iraq and refocus on Afghanistan, but some are growing impatient with U.S. operations in Afghanistan as well.

A few congressional Democrats go so far as suggesting that the Pentagon should pull out of Afghanistan now, while others say that troop withdrawal will be addressed after the military is out of Iraq.

Rep. Neil Abercrombie (D-Hawaii), a senior defense authorizer, wants the U.S. out of Afghanistan immediately, calling operations there “futile” in trying to effect political change in a country with a tangled history.

Most other Democrats want to focus on Afghanistan, with the goal of withdrawing the military down the road after the country is stabilized and any new Taliban resurgence quashed.

With a few exceptions, congressional Democrats no longer show any hesitation about withdrawing the military from Iraq. But they are more circumspect about Afghanistan, saying that the Bush administration let the situation worsen by shifting attention onto a protracted conflict in Iraq.

“We should have never gone to Iraq, because we would have been out of Afghanistan [by now],” Rep. John Murtha (D-Pa.) said in a brief interview.

Murtha, the chairman of the House Appropriations defense subcommittee and a vocal opponent of the war in Iraq, said that by September, when he takes up the fiscal 2008 war supplemental funding, he would have a better sense of how to handle Afghanistan.

Yet making the argument that the U.S. needs to get out of Iraq and stay in Afghanistan can be politically challenging. While Democrats regularly note that the war in Iraq has now gone on longer than World War II, the U.S. has been in Afghanistan longer than it has been in Iraq. And arguments that Iraqis need to take control of their own country can be applied to Afghanistan as well.

The Afghanistan effort enjoys much more support among the American public, and Democratic leaders have sought to burnish their homeland security credentials by presenting an unwavering backing of the war there.

Both House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) have stressed over the past several months that the U.S. should refocus on stabilizing Afghanistan and capturing Osama bin Laden, the architect of the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks.

“The Taliban played a role in the 9/11 attacks by providing a safe haven for bin Laden,” said Drew Hammill, Pelosi’s spokesman. “Preventing a successful resurgence by the Taliban is a national security objective of the United States, and our troops will remain in Afghanistan until the objective is achieved.”

In contrast to Iraq, Afghans are putting more effort into building up the government and security forces, Hammill added.

Democrats are adamant that they don’t want a terrorist training ground in Afghanistan, though al Qaeda and other factions are battling the U.S. in Iraq. Democrats, along with independent military experts, point out that the war in Iraq drove al Qaeda operatives into Iraq, a presence that has intensified throughout the four-year war.

House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) said, “A lot of the problems in Iraq are of our own making. In Afghanistan we still have the continued threat of al Qaeda having a base to operate. We have to continue to be there.”

“[The American people] are prepared to take losses, if they make sense. You don’t hear people saying, ‘We need to get out of Afghanistan.’ People know the difference,” said Sen. Russ Feingold (D-Wis.).

Withdrawing now from Afghanistan would be a big mistake, said Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.). “The country is in trouble, clearly we have not accomplished our mission there,” she said.

War violence is common in Afghanistan. One of the deadliest insurgent attacks since the fall of the Taliban in 2001 killed 24 people occurred earlier this month when a bus exploded in Afghanistan’s capital, Kabul. Out of the 24 victims, 22 were police academy instructors on their way to work. About 300 Afghan police officers have been killed in the past three months, making 2007 the worst year ever.

Insurgency-related violence has killed more than 2,400 people in Afghanistan this year, according to a count by the Associated Press based on official figures.

Meanwhile, the narcotics trade has been on the rise, with Afghanistan producing the vast majority of the world’s opiates as more Afghans resort to growing poppy as a means of survival.

About 25,000 U.S. troops are deployed in Afghanistan. Between Oct. 1, 2001, and June 2, 2007, 394 members of the military died as part of Operation Enduring Freedom, according to Pentagon casualty data.

“We are finished there, militarily speaking,” said Abercrombie, the chairman of the Air and Land Armed Services subcommittee.

“There is no useful purpose for our troops there,” Abercrombie stated in a recent interview. “The military should withdraw now,” he said, though he stressed that the U.S. could keep “isolated pockets” of special operators.

Instead of using the military to effect political change, the U.S. should have a complete diplomatic re-engagement in the region, “with an understanding that our role there should change,” Abercrombie added.

Murtha stressed that NATO forces should take a bigger role in Afghanistan. So far, the U.S. military has been the leading presence.

“I have not made the recommendation yet on withdrawing the troops from Afghanistan,” said Murtha. “Every commander I talk to still thinks that we have a chance.”

But Rep. Diane Watson (D-Calif.), a member of the Foreign Affairs Committee and a staunch opponent of the war in Iraq, said that it is time for the U.S. military to start leaving Afghanistan and the Middle East altogether.

“We are not securing America by being there,” she pressed. “The longer we are there, the more plots start growing in our country.”

Watson, who supported the war in Afghanistan, said that the military ought “to start leaving Afghanistan” and that the U.S. should allow Afghan officials to “formulate and run their own government.”

The anti-war grassroots movement has generally been quiet about Afghanistan as it has committed most, if not all, of its attention on Iraq.

Code Pink Women for Peace spokeswoman Dana Balicki said that her organization would like to see soldiers withdraw from Afghanistan.

“The combat forces should be replaced by international peacekeeping forces,” she said. “We should push for peace talks in the area with all groups that have power.”

MoveOn.org did not respond to repeated attempts for comment on the issue.

Meanwhile, several anti-war members, including Reps. Lynn Woolsey (D-Calif.), Maxine Waters (D-Calif.) and Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio), stress that any troop withdrawal from Afghanistan is inextricably linked to the military’s first leaving Iraq.

“I’d like to get out of Iraq first and look at Afghanistan and if it does not work … we should be impatient,” Woolsey said, adding that she is not prepared to give a timeline for withdrawal. “There was a reason [for being] there, but now we really need to reassess what we are accomplishing. It depends on what our mission is in Afghanistan; if our mission is to find Osama bin Laden, that is one thing.”

Bin Laden is believed to be in Pakistan, hiding along the border with Afghanistan. A decision to leave Afghanistan before bid Laden is caught or killed would be seen by some as abandoning the U.S. effort to combat terrorism.

Yet Kucinich, a 2008 presidential candidate, said that withdrawal from Iraq would open a new policy direction in Afghanistan.

“Once we show that we can handle a successful resolution of withdrawing troops from Iraq, it will be easier to shift direction in Afghanistan,” said Kucinich. “There is a sequence of events … get out of Iraq and then we must focus on getting out of Afghanistan.”

Rep. Barbara Lee (D-Calif.) is the only member of Congress who voted against the war in Afghanistan. Lee declined to comment for this article.

Elana Schor contributed to this article.

Stoking Talibanisation

By M Ismail Khan - Political engineering is a funny business. You aim for one thing and it brings out an entirely different result. In the late 1980s Mikhail Gorbachev wanted to reform the Soviet Union through glasnost (liberalization) and perestroika (reconstruction), but it all ended in the crumbling of the Soviet Union and the emergence of a new world (dis)order. In the 90s, a

ragtag army of madressah students called the Taliban was formed to bring stability in Afghanistan. Mainly originating from NWFP, the tribal areas in Pakistan and parts of Afghanistan, the Taliban went on to conquer Kabul and established their writ over a country ruined by decades of anti-soviet war and infighting among warlords. However, in 2001 the world found out that it was this very ragtag Taliban who were providing safe haven to Al Qaeda --established with a stated aim of toppling pro-west despotic regimes in Muslim

countries -- that was behind the blowing up of the twin towers in New York.

The post-9/11 political engineering, either done through the instrument of war e.g. Iraq and Afghanistan, or tried through a mix of political means and military action in Pakistan and elsewhere, presents a dismal picture. With nearly a million killed in Iraq, thousands dead in Afghanistan and hundreds perished in other countries including Pakistan, the war seems to have only exacerbated the conflict, which many in the west and also in the Islamic world

consider an essentially ideological one.

In Pakistan too, the process of radicalization, instead of subsiding, has gone up. There are more suicide bombings taking place and video shops are being burnt. Vigilante groups are vying to enforce their version of Islamic codes, women and NGOs are being harassed and girls' schools are being closed. The writ of the state is being openly challenged. The silent majority, that is fairly liberal, is standing on the sideline, silently watching the unfolding events.

Many among it also consider it a natural reaction to what they believe is an

unjustified western onslaught. There are a number of factors, external as well as internal, stoking the rise of extremism in the country.

The external factors are rooted in the process of globalization and western political positions. Technological advancement in the media and information systems has turned the world into the proverbial 'global village'. What happens in one part of the world is being instantly reported to the other parts and it is getting difficult for the governments to control information or manipulate it. Therefore, anomalies in policy and action are more exposed to public scrutiny. Extensive mass communication also means that ordinary people can read

leaders minds and can react to policies perceived as unjust and wrong.

One dangerous faultline on the global ideological map is the conflict in the Middle East. Palestine is a deep festering wound on the body politics of the Islamic world. The west's biased and often one-sided support to the state of Israel is perhaps the major underlying factor in the anti-western feeling among the Muslim masses. The way Zionist lobbies in Washington worked hard and succeeded in replacing Islam with communism as the new enemy in the post-cold war era, and the way they have managed to sell the concept of 'clash

of civilization' in theory and in practice during the last decade has further strengthened the rivalry.

The recent upsurge in extremism and anti-western feeling also owes its momentum the west's denial of popular mandate to Hamas -- welfare NGO turned political party in Palestine which won a landslide victory in 2006 against the pro-west Fatah party. Israel's effort to cripple the Hamas-led government through tacit support from western countries eventually leading to the dismissal of the Ismail Hunaya's government last week plunging Gaza and the West Bank into turmoil has exposed the west's lack of commitment to democracy and reconciliation.

Another strong external influence on extremism is the way Iraq war has been played out. Iraq has provided breeding grounds for a new wave of suicide bombing recruits. The US, despite hanging Saddam and his close associates, has in fact failed to establish control. Insurgents are carrying out their operations with impunity and the number of civilian causalities continues to grow in numbers. What happened and is still happening in Iraq has created waves of anger across the Muslim world. Scenes from Abu Gharaib prison and lawless

cells at Guantanamo Bay have left all right-minded people in the world outraged and disgusted, to say the least.

Afghanistan is another sore and perpetually sick part of this body politics. What happens in Afghanistan has a direct bearing on Pakistan. The inability of the west and its partners in Kabul to understand and tame the warring factions has spooned a new generation of Taliban sworn to fight till death for their honour, and of course Islam. The carrot and stick policy in the southern parts have failed to pacify raging tempers. Each new bombing and or targeted strike is producing more unbridled suicide bombers willing to blow up anywhere any time.

In such a precarious political environment, in which the wellbeing and peace of so many human beings is at stake, the aging queen of the United Kingdom decides to honour the most hated individual in the Islamic world. If bestowing knighthood to Rushdie is a conspiracy to trigger more hatred and violent reaction, then the queen and her poodle prime minister have certainly succeeded.

But in doing so the queen has also unwittingly pressed the button for accelerated Talibanization in countries like Pakistan, a process already in motion due to multiple internal reasons. If not arrested in time it can create more problems for the world then it can actually handle.

The writer is based in Islamabad and he has a background in media, public policy and development.

Al-Qaeda ready for conditional talks

TORKHAM (PAN): A key Afghan militant, having close links to the al-Qaeda terrorist organisation, has voiced conditional willingness for talks with the government of President Hamid Karzai. Dr. Aminul Haq, one of the top fugitives wanted by the US for having ties to the dreaded group, said on Monday they were ready to sit across the negotiating table with the government if foreign forces pulled out of Afghanistan.

In an exclusive interview with Pajhwok Afghan News, the 44-year-old from the eastern Nangarhar province made no secret of their aversion to the presence of foreign troops in Afghanistan. However, the Khogyani resident hastened to explain they were supportive of peace and reconciliation in the war-torn country.

Once a date for the foreign military withdrawal was announced, he reiterated, they would have no problem holding talks with the Afghan rulers. Most problems facing Afghanistan today were spawned by foreign military presence, claimed Dr. Amin, who believed the departure of NATO and Coalition plus the enforcement of Shariah would augur well for the war-weary nation.

Taliban, Hekmatyar and al-Qaeda mounted armed resistance only after the US

and its allies invaded and occupied Afghanistan, argued the man who has been

underground since the fall of the Taliban regime in 2001. Speaking to this scribe over the telephone from an undisclosed location, Dr. Amin ruled out any contact with the government as long as American and NATO troops remained in

Afghanistan.

Also a close associate of Maulvi Khalis at one point in time, he made clear the continued deployment of foreign troops meant al-Qaeda activists would press on with the jihad against them. The fugitive insisted their struggle was undeterred by the deaths of Taliban strategist Mullah Dadullah and al-Qaeda commander Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. Tens of warriors like them would rise through the ranks of the militant movements, he concluded.

Afghans resist camp closure, forced return to Afghanistan

Tuesday, June 26, 2007 Reuters - JUNGLE PIR ALIZAI: Afghans living in the Jungle Pir Alizai refugee camp are resisting the government’s enforced closure of the camp because many are reluctant to return to a country at war while others claim they are Pakistanis.

The authorities want to shut down the refugee camp and send its residents to Afghanistan, because they say the camp is infested with militants, guns and drugs. The camp in southwest Pakistan was first setup in 1979 during the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan and according to the government has lately become a haven for the Taliban. It is one of four such camps scheduled for closure this year.

The UN refugee agency, which is running a voluntary repatriation programme for Afghans, refused to help the camp in 2005 after its lost its “humanitarian value”, an agency official said. “It could no longer be considered, by UNHCR standards, a humanitarian camp. There was trafficking of arms, drugs and miscreants were living there,” said the official.

However, the closure of the camp is facing resistance. Many Afghans say they don’t want to return to a country at war, while other inhabitants say they are not even Afghans, but Pakistanis – and they have the identification to prove it. One resident, Ahmedullah, has spent his entire life as a refugee in Pakistan and says he desperately wants to go him. But the war is preventing him from returning. “Give us peace and we will go home,” he said.

Abdul Ghani, 65, said many people had been killed, including hundreds of Taliban militants, by NATO forces in his home region of Panjwai, in the southern Afghan province of Kandahar.

Another problem facing the authorities is many of the inhabitants claim to be Pakistanis and not Afghans at all. According to a 2005 UN census, the camp was home to 35,000 Afghans, but thousands of Pakistani villagers fleeing drought and tribal feuds have moved to the camp, raising its total population to more than 100,000, residents say.

Some residents said up to 80 percent of inhabitants were Pakistani ethnic Pashtuns. “We’re Pakistanis. I have as much right to be in Pakistan as you do. Why are you forcing me to Afghanistan?” said Haji Zardad Kakozai, head of a 25-member residents’ committee that manages camp affairs. He showed his Pakistani identity card to Reuters to prove his statement. “All of us have decided that if the government wants to send us to jail, we will go to jail. If it kills us, we will die, but we will not leave,” Kakozai added.

However, officials say many Afghans have acquired identity cards through marriage and other means. Many Afghans live and run businesses in Pakistani cities and towns across the country. “They carry both identities. They show their Afghan cards when they get aid meant for refugees, otherwise they show themselves as Pakistanis,” said a government official in Quetta.

Kakozai also denied there were any Al Qaeda or Taliban guerrillas hiding out in the camp. “I have told authorities that if you find a single Al Qaeda man or training camp for militants you should slaughter all 25 of us,” he said, referring to the committee.

More than 4.6 million Afghans have gone home from Pakistan and Iran since the overthrow of the Taliban in 2001. But about 3 million Afghans are still in Pakistan and 2 million in Iran. The UN has urged Pakistan not to send its refugees home, saying the people evicted from Iran already swamped impoverished Afghanistan.

Afghan tourism sector picking up’

KABUL (PAN): More than 3,100 foreign tourists visited Afghanistan in the first quarter of the current year, compared to 9,000 sightseers who holidayed in the war-wracked county in 2006. Ghulam Nabi Farahi, deputy minister for information, culture and tourism, told Pajhwok Afghan News the number of tourists visiting Afghanistan had steadily been increasing over the last few years.

In the years preceding three decades of war, Farahi recalled, annual arrivals of vacationers in different provinces were recorded at over 400,000 - lending Afghanistans tourist economy a considerable boost.

Lack of facilities and insecurity were the main reasons for the declining number of tourists, argued the deputy minister, who advised sightseers to visit safer areas, Bamyan, Mazar-i-Sharif, Herat and Parwan provinces were a major draw for foreigners, he pointed out. Although the situation was not that bad, he said, tourists insisted on efficient services and foolproof security. The destruction of the famous Bamyan statues in the twilight of the Taliban rule had hugely damaged the Afghan culture and tourism sector, he continued.

With his ministry taking the requisite measures to preserve tourist attractions, Farahi said they had issued licences for the construction of 150 guesthouses in the country besides printing brochures to guide visitors. The ministry has

earmarked $2 million for setting up a tourism school in Pul-i-Charkhi area on the eastern outskirts of Kabul. We plan to establish similar schools in other provinces as well to jump-start this important sector, Farahi concluded.

Woman gives birth to five

PESHAWAR (PAN): Quintuplets were born to an Afghan woman at a hospital in the Balochistan province, a media report said on Monday. The woman gave birth to four boys and a girl in the Bolan Medical College Hospital Sunday morning, according to Dawn newspaper. Gynaecologist Dr Mahrukh said both Ruqaiya - brought to the hospital by her spouse Maulvi Ahmed Jan from Pashtunabad area - and her babies were in good health. It was a normal delivery, the doctor told the paper, which said Maulvi Ahmed owned a grocery shop in Pashtunabad. One of the three children Ahmad had before the birth of the quintuplets had died some time back.

[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.]