In this bulletin:

• More civilians die in Afghanistan
• Afghan leader condemns civilian deaths
• Forces in Afghanistan Brace for Protests After US Forces Kill Civilians
• Afghan Media: U.S. Troops Deleted Images
• Winning Afghan hearts mired in corruption, civilian deaths
• Two Afghan rangers killed, seven captured
• 'US spy' shot dead in Pakistani tribal area
• TALKING WITH THE TALIBAN? Afghanistan Open to Dialogue With Militants
• Afghan prisoner transfer deal toughened: O'Connor
• Afghan rights group to monitor Canadian detainee transfers
• AFGHANISTAN: Fighting a losing battle against opium production
• US should recognise Pakistan’s interests in Afghanistan
• Afghanistan mission most critical of all
• Showdown Time – Strategy Page
• PAKISTAN: KEY ENVOYS CALLED HOME FOR CONSULTATIONS

More civilians die in Afghanistan – BBC

Nine Afghan civilians have been killed in a bombing raid in Kapisa province, Afghan officials say. US forces have confirmed carrying out an air strike in the area but say they have no accurate casualty information.

The news comes shortly after US forces were accused of killing 10 civilians during a shoot out on Sunday in Nangarhar province. Journalists say US troops confiscated their photos and video footage of the aftermath of the violence.

News of the air strike in Kapisa came first from the province's deputy governor, Sayed Daud Hashimi. He said the nine dead civilians included five women and three children and that the raid was carried out by Nato forces. Nato have denied any involvement.

But US forces say they dropped two 2,000 lb bombs during an air strike in Kapisa after a US base had come under attack. A US spokesman said they had no information yet on any deaths.

The news came shortly after President Hamid Karzai had condemned an incident on Sunday in which US forces were accused of firing indiscriminately at civilians in the eastern province of Nangarhar.

The Americans say the Nangarhar fighting, near the city of Jalalabad, started when a convoy of marines was attacked by a suicide bomber and came under co-ordinated small-arms fire.

They say their soldiers returned fire, and acknowledge that at least eight Afghan civilians were killed, with a further 35 injured.

President Karzai has "strongly condemned the incident which took place due to a suicide attack on a coalition convoy and which prompted the coalition force firing on civilians that killed 10 people", a statement from his office said.

Reports say that as they left the scene along a busy highway, the Americans fired indiscriminately on civilians and their vehicles.

Thousands of local people took to the streets on Sunday to protest against what happened. The Afghan authorities have launched an investigation into the circumstances of the militant attack.

The Associated Press news agency says it will complain to the US military after journalists said US soldiers deleted footage of the aftermath of the Nangarhar violence.

Freelance journalists working for the Associated Press said troops erased photos and video showing a vehicle in which three people were shot dead during Sunday's incident in the eastern province of Nangarhar.

Afghan leader condemns civilian deaths

By AFP - Middle East Times - Published March 5, 2007

Nine Afghan civilians were killed when NATO-led forces hit their home during a battle with militants, a top official said Monday, just after President Hamid Karzai condemned the killing of up to 10 civilians in a separate incident.
    
    Five women and two children were among the dead in the incident overnight in Kapisa province, north of Kabul, deputy provincial governor Sayed Daud Hashimi said.
    
    A NATO reconstruction team base came under attack "and they responded with artillery and an airstrike, killing nine Afghan civilians," Hashimi said.
    
    An interior ministry spokesman confirmed that there was an incident in Nijrab district of Kapisa involving "some casualties" but said that authorities were trying to find out more details.
    
    There was no immediate response from the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force or the US-led coalition.
    
    Karzai also ordered an investigation into Sunday's attack, during which insurgents using small arms and a suicide car bomb attacked a five-vehicle US-led coalition convoy in the eastern province of Nangarhar.
    
    His office and the Afghan interior ministry put the death toll at 10 civilians while the coalition late Sunday said that eight Afghans were killed and 35 wounded.
    
    Karzai "strongly condemned the incident, which took place due to a suicide attack on a coalition convoy and which prompted the coalition force firing on civilians that killed 10 people," the statement said.
    
    "The president also condemned the terrorist attack on [the] coalition convoy and said it was the work of the enemies of Afghanistan," the statement said, employing a phrase commonly used here to describe the Taliban. "The president has ordered authorities to investigate the incident and submit their report" as soon as possible, it said.
    
    Hours after the attack several hundred angry demonstrators gathered at the site, about 50 kilometers (30 miles) from the city of Jalalabad, to protest. They blocked the road in the Marko area for several hours.
    
    Reports said that demonstrators chanted "Death to America" and "Death to Karzai."
    
    The interior ministry Sunday night said that the civilians were killed by gunfire from the foreign troops, but Monday a spokesman said that it was unclear exactly how they died.
    
    "It's not yet clear if the civilians were killed in coalition firing or insurgents' firing. A delegation has been appointed to find this out," spokesman Zemarai Bashary said. "The coalition says they came under fire from insurgents and they returned fire in defense," he said. "The results of the investigation will find out exactly what happened."
    
    The delegation - which comprises a member of US-led coalition and around five interior ministry officials including the head of the counter-criminal department - left for the area Monday, Bashary said.
    
    International troops have killed scores of civilians during operations in Afghanistan against remnants of the fundamentalist Taliban regime, which was ousted by US-led forces in late 2001.
    
    The US-backed Karzai has repeatedly called on US-led and NATO soldiers to avoid civilian deaths by coordinating with Afghan security forces before attacking insurgents.
    
    Karzai's government says that it has indefinitely suspended an operation to recapture a southern district overrun by Taliban fighters because it wants to avoid civilian casualties.
    
    Taliban fighters have been in control of Musa Qala town in Helmand province since February 2 and authorities have been seeking a peaceful way to force the rebels out.

Forces in Afghanistan Brace for Protests After US Forces Kill Civilians

By Benjamin Sand – VOA Islamabad 05 March 2007

U.S. and Afghan forces are bracing for a possible backlash after at least eight Afghan civilians were killed in a military operation in eastern Afghanistan Sunday. Correspondent Benjamin Sand has more from VOA's South Asia bureau in Islamabad.

U.S. military officials in Afghanistan say Sunday's deadly incident was sparked by a suicide bomb attack on an American Marine convoy - not far from the eastern city of Jalalabad.

The Marines say they opened fired after an explosives-packed vehicle rammed their convoy and militants attacked with machine guns.

Spokesman Major Chris Belcher says civilians were killed in the exchange. "There are reports of death and injuries to Afghan nationals confirmed by Afghan and coalition authorities," Belcher says.

Local eyewitnesses say American soldiers fired indiscriminately into groups of Afghan cars and pedestrians as they tried to escape the area. Protests erupted almost immediately in the region and troops are braced for angry demonstrations.

Afghan President Hamid Karzai has repeatedly denounced U.S. and coalition military action that harms civilians. It is a major concern for Afghans who have endured more than three decades of foreign invasion and civil unrest.

U.S. and NATO troops are in Afghanistan to provide security and fight a militant insurgency by the former Taleban - which was ousted from power in 2001 for helping al-Qaida terrorists.

Afghan Media: U.S. Troops Deleted Images

By AMIR SHAH, Associated Press Writer, March 4, 2007

KABUL, Afghanistan -- Afghan journalists covering the aftermath of a suicide bomb attack and shooting in eastern Afghanistan Sunday said U.S. troops deleted their photos and video and warned them not to publish or air any images of U.S. troops or a car where three Afghans were shot to death.

Afghan witnesses and gunshot victims said U.S. forces fired on civilians in cars and on foot along at least a six-mile stretch of road in Nangarhar province following a suicide attack against the Marine convoy. The U.S. military said militants also fired on American forces during the attack.

The U.S. military and Afghan officials said eight Afghans died and 34 were wounded in the violence. One Marine was also injured.

A freelance photographer working for The Associated Press and a cameraman working for AP Television News said a U.S. soldier deleted their photos and video showing a four-wheel drive vehicle in which three people were shot to death about 100 yards from the suicide bombing. The AP plans to lodge a protest with the American military.

The photographer, Rahmat Gul, said witnesses at the scene told him the three had been shot to death by U.S. forces fleeing the attack. The two AP freelancers arrived at the site about a half hour after the suicide bombing, Gul said.

"When I went near the four-wheel drive, I saw the Americans taking pictures of the same car, so I started taking pictures," Gul said. "Two soldiers with a translator came and said, 'Why are you taking pictures? You don't have permission.'"

It wasn't clear why the accredited journalists would need permission to take photos of a civilian car on a public highway.

Gul said the U.S. troops took his camera, deleted his photos and returned it to him. The journalists came across another American, showed their identification cards, and he agreed that they could take pictures.

A Western military official who asked not to be identified because he was not authorized to release the information said the troops were Marine Special Operations Forces, the Marine Corps component created in February 2006 of the U.S. Special Operations Command.

"The same soldier who took my camera came again and deleted my photos," Gul said. "The soldier was very angry ... I told him, 'They gave us permission,' but he didn't listen."

Gul's new photos were also deleted, and the American, speaking through a translator, warned him that he did not want to see any AP photos published anywhere. The American also raised his fist in anger as if he were going to hit him, but he did not strike, Gul said.

Lt. Col. David Accetta, a U.S. military spokesman, said he did not have any confirmed reports that coalition forces "have been involved in confiscating cameras or deleting images."

Khanwali Kamran, a reporter for the Afghan channel Ariana Television, was in a small group of journalists working alongside Gul. Kamran said the American soldiers also deleted his footage.

"They warned me that if it is aired ... then, 'You will face problems,'" Kamran said. Taqiullah Taqi, a reporter for Afghanistan's largest television station, Tolo TV, said Americans were using abusive language. "According to the translator, they said, 'Delete them, or we will delete you,'" Taqi said.

A freelance cameraman for AP Television News said that about 100 yards from the bomb site, a U.S. officer told him that he could not go any closer to the scene but that he could shoot footage. The cameraman asked not to be named for his own safety.

"Then I started filming the suicide attack site, where there was a body and U.S. soldiers, and farther away, there was a four-wheel drive vehicle in which three people were shot to death," he said.

As he was filming, he said, a U.S. soldier and translator "ordered us not to move." The cameraman said they were very angry and deleted any footage that included the Americans, as well as part of an interview from a demonstration. Hundreds of Afghans had gathered to protest the violence.

Reporters Without Borders condemned the actions of the U.S. forces, saying they dealt with the press poorly.

"Why did the soldiers do it if they don't have anything to hide? The situation is very tense in Afghanistan, and the media should be able to report about it freely and safely," said Jean-Francois Julliard, a spokesman for the Paris-based Reporters Without Borders.

Winning Afghan hearts mired in corruption, civilian deaths

March 4, 2007

SPIRWAN, Afghanistan (AP) -- Abdullah Shah and his son made a pilgrimage to the holy Muslim city of Mecca this January, courtesy of the Afghan government. President Hamid Karzai himself arranged the trip to Saudi Arabia.

The invitation came after Shah's wife, two daughters and three other sons were killed by a wayward NATO bomb in Lagarnai, a village near here in southern Afghanistan.

Shah, in his 70s and wearing the white turban of a religious man, accepted the trip, but not the message. Before the deaths, "I wasn't with the Taliban and I wasn't with the government," he said. "But, I tell you, now I am Talib."

In the sixth winter since the U.S.-led ouster of the Taliban government, the radical Islamists are making a comeback. Their bold confidence was apparent last week, when a suicide bomber killed 23 outside an air base during Vice President Dick Cheney's visit there.

There are many factors. But citizens like Shah, the Afghan government and key NATO commanders agree on this: The use of force is sometimes excessive and errant. In Afghanistan's tribal society, a single death -- no matter if NATO labels it "enemy" -- can create scores of sworn foes. And NATO, like the Taliban, has killed hundreds.

On Sunday, U.S. Marines fleeing a suicide bomber and militant ambush opened fire on civilian cars and pedestrians on a busy highway in eastern Afghanistan, wounded Afghans said.

Lt. Col. David Accetta, a U.S. military spokesman, said officials were sorting out the chain of events and could not yet say who caused the numerous deaths and injuries.

The U.S.-based Human Rights Watch estimates that more than 100 Afghan civilians died as a result of coalition assaults in 2006. An AP tally, based on reports from Afghan, NATO and coalition officials, puts the overall death toll of civilians in 2006 at 834, most from militant attacks.

"Killing Taliban is not going to get this country sorted out. That is not going to fix the problem," said Brig. Gen. Tim Grant, commander of Canada's 2,500 troop force, stationed in southern Kandahar, heartland of the resistance to Karzai's government. What's needed, he says, is an Afghan army.

While troops go after Taliban fighters, Grant says that's not a priority for ordinary Afghans; they are frustrated by insecurity and lawlessness, which they blame on a corrupt and inept government whose police extort, threaten and make them feel less secure.

The international troops are there to support Karzai's government. When they do that aggressively, even in response to deadly Taliban tactics, they are seen as brutes protecting an unpopular regime, he said.

"Are we stuck between a rock and a hard place? Yes. We are here at the request of the government and the government has issues and corruption is leading amongst them," said Grant.

The head of an Afghan human rights advocacy group, Nader Nadery, told The Associated Press that Afghans are turning away from the government and the international forces.

Yet most Afghans don't want the foreign soldiers to leave, he said. They keep local warlords and commanders -- some now in government -- from turning their guns on each other. Such feuds killed thousands of Afghans in the 1990s, destroyed much of the capital, Kabul, and eventually gave rise to the Taliban.

Grant said his priority, higher than chasing Taliban, was training and equipping Afghan forces to provide security on their own by 2009, when the Canadian mission ends. There's much work to be done.

Wali Mohammad is a police officer in Kandahar, looking smart in his gray woolen hat and pants. He told the AP that a policeman's salary of $60 is so low it drives police to corruption.

"There is no discipline among the police, no direction," he said. "We are given nice uniforms and weapons but that won't feed our family. We are compelled to be corrupt."

The police chief of Zabul province, Noor Mohammed Paktin, earlier told the AP that criminal gangs abetted by the police and military are as big a threat in some parts of Afghanistan as the religious militia. With the spring thaw, fighting is sure to intensify.

U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates promises NATO and coalition forces will go after the Taliban rather than wait for them to strike. "What we want to do this spring is have this spring offensive be our offensive," he said.

But aggressive action risks a backlash. In 2006, NATO and coalition forces mounted blistering offensives, including the strongest called Operation Medusa in Panjwayi district of southern Kandahar.

Residents of Spirwan, a village in the heart of the district, fled before last year's operation and had only recently returned when the AP visited this January.

Mohammed Khan, a villager in his 50s with dirt-caked hands from scrounging through the rubble of his home, screamed abuse when he saw a Westerner approach.

"What are these foreign soldiers doing?" he said. "One day they are dropping bombs on us and then they come with three or four dishes of food. What is that? What do they think?"

The offensive against the Taliban left the common people with nothing but problems, he said. "We hate the world community. We hate America. We hate NATO," he said. "What good are they doing for us? What good is our government doing?"

In what appeared to be the only concrete structure in the otherwise mud-brick village, local elder Dur Mohammed warned that the bombing of villages was creating more Taliban. He sat in the corner of the room, smoking and stroking his artificial leg, lost in the 1980s war against the invading Soviet Union.

"People don't like the Taliban coming into the villages, because then the bombing will come," he said. "But why are they (NATO) killing the Taliban? They are from this country. Why should the foreigners come and kill Afghans?"

Grant said the war is lost if the international community loses the hearts and minds of Afghans. More foreign troops aren't the answer, he said, and when assaults are needed they must be accurate.

A study of the Afghan war released Tuesday by the U.S.-based Jamestown Foundation reached a similar conclusion.

"As coalition troops continue to use close air support and superior artillery firepower to flush Taliban insurgents out of provinces like Kandahar, the real contest for the hearts and minds ... may well hinge on the competing sides' "collateral damage" statistics," it said.

The Center for Strategic and International Studies, another Washington-based group, said that NATO and the U.S. military were wrong to emphasize their ability to kill Taliban. "The ensuing collateral damage in a culture that emphasizes revenge has created ten enemies out of one and has disillusioned most Afghans," it said.

Grant says there is more anger today toward the foreign soldiers than in 2005, when he also was stationed in Afghanistan. To turn around that perception means taking risks, he said.

"I tell the troops that there are 55,000 drivers in Kandahar city and maybe five among them are suicide bombers. But if we treat all the other 54,995 drivers like they are all suicide bombers then we have lost," he said.

Some, like Abdullah Shah, who lost so much of his family, can't be won back. "I don't care. They can kill me. What are the foreign soldiers doing but killing us?" he said, recounting the day his wife and children were struck as they tried to flee. His youngest child, a 10-month-old baby, died with his mother.

"From whom can they protect us? The looters? The looters are the government and they are with the government."

Two Afghan rangers killed, seven captured

Khost (AFP) - Taliban insurgents attacked a forest ranger unit in eastern Afghanistan, killing two guards and capturing seven others, an official said Monday.

Three other members of the tribal militia force which guards a mountain forest in Khost province against wood smugglers were injured in the attack late Sunday, a district chief said.

"The Taliban attacked a forest guard post made up of tribesmen and killed two, injured three and took with them seven others," Mohammad Akber Zadran, the governor of Gorboz district, told AFP.

He said the fighting was started by the Taliban and lasted nearly an hour before the militants pulled back to neighbouring Pakistan, where Afghan authorities allege the rebels have bases.

Gorboz faces Pakistan's semi-autonomous tribal region of North Wazirstan, where US officials say that Al-Qaeda and Taliban insurgents forced out of Afghanistan in 2001 are regrouping in new sanctuaries.

Drug smugglers and traders in wood for construction -- banned under Afghan law -- are also active in the border region.

'US spy' shot dead in Pakistani tribal area

Miranshah (AFP) - Suspected militants in a Pakistani tribal area shot dead a tribesman accused of spying for US forces operating in neighbouring Afghanistan, officials said Monday.

The body of 30-year-old Qayyum Shahmiri was found early Monday south of Miranshah, the main town of North Waziristan tribal district, a security official told AFP.

Shahmiri had been shot in head and chest and a note found near his body said that he was an "American spy", the official said.

Pro-Taliban militants last week decapitated an Afghan cleric accused of spying for US forces and making recordings of anti-Taliban speeches in neighbouring South Waziristan.

The militants also cut off the hands and feet of a suspected spy in North Waziristan last month. On February 6 the bullet-riddled bodies of two more suspected spies were found in the same area, while another was killed around February 1.

US Vice President Dick Cheney visited Pakistan last week to urge President Pervez Musharraf to crack down on Al-Qaeda and Taliban militants who are allegedly regrouping in the semi-autonomous tribal zone.

Pakistan signed peace deals with insurgents in South Waziristan in 2005 and North Waziristan in 2006, prompting concerns from NATO, US and Afghan officials.

TALKING WITH THE TALIBAN?

Afghanistan Open to Dialogue With Militants – Spiegel online

President Hamid Karzai of Afghanistan has said he is open to holding talks with moderate Taliban in order to secure peace in his country. But do the Islamists want to talk?

Afghan President Hamid Karzai has said he is willing to hold talks with members of the Taliban in order to ensure stability in the country. The Islamist militants have threatened to launch a spring offensive in Afghanistan in the coming weeks but Karzai is hoping to persuade pragmatics to split from the hardliners. He would even consider including Taliban in his government, he said. "I will embrace Mullah Omar and Gulbuddin Hekmatyar for peace in Afghanistan. For stability in Afghanistan. But it is the Afghan people who should decide on the atrocities committed against the Afghan people," he told DER SPIEGEL.

According to Mullah Wakil Ahmed Muttawakil, the former Taliban foreign minister, negotiations have to take place at the highest level to prevent the war from spreading throughout the entire country. "The talks should include all the parties," he told DER SPIEGEL. Muttawakil, who also served as Mullah Omar's spokesman under the Taliban regime, surrendered to the Americans following the invasion of Afghanistan in 2001. He now lives in Kabul and still maintains good ties with the Taliban leadership. Muttawakil and Karzai met last week in the presidential palace in the Afghan capital for a five-hour meeting to exchange ideas.

But it is unclear how affective this strategy might be. While Karzai is willing to consider all the options to try to prevent further bloodshed, the Americans refuse point blank to hold talks with the Taliban. And the feeling appears to be mutual. The Quetta Shura -- the Taliban council that control the Koran schools in the Pakistan city of Quetta and is thought to plan attacks in Afghanistan -- have ruled out any compromises with the "puppet government" in Kabul. The resurgent Taliban have used the tribal border area between Pakistan and Afghanistan as a stronghold to regroup.

Under pressure from Washington, Pakistan's President Pervez Musharraf has launched a crack down on the Islamic militants in recent weeks. The former Taliban Defense Minister Mullah Obaidullah Akhund is reported to have been arrested in Pakistan last Monday, although this has not been confirmed by the Pakistani government. Five other militants are being held after a raid in Quetta this weekend, Reuters reports.

So far, Musharraf had been reluctant to launch a full assault on the Taliban leadership in Pakistan. He fears that the Islamist extremists, which up to now have been able to move relatively freely in the south-west of the country, could start to attack him and his regime. However, the visit by US Vice President Dick Cheney last week seems to have had some affect. Cheney asked Musharraf to do more to hunt down Taliban fighters on the border with Afghanistan.

Meanwhile, events in Afghanistan over the past few days have shown just how volatile the situation remains.

On Sunday, US troops killed 10 Afghan civilians and wounded another 35 after their convoy was hit by a suicide attack. Witnesses say the three humvees fired indiscriminately along a six-mile stretch of busy highway, hitting 14 to 15 vehicles, as they fled the attack. The incident prompted angry demonstrations in the region, just 50 kilometers (30 miles) west of the Pakistan border, with some people shouting "Death to America! Death to Karzai!" President Karzai condemned the deaths on Monday and ordered an inquiry.

And on Monday a NATO airstrike hit a house during a firefight between Western troops and militants, killing nine Afghans who lived there. According to Afghan officials, militants had fired on a NATO base in Kapisa province just north of Kabul, and when soldiers returned fire they hit a home, killing a man five women and three boys.

Afghan prisoner transfer deal toughened: O'Connor

Updated Sun. Mar. 4 2007 - CTV.ca News Staff

Defence Minister Gordon O'Connor says a new provision has been added to Canada's prisoner transfer agreement with Afghanistan.

The news comes just days after news broke this week that three Afghan prisoners who are considered key witnesses in the probe into allegations of abuse by Canadian soldiers, have disappeared.

Speaking on CTV's Question Period on Sunday, O'Connor said Canada has signed an agreement that requires an Afghan human rights group to monitor treatment of detainees.

"What we've done is we've added to it recently. We've added another process getting the Afghan Human Rights Commission involved. We just signed another agreement with them at the local level," O'Connor said.

However, he said the agreement has been in the works since last June, and is not the direct result of the prisoners' disappearance.

The transfer agreement originally signed in 2005 by Chief of the Defence Staff Gen. Rick Hillier, stipulated that detainees will not face execution after Canadian troops hand them over. It also requires that "accurate written records accounting for all detainees" be kept by both Canada and Afghanistan.

But Canada has no power to follow up and ensure that the provisions are followed once the prisoners have been handed over.

Other forces, such as the Dutch, British and Danish, have such stipulations written into their handover agreements, but Canada's only sets out that the International Committee of the Red Cross is responsible for the treatment and tracking of the prisoners.

Now, he said, one more "level of comfort" has been added into the deal. "We're there in support of the Afghan government and when we get insurgents who break the law we hand them over to the authorities," O'Connor said.

"We want assurances that they're treated in accordance with the Geneva Convention. I know according to the rules of law they don't have to be treated under the Geneva Convention, but we insist that they are. We are reliant on the International Red Cross to monitor this and now we're asking the human rights organization to also do it."

Suspected militants captured in Afghanistan do not fall under the Geneva Convention, according to the military, because they do not wear a uniform and are not fighting for a recognized state.

O'Connor refused to speculate on what may have happened to the three missing prisoners, but said no one should jump to conclusions until the National Investigation Service has completed its probe.

He pointed out that the families of Afghan prisoners often find the means to get them released.

"Theoretically, everyone is member of a tribe and sometimes tribes get their people out of prison either through influence or paying fines...so it's quite a revolving door," O'Connor said. But he added that "anyone can be found."

The disappearance of three Afghan detainees -- key prisoners in the investigation into alleged abuse by Canadian soldiers -- has prompted strong criticism over the prisoner handover agreement.

Critics say Canada is putting too much faith in the Afghan military to treat suspected militants with respect, claiming they are often subjected to torture and even execution.

"This is a tremendous failing on the part of the Department of National Defense and I worry about it," Amin Attaran, a law professor from the University of Ottawa, told CTV Newsnet on Friday.

"It's just minimal basic requirement of taking care of any living person that you treat them without any kind of risk of torture, that you shelter them properly and you do not give them to known torturers as the Afghans currently are."

Afghan rights group to monitor Canadian detainee transfers

MURRAY BREWSTER - Canadian Press

KANDAHAR, AFGHANISTAN — The Kandahar office of Afghanistan's human-rights commission has agreed to act as watchdog for detainees captured by Canadians to ensure that valid complaints of abuse are investigated.

The agreement comes after concerns have been raised by human-rights groups about Canada's practice of handing captured Taliban prisoners over to Afghan authorities who have a reputation for torture, and the emergence of a debate in Ottawa about allegations that Canadian troops abused detainees last spring.

"Canadians respect human rights very well," Abdul Quadar Noorzai, the Kandahar manager of the Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission, said in an interview. He was eager to trumpet the agreement signed last Friday with Brigadier-General Tim Grant, commander of Canadian troops in Afghanistan. "It is one of the greatest acts taken by them, and I really appreciate it from the core of my heart," said a beaming Mr. Noorzai, who's been working for a year to carve out such an arrangement.

Marc Raider, a spokesman for the Defence Department in Ottawa, confirmed the existence of the agreement and said it builds on a December, 2005, technical arrangement signed between Afghanistan's Defence Minister and Canada's Chief of the Defence Staff, General Rick Hillier.

That initial deal, which has been criticized by rights groups, obliges Canadian troops to turn over captured militants to local authorities, but does not allow Canada any say in their treatment once handed over.

The agreement signed by Gen. Hillier recognized the Afghan human-rights commission but did not set out a specific role for the agency. Last Friday's agreement changed that. Not only does Canada have to notify the International Committee of the Red Cross when it transfers a prisoner to Afghan custody, it now must inform Mr. Noorzai's office.

"It's simply an added layer of protection," said Mr. Raider, who wouldn't comment on whether the agreement would satisfy critics.

Mr. Noorzai said he is now free to investigate and document cases of suspected detainee abuse, whether the allegations involve Canadian troops or Afghan authorities.

He said that eventually he would like to see the agreement expanded to allow the commission to report on civilian shootings by foreign troops.

The Afghan National Police and the human-rights commission have recommended that military convoys be escorted by Afghan authorities through Kandahar's chaotic streets, a suggestion the Canadian army is considering.

AFGHANISTAN: Fighting a losing battle against opium production

KABUL, 5 March 2007 (IRIN) - Afghanistan is set to produce record volumes of opium this year because the government’s eradication efforts are constrained by insecurity in the volatile south and southeastern regions.

“If we do not have peace in the coming months, we will probably end up with another boom in opium production for 2007,” warned Zalmai Afzali, a spokesman for Afghanistan’s Ministry of Counter Narcotics.

In 2006, Afghanistan produced a record 6,100 tonnes of opium, a 49 percent increase over the previous year, according to the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, accounting for one-third of gross domestic product (GDP). This was 92 percent of the world’s supply.

More than five years since the collapse of the hardline Taliban regime in October 2001, Afghanistan faces an insurgency in the remote poppy-growing region that for the past weeks has kept Mosa Qala district and other popular poppy-growing areas of Helmand province largely under Taliban control.

“This year we have given a strict message to farmers,” stated Zemarai Bashari, a spokesman for Afghanistan’s Ministry of Interior. “We will destroy all poppy fields.”

About 550 policemen have been sent to Helmand and neighbouring provinces, including Kandahar, where they have successfully eradicated more than 3,000 hectares of poppy fields.

However, such a figure could prove minuscule compared with the 172,600 hectares that experts believe were under cultivation last year.

Moreover, officials concede that insecurity will likely frustrate counter-narcotics efforts, particularly in Helmand, where 40 percent of Afghanistan’s illicit opium is cultivated.

“We have some problems in Helmand,” Bashari admitted, “and we know Helmand has the largest number of poppy fields in the country.”

In addition, government forces and local poppy farmers who have yet to be provided with alternative sources of income frequently come to blows.

On 27 February, clashes between eradication forces and local farmers in Nangarhar province, in the east, killed one and wounded three. Such incidents serve only to fuel growing concerns that poppy farmers - deeply disenchanted with the government’s eradication strategy - could find common ground with anti-government elements, including the Taliban.

In an effort to address such fears, Afghan officials say this year’s eradication push is being launched earlier to provide farmers with adequate opportunities to plant alternative crops.

However, the government’s strategy has been criticised for being ineffective and incompatible with the realities of impoverished Afghans, millions of whom are largely dependent on poppy cultivation.

“This is a strategy promoted by the US and the UK,” asserted Gulalai Momand, deputy country manager for the Paris-based Senlis Council, a policy and development group, which recommends licensing poppy cultivation in Afghanistan. “It alienates Afghan farmers from their government.”

The government has imposed restrictions on the council’s activities in the country, warning the organisation not to advocate for the authorisation of poppy cultivation, which the council says could be used for legitimate medical purposes.

Yet in the absence of tangible alternative livelihoods that could realistically meet the basic needs of destitute Afghan farmers, explained Momand, “it is counter-productive to emphasise solely eradication and a narrow-minded strategy”.

Afghan and international aid organisations created a Counter Narcotics Trust Fund in 2005, which has received US$33 million to finance alternative livelihood projects this year alone. However, with farmers profiting $775 million from the country’s $3.1 billion poppy industry in 2006, according to a US State Department report released on 1 March, it is clearly not enough.

The government of Afghan President Hamid Karzai pays $70 a month to its poppy eradication police, who destroyed less than 10 percent of the poppy fields in 2006.

“They [the eradication police] destroyed my small field only because I did not have money to bribe them,” Shahzada, a farmer in Helmand, complained. “For those who know officials or have the means to bribe them, their fields remain safe.”

“Police chiefs accused of corruption in 13 districts of Nangarhar province have been fired,” countered Bashari, adding that more provincial officials would be sacked if found guilty. But despite the rhetoric, it is clear the clock is ticking, with most analysts predicting a bumper harvest this year.

US should recognise Pakistan’s interests in Afghanistan

By Khalid Hasan – Daily Times (Pak.)

WASHINGTON: The Bush administration has been urged to recognise Pakistan’s legitimate interests in Afghanistan, such as its concerns about India, while remembering that it is an “article of faith” with Islamabad and part of its national security doctrine that the US is an “unreliable ally”.

In an extended testimony before the Senate Armed Service Committee on March 1, Barnett R Rubin of the Centre on International Cooperation, New York University, said the US should try to encourage greater transparency concerning Indian activities in Pakistan and Afghanistan.

He suggested that as the US increased pressure on Pakistan through the military assistance package, it needed to develop a multilateral approach with China because Pakistan, when it felt that the US was not supporting it, had tended to turn to China. “It tried to do that after the US-India nuclear deal last year, and China turned it down. So it would be very important to have a joint approach with China and the other NATO members on this as well,” he added.

Rubin said Pakistan also needed assistance in building of its capacity to integrate the tribal areas into the country’s political and economic system. In the absence of integration, Pakistan had been unable to do anything about “safe havens” it was believed to provide to the Taliban and others, he said, adding that the US also needed to help Pakistan and Afghanistan address their bilateral relationship. “This is not a personal problem between Hamid Karzai and Gen Pervez Musharraf. There are a whole set of issues regarding the border, trade, transit, ethnic relations, that have gone un-addressed for 60 years, but we can no longer afford to allow them to go un-addressed.”

He said if the US did not deal with the sanctuary problem, it would not succeed in Afghanistan, but it should be remembered that this was a “region problem”. He said that it was not that Pakistan was pro-terrorist, pretending to be anti-terrorist. Islamabad perceives the situation in Afghanistan in terms of its interests. Pakistan and Afghanistan have had antagonistic relations since the beginning. Rubin said the infrastructure built with US and Saudi help during the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan, was still there and being used by the same people to fight against the US, “including the same people in the Pakistan military and intelligence on the ground level who have been involved in this thing for 20 years, and are still there on the ground level and have not changed, even if their orders have changed”. Rubin said Musharraf’s “political problem” was that he was the head of the “largest political party in Pakistan, which is the Pakistan military”.

“The Pakistani military is not a military organisation in the sense that we understand a military organisation. The Pakistan military is the ruling organisation in Pakistan. Musharraf is the president and he’s the chief of Army Staff, and he’s running for election this year ... the Pakistani military has always been aligned with Islamist parties in Pakistan. Currently, the party that was founded and supported by President Musharraf is in alliance with an openly pro-Taliban party in the provincial government of Balochistan. Now in anticipation of this year’s upcoming elections, Musharraf has been conducting discussions with other political parties. He has not been able to reach an agreement with any of the Pakistani civilian political parties that support our efforts in Afghanistan. So he is going to be running either by himself or de facto, again, in political alliance with those jihadi parties,” he added.

He said military rule in Pakistan was not the solution. “Military rule in Pakistan is the problem.” He said the way that Pakistan could build up a political base for to support the US effort was through a process of civilianisation of the political system. He said not all Pashtuns supported the Taliban. There are political parties that democracy in the area – parties that have always been in opposition to the military regime. He said that as such, they continued to be treated as opposition. “So until and as long as the military is in control, it will be difficult to change the political orientation of those regions,” he added.

Afghanistan mission most critical of all

By Boston Herald editorial staff - Sunday, March 4, 2007

It’s increasingly clear that the force of events may accomplish what the Bush administration has refused to consider, a drawdown of U.S. combat troops in Iraq.

But instead of coming home, those troops may be needed in Afghanistan, where the Taliban, host to al-Qaeda before Sept. 11, is staging a comeback. The bombing at the gate of Bagram Air Base while Vice President Dick Cheney was there is just the tip of the iceberg: Jihadists in Afghanistan have staged almost 140 suicide bombings in the past year.

Cheney visited Pakistani President Gen. Pervez Musharraf this past week to urge him to do more to clean out Taliban and al-Qaeda sanctuaries in the “wild west” areas of Pakistan on the Afghani border. Musharraf withdrew his army to barracks in the area last year in exchange for promises from tribal leaders not to help the Taliban.

The assessment of the new director of national intelligence, Mike McConnell, for the Senate Armed Services Committee was directly to the point: “Long-term prospects for eliminating the Taliban threat appear dim, so long as the sanctuary remains in Pakistan, and there are no encouraging signs that Pakistan is eliminating it.”

Musharraf may be helpless; the Pakistani army likely is resisting whatever he tries to do. Pakistani intelligence services long have been close to the Taliban and the army has a long history of mounting coups.

The interests of the United States simply cannot permit a Taliban sanctuary in Afghanistan, Pakistan or anywhere else. This is vital - Sept. 11 showed just how vital - and far more important than who wins a civil war in Iraq. It may become necessary to act against the Pakistani sanctuaries. This might be done by air strikes alone or by fast in-and-out incursions by special operations forces, and with or without the tacit or explicit cooperation of Pakistan.

Afghanistan is a NATO fight, and the 26,000 U.S. troops in the country are only a little more than half the force. NATO partners are resisting calls for more troops. Only the British are adding troops and soon will have more in Afghanistan than they had in Iraq. The suppression of al-Qaeda and the Taliban is so important that the United States may have to act alone - if it must.

Showdown Time – Strategy Page

March 5, 2007:  Pakistan is being forced, by Taliban attempts to invade Afghanistan from Pakistan bases,  to confront the threat of Islamic terrorism. It was the government that encouraged the growth of Islamic radicalism in the late 1970s (when another general was running the country), in the belief that this would break the cycle of corruption that was crippling the government and economy. That didn't work, and Pakistan is still trying to rid itself of the murderous Islamic terrorist organizations that have since shown up. Worse, many senior officials of the government and military still believe that Islamic radicalism is the solution to the countrys problems. But those same officials are not willing to sacrifice their careers for that belief. They will, however, be less enthusiastic when ordered to take action against Islamic radical groups. The Islamic terrorists recognize this situation, and are careful to avoid targeting their allies when carry out assassination operations against Pakistani officials. President Musharraf risks civil war if he again turns the army loose on the Pushtun tribes along the Afghan border. But the West threatens him with far worse if a major terrorist attack in the West is traced back to bases in Pakistan.  

March 4, 2007: In Indian Kashmir, Islamic terrorists have demanded that cable TV companies drop foreign channels, because these channels show un-Islamic content. The Islamic terrorists did this once before, in 2005, and killed three cable company employees. The foreign cable channels went off the air for a while, then came back on. This sort of thing makes the Islamic terrorists more unpopular, but the terrorists don't seem to care any more. Increasingly, the Islamic radicals are spending most of their time terrorizing Moslems. The terrorists cannot afford to lose too much support among the Moslem population, as that would severely limit their mobility, fund raising and ability to recruit new members.

In eastern India, Maoist rebels assassinated a prominent politician, and four others. Maoists are increasingly using such killings to force the government to recognize rural areas where the Maoists have basically taken over the government.  

March 3, 2007:  Pakistani police almost captured Wahid Baksh, the leader of a group of Baluchi Iranian rebels. Baluchi tribes live on both sides of the border. The Baluchi are Sunnis, and never got along with the Shia Iranians. Iran has been pressuring Pakistan to crack down on rebel Iranian Baluchis who maintain bases inside Pakistan. In return, Iran will go after rebel Pakistani Baluchis who try to hide out in Iran.  Meanwhile, the Pakistani government got a migraine when an American general mentioned, in public, that U.S. and NATO troops fire across the border at Taliban and al Qaeda fleeing into Pakistan, and even pursue them into Pakistan. This is true, but it's supposed to be kept quiet, as Pakistani public opinion does not tolerate such invasions of Pakistani territory. But because Pakistan will not stop the invasion of Afghanistan from Pakistani territory, it has to tolerate some flexibility along the border. 

March 2, 2007: In eastern Pakistan, a roadside bomb was used in an attempt to kill a judge. The government is prosecuting the leadership of an Islamic terrorist group that has been killing Shia Moslems for years. The wounded judge was presiding over the trial. Islamic terrorists have long used terrorism against government officials, in order to avoid prosecution for their crimes. Islamic radicals are increasingly trying to impose their life style by threatening the owners of barber shops (that cut off beards) and music stores (that sell un-Islamic entertainment.) The terrorists are also threatening journalists who criticize Islamic terrorism. 

March 1, 2007:  Pakistani police arrested Mullah Obaidullah Akhund, and several key associates, in the southwestern Pakistani city of Quetta. This was part of a crackdown on Afghan refugees who are engaged in criminal activities (smuggling, drugs or the Taliban all count) Akhund, the Taliban Minister of Defense in Afghanistan until late 2001, is considered the number three man in the Taliban. At first, the Taliban publicists denied that Akhund had been caught, then tried to downgrade Akhunds stature. Quetta, the capital of Baluchistan, has long been a city where Taliban operated openly. The Baluchis are also pro-Taliban, but not as much as their Pushtun cousins. The Baluchis want their own country, while the Pushtuns just want to be left alone. 

February 28, 2007:  For the fifth time this year, the Taliban have murdered someone along the Afghan border, and accused them of being a spy for the Americans. This tactic is being used more frequently by the Taliban to intimidate opponents. Some of those opponents are informing the government, or maybe even the Americans, about what the Taliban are up to. But most of the Taliban opponents simply don't agree with the Taliban concept of Islam, and the need for a religious dictatorship. The Taliban attempts to dominate tribal leaders does not go down well. For the Pushtun on both sides of border, tribe is everything. Your tribe is your final defense against persecution and privation. To many Pushtuns, the Taliban are a bunch of power hungry extremists, who will kill you if you openly disagree with them.  President Musharraf has tried to avoid confronting the Taliban threat, if only because most Pakistanis prefer to let the tribes along the Afghan border sort out their own affairs. But in this case, one faction, the Taliban, is also invading Afghanistan, and trying to take over that country. This has always been a problem with the Pushtun tribes and borders. The U.S. is rubbing Musharrafs face in this border problem. This is not very polite or diplomatic, but neither is Pakistans attempt to just look the other way as Pakistani tribesmen invade a neighboring country.

PAKISTAN: KEY ENVOYS CALLED HOME FOR CONSULTATIONS

Islamabad, 5 March (AKI/DAWN) - A number of Pakistani envoys from key world capitals have been asked by Pakistan's foreign ministry to report to the headquarters in Islamabad this week for consultations on major challenges confronting the country on the diplomatic front and in the international arena. The two-day consultative meeting convened by Foreign Secretary Riaz Mohammad Khan is set to begin on Thursday and bring together seven Pakistani envoys, diplomatic sources told Dawn on Sunday, adding that all vital aspects of the country’s foreign policy and national security would be reviewed during the closed-door deliberations.

Pakistan’s Permanent Representative to the UN in New York, Munir Akram, Ambassador to the US Mehmud Durrani, Ambassador to China Salman Bashir, High Commissioner to the UK Dr Maleeha Lodhi and High Commissioner to India Shahid Malik would be attending the meeting as would Pakistan’s ambassadors to Afghanistan and Iran.

The proceedings of the meeting will be conducted by Pakistan's foreign minister Khurshid Kasuri and the foreign secretary.

Senior foreign ministry officials, including additional secretaries, and representatives of the country’s military establishment and key national security institutions were also expected to participate in the deliberations.

Although the official word was that the meeting was part of the "regular internal consultations" to review Pakistan’s foreign policy and was planned much before the international criticism of Pakistan on the Taliban and al-Qaeda issue, the consultations had acquired special significance because of its timing.

It's taking place amid growing international concern about an impending spring-offensive by Taliban in Afghanistan and mounting pressure on Pakistan from the US, Afghanistan, the NATO and other key members of the international community for not doing enough to curb Taliban insurgents and cross-border terrorism.

Pakistan had been the target of scathing criticism in the American and Western policy making circles as well as the US Congress in the past few weeks for letting its tribal areas turn into safe havens for al-Qaeda and Taliban militants. The Western media had also been highly critical of Pakistan and appeared to have unleashed a campaign against it.

Pakistan’s repeated assertions and assurances about its continued determination to fight al-Qaeda, Taliban militancy and Talibanisation in the tribal areas had clearly failed to convince the international community.“The meeting will take stock of the changing geo-political situation globally as well as regionally and make recommendations on the strategic adjustments that Pakistan needs to make to respond effectively to the emerging scenario,” one Pakistani diplomat said.

The country’s top diplomats were expected to focus on Pakistan’s role in the war on terror, the Pakistan-Afghanistan border situation and the intensifying pressure on Pakistan from all fronts on the Taliban and terrorism issue.

The strained relations with the US, Afghanistan and Iran over terrorism issue would also figure in discussions, sources said. The foreign secretary would also brief the envoys on the outcome of Pakistan’s evolving Middle East peace initiative.

Given that the meeting would take place just ahead of the fourth round of the Pakistan-India Composite Dialogue, discussions on the ongoing peace process and progress on the Jammu and Kashmir dispute would be part of the deliberations.

[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.]