In this bulletin:

• Bush calls for more Afghan troops
• Afghanistan to ask NATO for bigger army of its own
• Russia's problems nudge Afghanistan off the map
• Russian bid to replace Pakistan as supply route: War in Afghanistan
• NATO backs most of Canada's Afghanistan stance
• Afghan women protest anti-Islam art
• Afghan parliament committee wants foreign troops to leave Kabul
• Possible Afghan presidential contender against troops withdrawal
• Afghan MPs call for "legalization" of presence of foreign forces
• Afghan challenges know no border, Pashtun elder tells senators
• Pakistan rethinks US policy on militants
• Tell Canadians more about mission in Afghanistan, Kenny urges Ottawa
• Canadian soldier sees long fight in Afghanistan
• Working to rid Afghanistan of land mines a 'kind of jihad'
• Tories appear set to lose vote on lowering flag for Afghan deaths - and ignore it
• Afghanistan, Pakistan and NATO
• Afghanistan investment climate improving: WB
• Remembering the Soviet 'Vietnam'

Bush calls for more Afghan troops

BBC - US President George W Bush has urged Nato allies to send more troops to Afghanistan ahead of the alliance's biggest-ever summit in Romania. In a pre-summit speech in Bucharest, Mr Bush said "we cannot afford to lose Afghanistan... we must win".

Romania and France are due to send more troops and Mr Bush asked other nations "to step forward".

He also renewed calls for Nato membership to be open to any European democracy that sought it. The Nato-led force in Afghanistan currently numbers 47,000 troops from 40 nations. Commanders have called for a further 10,000 soldiers to be deployed.

Nato allies want the Bucharest summit, starting later on Wednesday, to send the message that it will stay in Afghanistan for as long as necessary.

In a keynote speech hours before the two-day summit of the 26-nation alliance, Mr Bush said: "As [French] President Sarkozy put it in London last week, we cannot afford to lose Afghanistan.

"Whatever the cost, however difficult, we cannot afford it, we must win. "If we do not defeat the terrorists in Afghanistan, we will face them on our soil."

His attempts to rally new troops came as Lord Ashdown, the former UN envoy to Bosnia who was blocked from being UN envoy to Afghanistan by President Hamid Karzai, warned the Nato-led alliance was "getting pretty close" to losing control of the country.

Mr Bush arrived in the Romanian capital, Bucharest, late on Tuesday. He has since left to meet Romania's President Traian Basescu in the Black Sea resort of Constanta. On the eve of his last Nato summit, Bush set out his agenda in a wide-ranging, half-hour speech.

In addition to asking for more troops, he also pushed for Nato's eastern expansion and appealed to Russia to drop opposition to US plans to establish missile defence installations in Nato members Poland and the Czech Republic.

President Bush said the "circle of freedom", as he put it, must be extended to include new Nato members from the Balkans. He said invitations would be issued to Albania, Croatia and Macedonia to join Nato.

He also pressed the alliance to support Membership Action Plans for both Ukraine and Georgia - a move opposed by France and Germany. "We must make clear that Nato welcomes the aspirations of Georgia and Ukraine for membership and offers them a clear path forward toward that goal," he said.

"Nato membership must remain open to all of Europe's democracies that seek it, and are ready to share in the responsibilities of Nato membership."

He also appealed to Russian President Vladimir Putin to accept the US missile shield installations. The US says they are needed to counter a potential threat from Iran, though Moscow fears they could be used against Russia.

"The Cold War is over," said Mr Bush. "Russia is not our enemy." After the summit, Mr Bush will fly to Russia for final talks with Mr Putin, who steps down in May.

Russia is fiercely opposed to the eastward expansion of Nato, and has warned of a crisis if Ukraine tries to join. Grigory Karasin, Russia's deputy foreign minister, said Ukrainian membership of the Western alliance would "entail a deep crisis in Russian-Ukrainian relations".

France and Germany, backed by several smaller west European allies, oppose Ukrainian membership. And opinion polls in Ukraine suggest there is little public support there for its admission to the alliance.

Nato Secretary General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer told the BBC he supported Nato membership for the former Soviet states. "There's no way that the door will be locked for Ukraine and Georgia," he said.

"The Nato Treaty very clearly states that European democracies fulfilling their criteria for Nato membership are welcome."

Mr de Hoop Scheffer said he understood Russian concerns but added that the "final decision will be taken by the allies and not by anybody else".

Answering a US call for more contributions to fight the Taleban and its al-Qaeda allies, French Prime Minister Francois Fillon said on Tuesday that France would send "several hundred" more soldiers to Afghanistan.

But he said France would oppose offering eventual Nato membership to Ukraine and Georgia, saying it would upset the balance of power between Europe and Russia.

Afghanistan to ask NATO for bigger army of its own

At the NATO meeting in Romania Thursday, Afghan officials are expected to request money to expand its National Army from 86,000 to 120,000 troops.

By Gordon Lubold | Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor

From the April 2, 2008 edition

KABUL, Afghanistan - Afghan officials will go to the NATO summit in Romania Thursday with a request: pay to increase our national Army by 40 percent. A bigger Army, Afghan officials argue, will allow the US and other coalition members to scale back in the coming years.

This appeal comes amid pleas from the US and Canada for other NATO members to commit more to the Afghanistan mission, which many analysts say has floundered over the past year for lack of resources and a coherent strategy. France is expected to contribute another 1,000 forces and Germany is likely to make a bigger commitment.

But American and Afghan government sources with knowledge of the expected Afghan proposal say that an increase from the current authorization of 86,000 Afghan Army soldiers to 120,000 is the only way to create an enduring defense against a resurgent Taliban and elusive Al Qaeda operatives.

"There are two big neighbors, Pakistan and Iran, where extremism and fundamentalism is part of their politics," says Helaludin Helal, a former deputy minister at the Ministry of Interior and now a member of the Afghan Parliament who favors a bigger Army but is not among those making the official proposal to NATO this week. "Extremism is taught there, trained there, and they all come to Afghanistan from there."

The lack of NATO consensus for the size of the Afghanistan mission is giving Kabul a chance to make a play for an Army increase – a move it argues will put an Afghan face on an Afghan problem.

Officials on the ground here, including members of the Afghan government, have long said a larger Army is necessary for a country the size of Afghanistan – which is 50 percent larger than Iraq, where the US has funded and trained 183,000 soldiers.

But as recently as this week, US officials said that they didn't think the Afghanistan minister of defense, Abdul Rahim Wardak, would use the forum in Bucharest, Romania, to press for more Afghan forces. And it was unclear what, if any, announcement would be made as a result or if the talks would remain private for now. Sources spoke on condition of anonymity due to the sensitive nature of the proposal.

The request for 120,000 is far short of the 200,000 that the Afghan government and American proponents have floated in recent weeks. But the appeal to grow to 120,000 may be far more realistic, say those close to the issue. US Central Command in Tampa, Fla., had also suggested the same number, another source says.

"My guess is that the Afghans are asking for the maximum of what they think they can get from us – which is probably around 120,000," says one American official. "They don't want to make a proposal and then get shot down."

The original size of the Afghan Army was determined by a 2001 agreement in Bonn, Germany, to be about 70,000, a "sustainable" number that reflected a postwar environment that would not require as much security.

But a resurgent Taliban over the last year has made violent inroads, especially in the southern provinces of Helmand and Kandahar, and there is now growing recognition that the size of the military needs to be rethought.

This January, a process known as the Joint Coordination and Monitoring Board, a committee of international members who oversee the Afghanistan Compact, also known as the London Compact, agreed to raise the size of the Army to 86,000. That board would have to meet again to increase the size of the Army again, American officials say.

As of March 25, there are 54,947 soldiers assigned to the Afghan National Army and another 8,900 soldiers undergoing training. The American military has spent more than $8.2 billion training Afghan soldiers since 2005.

Proponents of growing the Afghan Army include Sen. Joseph Lieberman (I) of Connecticut, who thinks the additional cost is worth it. "The fact is, the United States spends billions of dollars subsidizing the militaries of allies around the world, including many far less strategically important than Afghanistan," Senator Lieberman wrote in a Washington Post Op-Ed last month.

"Afghan troops are fighting on the front lines against America's mortal enemies. Whatever the cost of ensuring that our Afghan allies have the numbers and means to prevail, the cost of their defeat by the Taliban would be infinitely greater."

Lieberman supports an Afghan Army of around 200,000, saying the NATO summit is "an opportune moment for the United States to commit to expanding its ranks, and in a big way."

In an interview last month, the Afghan ambassador to the US, Said Jawad, said he believes the Afghans can grow the Army over the next few years and said his country could consider the use of a draft to do it if need be. Whatever the cost, he said, Afghanistan must be made to be capable enough to fend for itself. "What we need to do is to look at the cost of not doing it."

Supporters of growing the Army point to the cost efficiencies of expansion, saying that about 60 Afghan soldiers can be trained for the cost of deploying one US soldier to Iraq.

The Afghan Army is widely seen as a success story, even if it still relies heavily on US forces to conduct operations. According to officials at NATO's International Security Assistance Force, which leads NATO's effort here, public confidence in its Army is high. Two recent polls, one taken by the Asia Foundation and another by the Environics firm, show Afghan support for their Army to be between 84 and 88 percent.

Russia's problems nudge Afghanistan off the map

Putin's grievances in Eastern Europe and Balkans will make it hard for Harper to get world leaders' attention at NATO summit, DOUG SAUNDERS , April 2, 2008

BRUSSELS -- While Prime Minister Stephen Harper will enter the Bucharest NATO summit today with hat in hand, seeking 1,000 troops needed to prevent Canada from withdrawing from Afghanistan, he may be surprised to discover that the other 25 member nations are instead focused on another visitor with very different deals in mind.

The imposing figure of Vladimir Putin, the Russian President, has overshadowed most other matters in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization's crucial gathering. As the 59-year-old alliance prepares to expand onto Russia's doorstep with a proposal to put Ukraine and Georgia on the path to membership, and disputes with Russia dominate Europe's military agenda, the enormous problems of Afghanistan are slipping into the shadows.

"Ottawa is very, very focused on Afghanistan, to the exclusion of everything else, but seen from here, this is a very different summit," a top NATO official said at the organization's sprawling Brussels headquarters yesterday as he prepared to head to Bucharest. "Here, enlargement, the western Balkans and relations with Russia are the significant issues that are taking up all of our time. Most of the Afghan questions have been settled."

For Europeans, who dominate NATO's membership, the looming issues all involve Russia. In interviews with several foreign NATO delegations yesterday, it was clear that their attention is largely focused on matters far to the west of Afghanistan: on Kosovo, where thousands more troops may be needed soon; on Sudan, where the European Union is expanding its peacekeeping force, in what many consider the beginning of a new alliance to compete with NATO; and on Russia's border, where NATO's expansion is an enormously divisive issue.

While U.S. President George W. Bush visited Ukraine yesterday to drum up support for the country's pro-Western government joining NATO, German Chancellor Angela Merkel and French Prime Minister François Fillon have said that they are opposed to Russia's neighbours joining because it would inflame Moscow at a sensitive moment.

The Russian President, who is customarily invited as a guest, is likely to set the agenda from the outset, and his presence will not be merely symbolic: This is an opportunity for the world's powers, and especially the United States, to make deals with him, and he has arrived with bargaining chips. NATO officials said they are prepared to take up Mr. Putin's offer to grant military access to Afghanistan's northern borders through Russia, which would be an important tactical development.

In exchange for this, he will likely ask for concessions on one of the several grievances that will almost certainly dominate his speech on Friday and his news conferences throughout the week. They include anger over NATO's invitation of Russian neighbours Ukraine and Georgia to begin the process of joining the alliance; fury over the February declaration of independence by Kosovo, which has been occupied by NATO troops since 1999; and an angry standoff over a U.S. anti-missile base in the Czech Republic and Poland, which led Russia to withdraw from weapons treaties.

To make matters even more sensitive, a group of five high-level generals from the largest NATO nations, including the United States, France and Britain, are using the summit to promote a position paper calling for NATO to develop first-strike nuclear capability. While a senior NATO figure said that the idea has "no traction whatsoever," the discussion of such a blatantly Cold War-style concept among prominent generals is unlikely to please the Russians.

While the Afghanistan war, which involves 47,000 troops from 40 countries, remains by far the largest issue within NATO, there is a sense among many member nations that there is little left to discuss. On the other hand, no major countries are considering withdrawal from Afghanistan at the moment (Canada's threat to withdraw in 2009 if 1,000 troops aren't delivered is not considered likely by anyone within NATO).

It is here that Mr. Harper will confront a third deal maker seeking to capture NATO's attention. At a dinner tonight, French President Nicolas Sarkozy will promise to expand France's force of 2,500 troops and put them in a more active combat role - exactly how many or where is still not clear - but for most figures in NATO, this "Canadian solution" will be far less interesting than Mr. Sarkozy's other proposals.

In exchange for the troops, Mr. Sarkozy will demand that the approach to the Afghanistan war change to one based on more nation-building and economy-boosting practices, and less heavy combat. "We are going to call for a less feudal, a less medieval approach to the war, where you currently have military forces creating walled-off areas where agriculture only takes place under the occupier's guard," one French official said. "We want to put the economy first."

Mr. Sarkozy is offering to have France rejoin the NATO command structure, from which France withdrew in 1966 in a dispute over U.S. dominance of the alliance. In exchange for taking on this responsibility, France is demanding a greater European role, and thus a reduced U.S. position, in NATO's decision making. France's larger goal, to be put into play when it takes over the rotating presidency of the European Union this summer, will be what is known as the European Security and Defence Policy, a separate EU military force that could become a competitor to NATO.

For years, the United States strongly opposed a separate European defence force, and was able to use its allies within Europe to block it. But after Mr. Sarkozy, a conservative and admirer of the United States, made a peacemaking visit to Washington earlier this year, the United States agreed to drop its opposition to the European defence plan.

But neither Mr. Putin's nor Mr. Sarkozy's promises are likely to produce decisive results in Bucharest this week, and they are likely to create enough noise to make Mr. Harper's urgent request for troops seem secondary.

Russian bid to replace Pakistan as supply route: War in Afghanistan

Dawn, By Anwar Iqbal - WASHINGTON, April 1: At the Nato summit, which begins in Bucharest on Wednesday, Russian President Vladimir Putin is expected to offer an alternative route for supplying US and Nato troops in Afghanistan.

The proposal, if accepted, will change the course of the war in Afghanistan and will also have far-reaching consequences for Pakistan as Nato’s 43,000 troops in Afghanistan rely heavily on supplies transported via Pakistan.

Diplomatic sources in Washington told Dawn that Russian and Nato diplomats have already held a series of “productive and successful” talks on a plan that would allow non-military material – such as clothing, food and petrol – to cross Russia by land.

The plan, however, could later be expanded to include ammunition and light weapons as well, the sources said.

Russia’s new ambassador to Nato Dmitri Rogozin played a key role in selling this plan to the members of this US-led alliance, telling them that this will be a reliable alternative route free of violence and political troubles.

While America’s European allies have shown great interest in the proposal, the Americans are still reluctant as they do not want to bring Russia back to a region from where it was forcibly ousted in 1989, after battling Afghan freedom fighters (now Al Qaeda and Taliban militants) for almost 10 years.

Despite Washington’s reluctance, the Nato has held intensive talks with Russian officials on the precise routes to be used and hopes to reach agreement at this week’s summit in Bucharest.

If approved by the summit, the supplies can begin as soon as Nato wants as the Russians already have a functioning route passing through Russia, Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan.

Under the proposed agreement, Russia and the Collective Security Treaty Organisation, a military alliance of former Soviet republics, will jointly guarantee an interrupted supply of essential goods to the Nato forces.

Western diplomatic sources in Washington told Dawn that Nato sees the proposed route as a good alternative for supplies going through Pakistan which faces political uncertainty and may not be a reliable route for long.

The Pakistan route, according to these sources, passes through the Taliban-infested tribal zone and has become increasingly dangerous. Last Sunday, militants blew up a convoy of 36 oil tankers meant for US forces in Afghanistan.

Russian diplomats promoting their proposal also have underlined a so-called “crisis of trust” between the United States and Pakistan, where the new government plans to engage militants in a dialogue opposed by Washington.

They also argue that Russia has always had a strong interest in seeing the Nato mission in Afghanistan succeed because Moscow wants to prevent Muslim extremists enter the former Soviet republics.

But there are others in Washington who warn that an attempt to disassociate Pakistan from any plan for Afghanistan may have dangerous consequences.

In an article published on the eve of the Nato summit, Karl F. Inderfurth, a former US assistant secretary of state for South and Central Asian affairs, describes Pakistan as “one country that can make or break (Nato’s) mission” in Afghanistan.

He notes that Nato’s Secretary General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer has promised to visit Islamabad as soon as the new Pakistan government is in place.

“After Bucharest there is no better destination to reinforce Nato’s Afghan mission,” says Mr Inderfurth while backing the proposed visit.

Mr Inderfurth urges Nato leaders to work on a “new compact” that addresses Afghanistan and Pakistan’s political, economic and security concerns and seeks to neutralise regional and great power rivalries.

To attain this, he proposed an UN-sponsored, a high-level conference of all Afghanistan’s neighbours and concerned major powers for talks on a multilateral accord that addresses Pakistan’s concerns about developments in Afghanistan.

The proposed accord should recognise Afghanistan’s borders with Pakistan, pledge non-interference in Afghanistan’s internal affairs, recognise Afghanistan as a permanently neutral state and establish a comprehensive international regime to remove obstacles to the flow of trade across Afghanistan.

Mr Inderfurth also warns that any large-scale outside military intervention in Pakistan’s tribal areas would be disastrous for the Pakistani state and US interests.

Instead, he urges working with Pakistan’s new leadership to integrate the tribal region into the Pakistani political system and provide substantial assistance to build up their economy and social infrastructure.

NATO backs most of Canada's Afghanistan stance

Mike Blanchfield, Canwest News Service  Published: Tuesday, April 01, 2008

BUCHAREST, Romania -- Canada may not leave the NATO summit with the extra troops it is demanding, but it has had a major influence on the international road map for Afghanistan's future, Canwest News has learned.

Plotting a more unified way forward in Afghanistan is one of the top priorities for NATO's 26 leaders meeting here in the Romanian capital. The alliance is attempting to counter long-standing criticism that its political and military strategy for Afghanistan has been fragmented, plagued by public disagreements, and has lacked co-ordination with other international actors in Afghanistan, particularly the United Nations.

NATO, along with its 13 partner countries in the International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan, is banking that a sweeping communique to be released Thursday, which some are calling a vision statement, will result in a renewed statement of solidarity in Afghanistan and affirm a long-term international commitment to the war-torn country.

"Through the negotiation process, I would say the document looks a lot like what Ottawa wanted," said a top NATO diplomat, who spoke on condition of anonymity.

Defence Minister Peter MacKay attempted to dampen expectations Tuesday that NATO would immediately find the 1,000 additional troops Canada has demanded for southern Afghanistan. Canada has threatened to withdraw its 2,500 troops from Kandahar by February 2009 unless the extra combat troops are found.

"We've done everything humanly possible to set up those conditions -- but keep in mind we have until February 2009 to fulfil those commitments," Mr. MacKay, noting that he wanted to see what France brings to the summit table.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper has led a diplomatic offensive to get more troops, but aside from periodic reports that France might send 1,000 commandos to eastern Afghanistan, no firm offers are on the table heading into the Bucharest summit.

"President [Nicolas] Sarkozy has made a number of references to the fact they want to do more," Mr. MacKay said. "Now, it's simply wait for the delivery."

Behind the scenes, however, Canada is playing a major role in shaping the future of the NATO's involvement in Afghanistan.

While it is not uncommon for Canadian officials to overstate the country's influence at international summits, European sources say Canada's imprint on NATO's Afghanistan vision statement has been considerable in the past weeks.

"In essence, the shape of the document, how it looks, the priorities, of course they are consensus issues. Nobody has had their arm twisted by Canada," the NATO diplomat explained. "The Canadian ideas that have been brought to the table have resonated with the allies, as reflecting what they also want to articulate."

But the NATO diplomat said Canada's ambassador to NATO, Rob McRae, has played a key role in the weeks of sometimes heated closed-door negotiations over the final text of the Afghanistan statement.

"What Canadians have not seen is the very substantial role Canada has played," the diplomatic source said. "Let me tip my hat to Ambassador McRae here in shaping the political-military strategy."

Canada's influence can be traced back to the report by the independent panel headed by former Liberal cabinet minister John Manley on Canada's future in Afghanistan, from which stemmed Ottawa's ultimatum to NATO: that it find an additional 1,000 troops for southern Afghanistan or face the withdrawal of 2,500 Canadian Forces personnel from Kandahar next year.

The Manley report was also critical of the fragmented international approach to Afghanistan. Canada has pushed hard for language that calls for greater co-ordination between the UN, the Afghan government and the various international agencies that are trying to rebuild the country more than six years after the fall of the Taliban.

"Everybody has been aware of the Canadian requirement for more support. That requirement has been heard with sympathy and it has been, hopefully, it will be answered," the diplomat said.

The French newspaper Le Monde reported again this week that France will deploy 1,000 commandos to the volatile eastern region of Afghanistan.

It is believed that would free up more American troops to partner with Canada in the south, thus fulfilling the demand for more troops there. The U.S. is responsible for Afghanistan's tough eastern border region, where the greatest threat is the flow of Taliban and al-Qaeda fighters over the border from neighbouring Pakistan.

For the next seven months, 2,000 U.S. marines will be stationed in the south to bolster the ranks of Canada and its British and Dutch partners in the region, where the Taliban insurgency is the strongest.

The U.S. has said that it will not allow numbers to dip in the south after this temporary marine deployment has expired.

Afghan President Hamid Karzai and UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon are to attend Thursday's special session.

Mr. Harper arrived in Bucharest on Tuesday afternoon. He is to take part today in a 90-minute discussion about Afghanistan with Mr. Karzai and NATO Secretary General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer in a keynote event sponsored by the German Marshall Fund of the United States. Mr. Harper will hold separate bilateral meetings with his two fellow panellists earlier in the morning.Ottawa Citizen

Afghan women protest anti-Islam art

KABUL, Afghanistan (AP) — Dozens of Afghan women have burned the Dutch and Danish flags in protest of an anti-Islam cartoon and film.

About 70 women chanted slogans against Denmark and the Netherlands during Wednesday's protest outside the Afghan Ministry of Information and Culture. Most wore the all-covering blue burqa.

The women called on Danish and Dutch troops to leave Afghanistan. They also urged the Afghan government to shut down their embassies and cut diplomatic relations.

The film, made by a Dutch politician, intersperses images of recent terrorist attacks with verses from the Quran and fiery speeches by Islamic extremists.

The protesters were also angered by the recent republication of a cartoon showing the Prophet Muhammad wearing a bomb-shaped turban.

Afghan parliament committee wants foreign troops to leave Kabul

Text of report by state-run Iranian radio external service from Mashhad on 1 April

[Presenter] You may know that the Committee for Overseeing Proper Implementation of Legislation of the lower house of parliament is working on a plan under which foreign troops will be asked to leave Kabul.

The committee has given assurances about the ability of the local forces to maintain security in the capital. It has called on foreign troops to leave Kabul and to move their military base from Kabul to the outskirts of the city. According to those who initiated this plan, the removal of foreign forces from Kabul will bring more stability and security for Kabul and its residents. My colleague has arranged an interview with Kabir Ranjbar, head of the Committee for Overseeing Proper Implementation of Legislation, who will provide you with further details on this:

[Kabir Ranjbar] After the fall of the Taleban, both the people of Afghanistan and the world community were concerned over security in Afghanistan. There were many illegally armed people! in Kabul and there was no national police or national army at that time. Therefore, there was a dire need for foreign troops to take care of security in the capital. However, now we are happy to say that the government of Afghanistan, with the help of international community, can reorganize the national army and police in Afghanistan. Now, in addition to the national police force and army troops, we have the national security directorate as the leading intelligence body in the government structure.

Considering all these positive changes and developments, we believe that the local security forces are now able to maintain security in the capital. Over the last three years, most of the suicide attacks have targeted ISAF and NATO troops and convoys, but the majority of the victims and of those who sustain losses are civilians and the vulnerable people of Kabul.

There were no suicide attacks in the first four years after the establishment of the interim government i! n Afghanistan, but now both the people and the government are concerne d over the increase in the number of suicide attacks in Kabul. We believe this plan is a good way of improving security and reducing suicide attacks. Moreover, removing the foreign forces will improve the traffic system in Kabul. Currently, the people have lots of problems with the traffic. Several roads and streets have been blocked for the sake of security for foreign military bases. Even some pavements in Kabul have been turned into security checkpoints and are blocked with cement walls.

This situation has changed the whole atmosphere of the city. Kabul is now considered a military city with a big population and small or blocked roads. Moreover, the people do not feel safe with the movement of vehicles of the foreign forces. We have had several cases of foreign troops opening fire at civilians by mistake, or of accidents because they usually drive fast for fear of attack.

Considering all the stated facts, the Committee for Overseeing Proper Implementation of L! egislation has for the first time initiated this plan and we hope to put it into practice in the near future. We believe the presence of the foreign forces is no longer required in the city because it is beneficial neither to the people nor to themselves. They can move to a remote place outside of the city and, if need be, they can always help the local security forces. In fact, their presence on the outskirts of the city is much more important. Apart from some criminal activities, there is no major battle inside the city that requires the presence of hundreds of foreign troops.

[Presenter] Do you think the security and traffic system would improve with the removal of foreign troops from Kabul city? Has the issue been brought to the attention of the government officials, especially the president?

[Kabir Ranjbar] The plan has been carefully reviewed and we believe that there will be improvements in both security and traffic systems in Kabul. As indicated earlier,! for a newcomer, Kabul is like a military base, or the frontline of th e battle. In every street or main road you will see a security checkpoint, armed guards and the continuous movement of the armoured vehicles of the foreign forces. With the evacuation of the foreign forces, we would not need such tight security measures and we could unblock several roads and this would greatly help the traffic.

With regard to security, I cannot guarantee that with the departure of the foreign forces there will be no suicide attacks. But, there would be a fall in the number of such attacks. Out of every 10 suicide attacks, eight or nine target foreign troops. As a result, we recommend this plan for the safety of both foreign troops and the residents of Kabul.

You may know that the foreign forces are here to fight terrorism. They have obligations to involve themselves in the arrest of criminals. This is the job of the police and the police are now able to react to any criminal action.

With regard to the plan, I would say it has not been final! ized yet. However, senior officials, including the president, have been alerted to this and the president may even take up the issue with NATO officials at the forthcoming NATO summit in Bucharest.

Possible Afghan presidential contender against troops withdrawal

BBCM – 02 Apr 08 - Former Afghan interior minister Ali Ahmad Jalali, currently lecturing at an American university, but also considering standing in the presidential elections expected in Afghanistan in 2009, has said he does not think foreign troops should be withdrawn from Afghanistan at this stage.

Asked in an interview to private Ariana TV on 1 April about the government's recent attempts to invite the Taleban to the talks table, the former minister said the government "had no mechanism" to implement the reconciliation process. He said Afghanistan still needed foreign troops and this was not a good time to ask for their withdrawal for the sake of talks with the insurgents.

Jalali said a large number of elders from different provinces had urged him over the past two years to return home and stand for president, and that he may nominate himself after discussing the issue with them.

He described reports about strained relations between the United States and Britai! n over policy in Afghanistan as "baseless", but said there had been disagreements, among them the controversy over Musa Qala District in Helmand.

In conclusion, he said he was optimistic about the future of Afghanistan, that the people still want a foreign presence and do not see the Taleban as a good alternative to the current administration. He rejected the idea of calling the mojahedin warlords.

Afghan MPs call for "legalization" of presence of foreign forces

BBCM 2 Apr 08, Excerpt from report, "Emotional decisions will not put presence of foreign forces on a legal footing - Qanuni", by privately-owned Afghan newspaper Rah-e Nejat on 30 March

After NATO forces searched the house of Abdol Khaleq Mojahed, MP from Urozgan Province, parliament yesterday changed its agenda from the election law to discussing putting the presence of foreign forces on a legal footing in the country. They stressed that the presence of these forces should be put on a legal footing.

According to a report by Rah-e Nejat's parliamentary reporter, Parliament Speaker Yunos Qanuni called on MPs to think further about this and said was impossible to put the presence of foreign forces on a legal footing in Afghanistan on the basis of emotional decisions by MPs.

NATO forces raided a private house of Urozgan MP Abdol Khaleq Mojahed on Thursday [27 March] and searched it. Parliament yesterday discussed this issue as well as putting the presence of foreign forces on a legal footing in the country.

Ahmad Ali Jebraili, MP from Herat Province, said the existing problems in the country resulting from the illegal presence of fo! reign forces were intolerable. He said that if parliament fails to adopt a decision on the presence of foreign forces in the country, arbitrary and inappropriate activities will continue.

In addition, Sayed Hosayn Alemi Balkhi, MP from Kabul Province, said that when [Kabul MP Abdurrab Rasul] Sayyaf's house was searched by foreign forces and he was insulted, we said that this would not be their first or last action, and we were right.

He said that parliament should adopt a serious decision about this. He added: "Our suggested solution is that parliament should be suspended temporarily, as a protest, so that foreign forces realize that parliament has legal powers."

Alemi Balkhi described as weak parliament's previous decision-making relating to legalization of the presence of foreign forces. He added: "Suspension of parliament, as a protest, will display its sovereignty. If foreign forces do not pay attention to MPs' demands, other decisions can be adopted."!

Aziz Ahmad Nadem, an MP for Herat Province, also described the foreign forces' insults to any citizen of this country as against the Constitution. He said: "We are guilty for the insult to our honour by foreign forces. Why have we not adopted a serious decision on legalization of the presence of foreign forces in the country? We have only made emotional remarks and condemned the performance of these forces."

He said that foreign forces undermined the country's independence. He added that at a time when all authorities in the government are controlled by NATO and foreign forces stationed in Afghanistan, it is a false claim to say we have political independence.

MPs also condemned the action by foreign forces and called on parliament to take a serious decision in an effort to put the presence of foreign forces on a legal footing. In reaction to MPs' calls, Mohammad Yunos Qanuni said that MPs' emotional decisions will not prove effective. He said when MPs see an incident, they become emotional and take decisions, but after a wh! ile they express regret and change their stance.

He said that MPs should adopt all decisions carefully. He added that when parliament adopts a decision, MPs should stick to it on any condition.

At the end of parliament's plenary session yesterday, it was decided that the relevant committees of parliament (security affairs, defence and territorial integrity affairs and mps' security and entitlement affairs committees) should evaluate the case and present their findings to a plenary session of parliament, so that parliament discusses and evaluates it and adopts a decision about it.

[Passage omitted: MPs' reaction to house searches and civilian casualties have not yet proved effective]

We expect the Afghan parliament to adopt a serious and single decision this time in order to put an end to the arbitrary activities of the foreign forces. They should give an appropriate response to people's objections, otherwise the distance will widen among parliament,! the government and the people and it will be very difficult to reverse.

BBC misquoted Afghan official on Pakistan nuclear waste dump – TV

Text of report by Afghan independent Tolo TV, on 1 April

[Presenter] The presidential office for administrative affairs has rejected reports saying that Pakistan's nuclear waste had been dumped in Afghanistan. The head of the department says his comments on the issue have been misinterpreted.

On the other hand, following the reports, a number of MPs have asked for serious investigation into the issue. My colleague Tamim Hamid has more.

[Correspondent] The BBC has quoted the state minister for parliamentary affairs [Faruq Wardag, who is also head of president's office on administrative affairs ] as saying that the government had evidence suggesting that nuclear waste from Pakistan had been dumped in parts of Kandahar and Helmand provinces.

The BBC says the nuclear waste was dumped in the provinces during the reign of the Taleban. But the parliamentary affairs minister stresses that his comments have been misinterpreted in the report.

According to Faruq Wardag, yesterday's meeting! of the council of ministers, held in Mazar-e Sharif city, decided that the atomic energy commission, which was previously working within the Environment Protection Department, should be developed to an independent organ. He said the comments on the issue were also made during the meeting.

[Faruq Wardag] In addition to developing a law and structure - and if possible a budget - for its activities to use the resources of the International Atomic Energy Agency, the commission will also try to make sure that our soil and people are kept safe from the dangers of nuclear waste dump from the countries which have nuclear powers. Of course Afghanistan, from the geographic point of view, is located in a region where there are atomic powers.

[Ahmad Behzad, MP for Herat Province] We are in a region where some of our neighbours are engaged in atomic and nuclear activities. The consequences of their programmes will definitely affect Afghanistan.

[Fatema Nazari, MP for ! Kabul Province] It should not remain merely in words. Practical measur es should be taken and decisions should be made to pay attention to Afghanistan's environment, atmosphere and other issues that the government has so far not looked at.

[Correspondent] The Pakistani authorities have said they would not comment on the allegations unless the government of Afghanistan makes an official statement about the issue.

Afghan challenges know no border, Pashtun elder tells senators
Canwest News Service Tuesday, April 01, 2008

A FORWARD OPERATING BASE IN PANJWAII, Afghanistan - Haji Agha Lalai held members of the Senate's national security and defence committee spellbound Tuesday with a vivid briefing about the challenges faced by those like him who oppose the Taliban and al-Qaida.

"As you know, this is the fighting season and we are building a road" the fiercely imposing, heavily bearded Pashtun elder told his Canadian visitors. "The enemy tries to disrupt the environment. People are getting 'night letters' threatening them if they continue working with us, but we are determined to pave that road . . .

"Of course, workers on the road project are exposed to danger. One of the workers, they shot him in his leg, but he continues to work. People ignore the threats."

Construction on the eight-kilometre-long asphalt surface began two months ago in an area that was home to the Taliban's Mullah Omar and is where al-Qaida's Osama bin Laden once had a madrassa. Funded by the Canadian army and supervised by Canadian military engineers, the road venture employs 400 Afghans.

Negotiations are now taking place with the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA) for funds to pave another 11 kilometres of the road.

Many of Panjwaii's problems were caused by "neighbours who infiltrate and facilitate the enemy," Lalai said, singling out Iran and "especially Pakistan. They train Afghans there, but when they come back to fight one or two foreigners always come with them . . .

"The problems we have with Pakistan are not about the Durand Line (the border drawn by the British in the late 19th century). There are hidden agendas. The ISI (Pakistani military intelligence) is not capable of training and funding the enemy by themselves. Others are involved."

Lalai, who bore a deep scar on his forehead, one of three serious wounds he said that he suffered fighting the Red Army in the 1980s, hinted that other outsiders who might be meddling in Afghanistan included his old enemies, the Russians, as well some Saudis.

"There are Americans in Saudi Arabia, but nobody calls for a holy war because of this," he said, "and they haven't called for a holy war in Pakistan, which has ties to the U.S. So why, when we get help from outside, they call for a holy war here?"

Colin Kenny, the Liberal who led the Senate delegation on what was its fourth visit to the region, but only its first trip "outside the wire," said: "I think that the point to take from him (Lalai) is that to organize and co-ordinate what is going on, there is an extra push from somewhere else in this part of the world. That is an opinion that does not surprise me."

Conservative Senator Michael Meighen said that from what he had heard at the forward operating base and in Kandahar, "everybody gilds the lily a bit," but great progress was being made.

"So many Canadians and Afghans speak of progress, you can't help but believe that we are on the right track," he said.

Liberal Senator Rod Zimmer praised the Afghans' willingness to work, despite intimidation and government and said he felt that what Canada was doing was "appreciated and respected." He also praised the Canadians serving in Afghanistan.

"I had no idea what our troops go through," the Winnipegger said. "Their commitment is an inspiration. I did not believe that they were so deeply involved here and so respected."

Advances had been made since he was last in Afghanistan, said Kenny, who has been involved in security issues since before being appointed to the Senate by Pierre Trudeau 24 years ago. Canadian troops are now working closely with others from Canada, including policemen, corrections officers, diplomats and aid agency officials, Kenny said. He termed this team concept "a really smart move."

However, one of the reasons that it is still difficult to measure success is "because we don't know the objectives are," he said. "A really important message for the government is that they have to outline the objectives here . . . Canadians need to understand that A is connected to B is connected to C is connected to X, Y and Z. If one thing is not moving forward, everything can get blocked. We also have to understand that it takes time to build trust.

"The military has got it. DFAIT and CIDA have got it. But Ottawa is not telling Canadians enough about Afghanistan. The free advice of Colin Kenny to the prime minister is that he should go on television and talk to Canadians about the situation here."

Pakistan rethinks US policy on militants
By Barbara Plett , BBC News, Islamabad

There is a buzz of excitement in the wood-panelled assembly hall of Pakistan's parliament. After eight years of military rule, the new legislators feel empowered by an enormous popular mandate. And they are ready to tackle unpopular policies, especially Pakistan's participation in what is called the War on Terror.

"We've gone through enough problems because of following different agendas of different countries - we need to follow our own agenda," said one parliamentarian from the governing coalition, speaking to a crush of reporters outside. "Pakistan must get out of America's fatal embrace," said another.

Comments like these alarm the Americans, because Pakistan is crucial to their Afghan policy.

Since 9/11 they have relied on President Pervez Musharraf and the army for cooperation against al-Qaeda and the Taleban, in exchange for billions of dollars.

Until now parliament was out of the loop. "No one in this country knows what General Musharraf has agreed with the Americans or anyone else!" says Ahsan Iqbal, a minister in the new cabinet.

The president apparently agreed to an increase in US air strikes in the Taleban strongholds near the Afghan border. These have killed around 50 people this year, including militants. Like everyone else, Mr Iqbal read about the tacit understanding in the newspaper.

Such heavy handed tactics "give a cause for these militants to fight for", he says, "so therefore I think whatever strategy we work out, the sovereignty of Pakistan must be respected and we should not give more fuel to these militants".

Pakistanis believe a deadly bombing campaign in the country is the price they are paying for missile strikes and large scale army operations against the militants.

Nearly a thousand people were killed in suicide attacks last year. And massive injections of American aid have made little difference to their security.

"The general perception in Pakistan is that the deal over the War on Terror was favourable only to one party and unfavourable to Pakistan," says Aseff Ahmad Ali, a member of the governing Pakistan Peoples' Party and a former foreign minister.

"The Americans give us a billion dollars a year for the War on Terror. But where has the money gone? We don't know, maybe to the army.

"But we do know there's been no trickle-down effect - there is neither internal (security) nor food security nor development. "To the common man the US-Pakistan deal looks absolutely awful. It has to be renegotiated."

In a speech outlining the government's policies, Prime Minister Yusuf Raza Gillani emphasized social and political reforms to address the causes of militancy. He also said the government would negotiate with those who laid down their arms.

Some of his coalition partners go further, like the Pashtun Awami National Party (ANP), which has gained power in the North West Frontier Province near the Afghan border.

"This problem is not going to be solved by my going to talk to the tribal elders only," the provincial chief minister, Amir Haider Khan Hoti, told the Dawn newspaper.

"Unless we somehow approach the one who has taken up arms, or is involved in suicide bombing or has gone to the other extreme, and reach an understanding with him, the problem would not be solved."

This is a long term solution, but does America have the patience to wait? The head of its Central Intelligence Agency is sounding very impatient.

"The situation on the Afghanistan-Pakistan border presents a clear and present danger to... the West in general and the United States in particular," Michael Hayden said during a recent interview on NBC television.

"It's very clear to us that al-Qaeda has been able for the past 18 months or so to establish a safe haven along the border area that they have not enjoyed before.

"Operationally, we are turning every effort to capture or kill that leadership from the top to the bottom."

Tanvir Ahmed Khan, a former Pakistani ambassador to Afghanistan argues that "the Americans have leverage (in Pakistan), but not the same degree as before".

"There would be a restive parliament. There is no strong opinion in parliament for reversing the policy, but there is a strong opinion for moderating it, for a better mix between military and diplomatic measures."

But will Pakistan's powerful army agree? President Musharraf's attempts at peace deals only strengthened the militants and put the military on the back-foot, says retired General Shujaat Ali Khan. The military would be wary of going down the same path again.

"There may be an (initial) agreement on the part of the militants, to sort of pull back their punches", he says, "but during this two or three month period there is a danger that they may regroup. "And if the armed force is withdrawn, there may be a resurgence, and they'll strike again."

Many here also believe that peace inside Pakistan will be difficult, as long as American and Nato troops remain in Afghanistan. On Sunday the Pakistan Taleban Movement (Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan) responded to the government's overtures.

It said it was ready to end attacks inside Pakistan if the authorities showed flexibility, but the 'jihad' against America would continue in Afghanistan.

"Our war is with America", local Taleban leader Maulvi Faqir Muhammed told a rally. "Whenever Pakistan will work for American interests as its ally, we will oppose it."

Tell Canadians more about mission in Afghanistan, Kenny urges Ottawa

KANDAHAR PROVINCE, Afghanistan — The federal Conservative government and Prime Minister Stephen Harper need to better define Canada's goals and objectives in Afghanistan and spell them out clearly to Canadians, an outspoken Liberal senator said Tuesday.

Colin Kenny was one of six senators from the Standing Senate Committee on National Security and Defence who travelled to Kandahar province for an up-close, in-person look at Canada's specific reconstruction efforts in a war-beaten, poverty-racked region long acknowledged as the cradle of the Taliban.

They visited Canada's Provincial Reconstruction Team, greeted and chatted with soldiers and police who are actively training their Afghan counterparts, and toured a road reconstruction project that employs 450 local labourers - many of whom work despite Taliban threats and intimidation.

Kenny said he noticed a lot of change for the better in the year since he was last in country, and described a "synergy" between the mission's various prongs - the military, police, corrections officials and agencies like the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade, or DFAIT, and the Canadian International Development Agency, CIDA.

The difficulty, he said, is that many of Canada's ultimate objectives in Afghanistan remain amorphous and ill-defined, making it hard to measure what sort of progress is being made.

"We have been pushing (the federal government) hard for metrics, but in a few cases there has been trouble measuring anything because we don't know what the objectives are," Kenny said.

"A really important message for the government is that they have to outline the objectives here."

Canadians who aren't seeing Afghanistan with their own eyes can't grasp the level of poverty there, or what the daily struggle is like for local villagers who are just trying to survive, he added.

"The military has got it. DFAIT and CIDA have got it. But Ottawa is not telling Canadians enough about Afghanistan," Kenny said.

"The free advice of Colin Kenny is that the prime minister should go on television and talk to Canadians about the situation here."

It was the committee's third visit to Afghanistan, but only the first time they were able to see anything beyond the relative comfort and security of the main base at Kandahar Airfield.

The visit came as Harper touched down in Bucharest for a summit with leaders from the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, where Canada is hoping for more clarity on whether NATO will provide up to 1,000 more troops to assist with security in Afghanistan's volatile south.

It was also the committee's first visit since the formal establishment of 2011 as the new pullout date for Canadian forces - a deadline the committee opposed, said Conservative Senator Michael Meighan.

"It is better to talk of objectives rather than about when the mission should end," said Meighan, who agreed Canada is indeed pushing forward in Afghanistan.

"Everybody gilds the lily a bit, but we are absolutely making progress," he said. "So many Canadians and Afghans speak of progress, you can't help but believe that we are on the right track."

During a stop at a Canadian forward operating base, the senators also met with Haji Agha Lalai, a member of the Kandahar provincial council who represents the infamous Panjwaii district, a hotbed of insurgent activity steeped in Canadian triumph and grief.

Where there was but a butcher shop last year, many other stores have opened up, and some 3,000 families have moved into the area in the last 12 months, Lalai said.

The insurgency, he said, is being fuelled by "neighbours" from outside Afghanistan's porous borders - Pakistan primarily, but also Iran, he said - "who infiltrate and facilitate the enemy."

He acknowledged the Panjwaii's storied and bloody history - as a centre for al-Qaida, a home to one of Osama bin Laden's religious schools and as the birthplace of the Taliban and its one-eyed leader, Mullah Omar.

But he said none of that should prevent the fertile district from becoming the region it once was - a safe and secure place for families, farming, commerce and trade.

"The most influential Taliban are all from here, (but) despite the big players being from this area, we can do our work," Lalai said. "The problem we have is with security. With security we can get a lot done."

The other vital objective is to establish a national, democratically elected government that is trusted by the nation, said Liberal Senator Rod Zimmer.

"They need democracy. People are willing," said Zimmer, citing the example of the hundreds of locals who brave chilling "night letters" - threatening notes found nailed to their doors in the morning - to participate in projects like road paving.

Lalai noted one case of a man who was shot in the leg by the Taliban for participating in the project, and yet he continues to work. "Look, they are willing to risk their lives to work," he said.

"Canada is very involved. They are appreciated and respected. The reaction is very positive from the Afghans."

Canadian soldier sees long fight in Afghanistan

Former South African says conditions similar to Angola war in 1970s,
Tuesday, April 01, 2008, Canwest News Service

BETWEEN ZHARI and PANJWAII, Afghanistan -- Sgt. Malcolm Thomson was a tactical tracker with the South African Defence Force in 1978, hunting for guerrillas in Angola.

Three decades later, Thomson, who is referred to as Grandpa by younger troops, acts as a patrol commander on convoys that sometimes hunt for the improvised explosives that the Taliban bury under roads in order to kill Canadian troops and Afghan civilians.

"Some of the soldiering here is the same as in southern Africa. We are trying to hunt down a fairly elusive enemy that blends in with the local population," the 48-year-old Edmonton resident said after a morning spent leading troops along a treacherous stretch of road that cuts through the heart of the Taliban insurgency.

"A disadvantage here compared with when I was in Africa is that we don't know the ground that well. Some of our troops have never been outside of Western Canada before."

Thomson is a staunch supporter of what Canada is trying to achieve in Afghanistan because "if we don't find them (the Taliban) here, when will we do it?"

Thomson, born in Sierra Leone, was press-ganged into the SADF as a teenager when on a visit to South Africa with his parents. After two years serving in Angola and what were then known as South-West Africa (now Namibia) and Rhodesia (Zimbabwe), he moved to Canada where he spent 21 years in the army, with peacekeeping tours in Cyprus, Bosnia and Croatia along the way, before becoming a reservist.

Ironically, given that he is again on the battlefield, one of the main reasons Thomson's father had agreed to let him sign up with the Canadian army was that he was not likely to go to war, whereas while serving for South Africa he had spent much of his time on "hunt and kill missions."

Much of Thomson's current security work keeps him at Canada's provincial reconstruction team in Kandahar City.

But he gets outside the wire as much as he can with those he serves with, a mixture of reservists from northwestern Ontario through to British Columbia and full-time soldiers from the Princess Patricia's Canadian Light Infantry.

"Through interpreters we get to talk a lot with locals and they are quite positive about what we are doing," he said. "Of course that is not always the case.

"Security varies a lot from place to place. In some areas kids throw stones as we go by and the adults make hand gestures. The problem in high threat areas is that those who support cannot openly show us friendliness. But they are finding IEDs and either tell us about them or bring them to us."

Thomson reckoned that Canada had to be prepared to spend "20 or 30 years" in Afghanistan to help turn the country around.

He worries about those Afghans who were targeted by the Taliban because they were friendly to western forces and constantly reminds his troops that they have the same aspirations as those they have been sent here to defend.

"We may not understand or relate to their culture, but we have to respect it," he said. "It's not the religious part. This is not about being a Christian or being a Muslim. We have something in common with these people. All they want is a better life for their people."

Working to rid Afghanistan of land mines a 'kind of jihad'

OLIVER MOORE – Globe and Mail, April 1, 2008

KANDAHAR, AFGHANISTAN -- Noor Ahmad has one of the most dangerous jobs in the world. For 18 years, he's prodded the earth centimetre by centimetre to rid his country of land mines, a scourge that has become more numerous in the time he's been working. He's seen an anti-personnel mine blow up in front of him and still bears the scars where his body wasn't shielded by protective gear.

He presses on in spite of the dangers, working in the hot sun on the weekend to help clear the perimeter of a bombed-out weapons factory east of Kandahar, because he considers it "a kind of jihad."

"If you protect the life of one person, then you will be rewarded as if you have protected all the world," Mr. Ahmed said, citing a verse from the Koran.

But that dedication hasn't been enough to protect de-miners from attacks. Teams have been targeted in several parts of the country and at least 10 people have been killed since August.

As the world prepares to mark International Mine Action Day this Friday, Afghanistan continues to struggle as one of the most heavily mined countries on Earth. It is impossible to know the number of mines and pieces of unexploded ordnance that litter the ground, but the best estimate is that about 750,000 square kilometres of land remain too dangerous to use.

Because of the targeted attacks, the United Nations in Kandahar province is not escalating operations but instead has reduced its number of teams and now limits its work to areas near the city.

Sayed Ahmad (no relation to the veteran de-miner), the regional officer in charge of the UN Mine Action Center for Afghanistan, said the agency would like to strike a deal with the insurgents for safe passage but are afraid of incurring the wrath of the government in Kabul. "If we have contact, the government will take negative action because they will say we are joined with the Taliban," he said at his office in Kandahar. "And if we work too closely with the government, the Taliban will get negative. So we are stuck in the middle."

That impasse has forced the UN to radically curtail its de-mining work in the province. Last summer, agency personnel had been working as far afield as Panjwai, a volatile district where the Taliban is strong, but they changed tactics after three support staff were kidnapped.

The agency contacted the Taliban to plead for the men's lives, but Sayed Ahmad said they were told that the situation had already been referred "to the court." The men were later found dead, still wearing uniforms with the badge of DAFA, the de-mining agency for Afghanistan.

A man who regularly speaks on behalf of the Taliban said that his group is being unfairly blamed for the kidnapping and killing. "The Taliban was not involved in this case," Qari Yousuf Ahmadi said through a translator. "We don't want to kill the people who collect mines; this is good action."

But the damage has been done. It was a month after that incident before UN teams began working again. And they now consider enormous parts of the province off limits.

A map showing the initial goals of Operation Hamkari (which means co-operation), a project funded by the Canadian International Development Agency, showed the area west and south of Kandahar city divided into sectors. No substantial area was then considered safe enough to ignore. De-mining teams have since narrowed their scope and now stay within a five-kilometre radius of Kandahar city.

In the more remote areas, the UN has set up community-based "mine-risk education teams" and is compiling maps of reported dangers, but they can't go to help the people directly.

"In the areas which we are not able to send our teams, we are getting the reports every month of some victims injured and killed," Sayed Ahmad said.

Each month, mines and unexploded ordnance kill or injure an average of 62 Afghans. About half of the victims are children. The overwhelming scale of the problem means that, for now, there is enough work close to Kandahar city to keep de-miners busy.

Backhoes break up the rocky soil, in the process detonating some ordnance, but most of the work is done with hand tools and metal detectors.The threat of grievous danger is never far away. As well as donning heavy vests and helmets, visitors are required to sign in and provide their blood type.

"It's my career," Noor Ahmad said with a shrug when asked whether he would prefer an office job. A father of five, he makes about $250 a month. "We are obliged to work and support the family. Besides, we want to support the nation."

Tories appear set to lose vote on lowering flag for Afghan deaths - and ignore it

OTTAWA — The House of Commons appears set to adopt a motion calling for the flag to be lowered on the Peace Tower whenever a Canadian soldier is killed in Afghanistan.

And the Conservative government appears set to ignore the vote result. The Commons votes Wednesday on a Liberal motion that would require a moment of silence and a lowering of the flag for one day following the death of a Canadian soldier.

Both other opposition parties told The Canadian Press they will support the Liberal motion, easily guaranteeing it will have enough votes to be adopted in the minority Parliament.

But the motion is non-binding - and the government has other ideas about how to honour soldiers.

The Tories said they will refer a report by an expert panel to the Commons heritage committee, and ask members to hold hearings and come up with a wide-ranging policy on when the flag should be lowered.

"Canada should have a consistent policy on half-masting the Canadian flag," said Alykhan Velshi, a spokesman for multiculturalism and Canadian identity minister Jason Kenney.

"Our government is committed to bringing clarity and consistency to Canada's half-masting policy."

A panel led by Canada's former chief herald Robert Watt recommends against lowering the Peace Tower flag whenever a soldier dies. The Tories commissioned the report following an uproar in 2006 when they first announced they would not lower the flag to half-mast.

Watt's report also suggests scaling down other occasions in which the flag is placed at half-mast - including Dec. 6, the national day of remembrance and action on violence against women.

It also recommends against the continued lowering of the flag once every September to honour fallen police officers. According to the panel, such events water down the significance of Remembrance Day on Nov. 11.

The flag-lowering motion was tabled by Liberal MP Andrew Telegdi, and will be voted on late Wednesday afternoon. The NDP says it will support the motion, adding that while the government might legally ignore the will of the House of Commons it would not be politically wise.

Afghanistan, Pakistan and NATO

By Karl F. Inderfurth, Tuesday, April 1, 2008 – Int. Herald tribune

The NATO summit meeting in Bucharest this week comes at a critical time for the 26-member alliance and its mission in Afghanistan. It also comes at a critical time for the one country that can make or break that mission: Pakistan.

NATO is collectively holding its breath as the Musharraf era comes to a close, replaced by a new and uncertain civilian political leadership and accompanied by a continuing rise in extremist violence. A month-long surge in suicide bombings has put the country on edge. Jaap de Hoop Scheffer, NATO's secretary general, said during his recent visit to Washington that as soon as the new Pakistan government is in place, he will travel to Islamabad. After Bucharest there is no better destination to reinforce NATO's Afghan mission.

Afghanistan and Pakistan are inextricably linked. There can be no successful outcome for Afghanistan if Pakistan is not a part of the solution. The future stability of both depends on the development of an effective regional strategy to counter and uproot the Taliban/Al Qaeda sanctuary in Pakistan's tribal border areas. Despite Pakistan's counterinsurgency efforts over the last four years (or lack thereof according to the critics), the Taliban and Al Qaeda have developed a stronghold in this region that bolsters the Taliban's capabilities against coalition forces in Afghanistan, poses a direct threat to the Pakistani state itself, and facilitates Al Qaeda planning and execution of global terrorist plots, including those directed against the United States. What can be done about this interconnected set of problems?

Countering cross border infiltration is the immediate priority. The Trilateral Afghanistan-Pakistan-NATO Military Commission is an important mechanism in this regard. So is the strengthening of the U.S. military presence along the Afghan side of the border, which the latest U.S. Marine contingent now arriving in Afghanistan will assist as will the opening of the first of six joint U.S.-Afghan-Pakistan military intelligence centers along the border. Washington also needs to work more closely with Pakistan in joint counter-terrorism operations. The possibility for collaboration exists, as evidenced by the missile strike in North Waziristan earlier this year that killed the senior Al Qaeda operative Abu Laith al-Libi. But these operations are highly sensitive and politically charged in the tribal areas and must be pursued through quiet, behind the scenes efforts with Pakistan political and military leaders.

In addition, any large-scale outside military intervention in Pakistan's tribal areas would be disastrous for the Pakistani state and U.S. interests and would not provide a lasting solution to the problem. A more effective strategy involves working cooperatively with Pakistan's new leadership to integrate these areas into the Pakistani political system and, once they are secure, provide substantial assistance (along with the European Union, the World Bank and other donors) to build up their economy and social infrastructure. As Pakistan's ambassador, Mahmud Duranni, says, what is needed in these areas is a "multipronged strategy. That is, military force, development and empowerment of the people. Using force alone is not the answer."

Over the longer term, the region requires a new compact that addresses Afghanistan and Pakistan's political, economic and security concerns and seeks to neutralize regional and great power rivalries. To accomplish this the UN should convene an international conference attended by all Afghanistan's neighbors and other concerned major powers, a task that should be added to the agenda of the newly appointed UN envoy for Afghanistan, the Norwegian diplomat Kai Eide.

The goal would be a multilateral accord that recognizes Afghanistan's borders with Pakistan (the Durand Line of 1893 is still in dispute); pledges noninterference in Afghanistan's internal affairs; affirms that, like the Congress of Vienna accord for Switzerland, Afghanistan should be internationally accepted as a permanently neutral state; and establishes a comprehensive international regime to remove obstacles to the flow of trade across Afghanistan, the key to establishing a vibrant commercial network that would benefit the entire region.

And such an agreement would have another positive corollary - it would provide the basis for the eventual withdrawal of U.S. and NATO military forces from a stable and secure Afghanistan.

Karl F. Inderfurth, a professor at the Elliott School of International Affairs at George Washington University, served as U.S. assistant secretary of state for South Asian affairs from 1997 to 2001.

Afghanistan investment climate improving: WB

Independent-Bangladesh, Bangladesh, Monday, 31 March 2008

A World Bank report released on Saturday said that the investment climate in Afghanistan was improving, but identified key constraints to capital inflows.

The report called on the government to do more to promote private-sector development, according to Internet. Based on a survey of 338 companies in five Afghan cities, the report said the most serious constraints for private-sector developments were reliable mains electricity, access to land and finance and the scourge of corruption.

According to the study, the key challenge is to broaden participation in the market by removing barriers to new investors and creating conditions that will encourage those already active in the economy to invest more.

The report emphasises the need to improve government’s capacity to formulate and implement private-sector development policies and programmes. “Enterprises need a variety of business services to help them enter, operate, grow and manage risks,” said Samuel Munzele Maimbo, World Bank Senior Financial Sector Specialist and co-author of the report.

“These services are best provided by the private sector but the government needs to put in place a policy and regulatory framework to facilitate private entry.” The report notes that the Afghan government has taken a number of steps to improve the business environment and attract investment. It has established the Afghanistan Investment Support Agency (AISA) designed specifically to promote and facilitate investment.

There has also been significant progress in developing the financial sector, as well as reform in labour regulation and the nation’s tax regime. “The government has made important strides toward creating an enabling investment climate,” said Jean Mazurelle, World Bank Country Manager for Afghanistan. “But much more remains to be done. Private-sector activity is still carried out in an environment dominated by informal practices.

These arrangements may be useful for many investors in the short run but will have negative effects for longer-term investment growth.” Some 80-90 percent of economic activity in Afghanistan is informal and potential investors who do not have established contacts with influential figures find these informal arrangements daunting and are often discouraged from investing, the report argues.

Afghanistan has witnessed a sharp increase in private-sector investment since the demise of the Taliban in late 2001 , but it is well below its potential, the report says. For example, AISA has registered nearly US $1.3 billion in new investment (excluding telecom firms) over the past two years, but only a fraction of these commitments have actually been disbursed.

While investment accounts for nearly 22 percent of Gross Domestic Product (GDP), the bulk of it is public money financed through international aid. Nearly 50 percent of the new investment approved by AISA has been in construction and construction materials.

“This reflects the massive inflows of external aid and the need to rebuild infrastructure,” said Syed Mahmood, World Bank Private Sector Development Specialist. “In the risky environment of Afghanistan, foreign investors prefer government and donor-funded reconstruction projects or services through which they can quickly recover their investment, to the longer-term process of building markets for manufactured goods.” The World Bank has contributed over $900 million to post-war Afghanistan since 2002, the major component being soft loans.  

Remembering the Soviet 'Vietnam'

Al Jazeera / March 31, 2008 - The Soviet Union's decade-long war in Afghanistan in the 1980s is a conflict many in the former countries of the USSR would rather forget. As part of the special Veterans series, Al Jazeera visited the Russian cities of Moscow and Yekaterinburg and found survivors of the war who simply cannot leave the past behind.

In the suburbs of Moscow is a small museum, known by few Russians and visited by even fewer, that is dedicated to a conflict dubbed by many the Soviet "Vietnam".

One of the few visitors is Irina Pavlovna, who has come to remember her son who died in 1982 - one of the estimated 15,000 soldiers who perished during the Soviet Union's decade-long war in Afghanistan.

The fact Irina has to visit such a small and unassuming tribute to what was the bloc's largest military operation since World War II is testament to the humiliation still felt today over a conflict many would rather forget.

But for the survivors it is impossible to forget such a devastating and futile conflict that many were ill-equipped to fight. Many former soldiers still bear physical and psychological scars.

Responding to a request from the socialist-leaning administration in Kabul at the time, Soviet tanks began rolling into Afghanistan on December 25, 1979 to assist government troops against so-called fundamentalist rebels.

But the invasion of 80,000 troops was met with angry opposition from the Soviet Union's cold war opponents, led by the United States, who poured money into arming mujahadin fighters to conduct guerrilla warfare.

Although Soviet forces controlled Kabul, the Afghan capital, they struggled to establish a foothold in the mountainous countryside and were the victims of regular attacks by mujahadin – who they referred to as "dukhi" – "ghosts".

"This was not like the second world war, where there [were] two opposing sides and our fathers protected our motherland," Sergei, one veteran of the Afghan conflict, says. "The Afghans were peaceful and friendly to us in the daytime; but at night they turned to enemies."

The terrain and Afghanistan's Muslim population were entirely alien to many young conscripts from cities such as Moscow and St Petersburg. The loss of their innocence was swift.

"Our commanders told us to be humane, yet I remember one episode, when one of them aimed his machinegun at a camel and shot it," Ahlam, another veteran, says.

"I was horrified. 'Why did you do that?' I asked, 'Is this animal guilty of anything? Has it done anything wrong?' And he said: 'Yesterday they killed my friend.' He completely tore apart the animal because he was mad with anger."

As the Soviets became embroiled in the internal problems of Afghanistan and the casualties mounted, pressure increased in turn for a pullout. With its prestige in tatters, the USSR began negotiations for a withdrawal. That withdrawal was completed when the last Soviet soldier left Afghanistan in 1989.

With the USSR disintegrating two years later in 1991 and Russia now newly resurgent under Vladimir Putin, many in the country today have consigned the Afghan debacle to the back of their mind.

There are no national monuments to a war regarded by many as a humiliation but individual towns have chosen to commemorate those who served and died for their country.

The imposing "Black Tulip" monument in the Western Siberian town of Yekaterinburg is named after a cargo plane that carried home some of the tens of thousands of dead bodies from Afghanistan.

But many of those who returned alive are still disappointed by the lack of support they received and the isolation they felt from society. "There was no governmental programme to help the veterans, even the invalids," Dmitry Levin, who runs the museum dedicated to the war in Moscow, says.

"We had to survive on our own, so we started to unite. Some of us succeeded in this. Some didn't." Ahlam, a former soldier from Yekaterinburg, says a list of substantial benefits for veterans was shown on the television at the time.

"It read that all veterans get an increase of 2,500 rubles in pensions, and more for invalids – 4,500 rubles," he says. "But when it comes to receiving the pension, they tell me: 'You get 300 rubles. Be thankful we even give you that much!'"

As well as financial hardship, those returning to the USSR also had to adapt to the end of communism soon after and the advent of a free-market system. "That sudden change was shocking for many," Dmitry says.

"Days before our politicians were communists and here they were throwing away their party membership cards. That made us hate them."

Despite the difficulties faced on their return, many veterans of the conflict have put their experiences behind them and adapted well to civilian life. Valery Burkov is one. Despite losing his legs in the conflict, he is now a successful politician.

But others have deep psychological scars despite not being injured physically, and have found adapting to life after war more difficult. Valentina Impulskaya works as a doctor in Yekaterinburg where many veterans from the region come for free, locally-funded treatment and support.

"During Soviet times, we had certainty and order. And now we have capitalism. Everyone is on his own, and in charge of himself," she says. "And this leads to emotional stress. People who experienced stress during battles react to these changed circumstances very keenly."

Some of the problems the veterans experience are a direct result of battle injuries. "Unfortunately many of the soldiers suffered cerebral contusion – that is brain damage or shell shock - as a result of mines exploding under their tanks or armoured personnel carriers," Semen Spector, a former director of the hospital, says.

"We have discovered that a man with contusion is physically 14 years older than his real age. Psychological instability, poor memory, social problems are all caused by this."

Sergei and Ahlem are among the patients and both have suffered from alcoholism since returning while others turned to drugs for solace. Afghanistan supplies 90 per cent of the world's opium and drug habits acquired on the battlefield have not been easy to shrug off.

Vladimir Gaiworinok first tried heroin in Afghanistan and has used it intermittently ever since. He has contracted Aids as a result of his usage.

He refuses to blame his experiences in the war for his current plight and says he learned a lot in Afghanistan but says that he thinks "it would have better for me to have been killed there… It would have been better like this."

Viktor Bashkow, the director of the hospital, says many veterans would choose to forget the conflict if they could but they cannot. "And in fact they shouldn’t forget their past," he says.

"They must pass it on to their children – the knowledge that war is the worst thing. "And that is why veterans are the best peacekeepers. They know the value of human life. Even though they might smoke or drink, the sense of justice in them is the strongest."

Despite fading from the consciences of many people in modern Russia some veterans are determined not to forget their fallen comrades, whether it be through the regular meetings of regional Union of Afghan veterans in Yekaterinburg or the work of Dmitry Levin at his museum in Moscow.

Today, it is not the Soviet Union that is sending its young men to war but the Russian Federation. A new section has already been added to the Black Tulip memorial in Yekaterinburg. The Cyrillic script reads simply: "Chechnya".

Like their counterparts who fought in Afghanistan, a new generation of veterans will pay the price of a war fought for political reasons.

[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.]