In this bulletin:

• Child killed in Afghanistan blast
• Karzai denies tensions with West
• West warned over Afghan failure
• Gates Hits NATO Allies' Role in Afghanistan
• US Congress Hears About NATO Problems in Afghanistan
• Tories seek to extend Afghan mission to 2011 in confidence motion
• Confidence vote on Afghan mission expected for March
• France hints it will offer Canada troop support
• Alleged abuse of Afghan detainees no longer a problem: Afghan minister
• Amnesty fails to block Canada's Afghan transfers
• Kabul officials sent to monitor detainees
• Diplomat with 'encyclopedic knowledge' to lead civilian efforts in Kandahar
• Nato leaders launch rearguard action to stop alliance rupturing over Afghanistan
• Iran backs peace in Afghanistan
• Where the sniping has to stop
• Turkmenistan, partners to revive Afghan gas project
• Afghanistan: The Need for International Resolve
• Afghan Gov't Urged to Support Sentence
• What next in South Waziristan?
• Editorial: Baitullah in peace mood?
• Retired Generals Turn on Musharraf
• Khatami furious over election disqualifications
• Official: al - Qaida Near Tipping Point?
• At home: Beautiful Afghan rugs are splendid poverty fighters

Child killed in Afghanistan blast

(AP) A suicide car bomber has detonated his explosives near a convoy of Afghan troops, killing one soldier and a child who was nearby.

Another four soldiers and a child were also wounded in the attack in central Ghazni province, said provincial Gov Faizullah Faizan.

The latest attack comes a day after a suicide car bomb targeting a Nato convoy left three soldiers lightly wounded in eastern Khost province, and a bungled suicide attack hurt two civilians in the south-western Nimroz province.

Last year, the Taliban launched more than 140 suicide missions - the highest number since they were ousted from power by the US-led invasion of 2001.

Insurgency-related violence in 2007 left more than 6,500 people dead - a record number, according to an Associated Press count of figures from Afghan and international officials.

Karzai denies tensions with West

BBC – 07 February 2008 - President Hamid Karzai has played down tensions over the role of foreign countries operating in Afghanistan. Speaking at a news conference in Kabul, Mr Karzai expressed gratitude to Nato members that had contributed troops.

At his side, US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice insisted progress was being made fighting insurgents but admitted the work was "not complete".

Her unannounced visit, with UK Foreign Secretary David Miliband, comes amid differences in Nato over Afghanistan.

The US and UK have been urging other countries to share more of the combat burden in the south of the country, but many are reluctant.

Speaking at a meeting of Nato defence ministers in the Lithuanian capital Vilnius, Secretary General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer said some progress had been made.

"We are making progress... but we're not there yet and we have to do better," he said. He cited Belgium's recent offer of four F-16 fighter planes and Poland's increase in its troop presence.

French officials have also said President Nicolas Sarkozy was considering sending more troops, but refused to confirm plans to send 700 paratroops to the south.

US Defence Secretary Robert Gates said he was disappointed with some countries' responses and that strengthening the force would hasten the Taleban's defeat.

"My view is that it represents potentially the opportunity to make further progress faster in Afghanistan if we had more forces there," he said.

But Taleban spokesman, Yousuf Ahmadi, told the BBC any increase in troops would be ineffective, and it would simply increase the determination of the Taleban to succeed.

Relations between the Afghan government and Nato allies had been strained by Mr Karzai's assertion that despite British efforts, the situation had worsened in southern Helmand province where most UK forces are based.

He also recently blocked the appointment of the UK's Paddy Ashdown as a UN envoy.

But at the news conference he played down his criticism, saying it was a "personal matter of sadness" that the appointment of Lord Ashdown "did not work out".

He said his remarks about the situation in Helmand province had been "misquoted", adding: "We appreciate the British role in Afghanistan and the contribution they have made."

Afghanistan "hasn't been forgotten" by the international community, he said.

The BBC's Alistair Leithead in Kabul says that despite the handshakes and camera flashes at his meeting with Ms Rice and Mr Miliband, there is a lot more to do be done behind the scenes to repair relations and get the international community's efforts properly co-ordinated.

Correspondents say Mr Karzai's remarks accorded with the display of unity by all three participants at the conference, with neither Ms Rice nor Mr Miliband making explicit reference to the current differences in Nato over troop commitments to the country.

But earlier, Mr de Hoop Scheffer said he would be spelling out to the Nato ministers that member nations had to do more to train and equip the Afghan army. Nato's mission in the country was one of necessity, not choice, he added.

"This is the front line in the fight against terrorism, and what is happening in the Hindu Kush matters, because if terrorism is not dealt with in Afghanistan, the consequences will be felt not just in Afghanistan and the region, but also in London, Brussels and Amsterdam," he told the BBC.

Speaking earlier to frontline forces in Kandahar, Ms Rice echoed the theme, saying their fight was necessary to prevent "the attacks against our cities and against our people that originated here".

Despite the recent squabbles over burden-sharing in Afghanistan, says the BBC's Caroline Wyatt in Vilnius, it is unlikely, however, that more combat troops will be offered at the two-day Lithuanian meeting.

But officials are hoping it will pave the way for further contributions to be made at Nato's summit in Bucharest in April, she says. Most of the fighting in the volatile southern provinces is being done by troops from the US, UK, Canada and the Netherlands. Many US allies, including Germany, Spain, Turkey and Italy, have refused to send significant numbers of combat forces there.

West warned over Afghan failure

BBC – 7 Feb 08

Nato Secretary General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer has said the failure of Nato's mission in Afghanistan could result in terror attacks in Western countries.

The alliance's mission in Afghanistan is not failing, but big challenges remain, Mr de Hoop Scheffer added. He was speaking ahead of a Nato defence ministers' meeting in Lithuania.

His warning was echoed by US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, who is visiting Afghanistan with UK Foreign Secretary David Miliband.

On the unannounced visit, Ms Rice told frontline troops in Kandahar that "winning here in Afghanistan so that there can not be the attacks against our cities and against our people that originated here - that's the core of the modern fight".

The visit comes amid tensions over the Nato mission in Afghanistan. The US and UK have been urging other countries to share more of the combat burden in the south of the country.

Relations between the Afghan government and the Nato allies operating there were strained by President Hamid Karzai's assertion that despite British efforts, the situation had worsened in southern Helmand province where most UK forces are based, says the BBC's Alastair Leithead in Kabul.

President Karzai also blocked the appointment of the UK's Paddy Ashdown as a UN envoy.

Meanwhile, a string of studies has warned that Afghanistan risks becoming a failed state without more effective action.

Mr de Hoop Scheffer said he would be spelling out to the Nato ministers that member nations had to do more to train and equip the Afghan army.

The challenges that remain include the adequate training and equipping of the Afghan national army, but Nato's mission in the country was one of necessity, not choice, he added.

"This is the front line in the fight against terrorism, and what is happening in the Hindu Kush matters, because if terrorism is not dealt with in Afghanistan, the consequences will be felt not just in Afghanistan and the region, but also in London, Brussels and Amsterdam," he told the BBC.

It is unlikely, however, that more combat troops will be offered at the two-day Lithuanian meeting, although officials are hoping it will pave the way for further contributions to be made at Nato's summit in Bucharest in April, says the BBC's Caroline Wyatt in Vilnius.

The squabbling of recent days has again highlighted divisions within Nato over burden-sharing in Afghanistan, our correspondent adds.

Ms Rice and Mr Miliband arrived in the Afghan capital, Kabul, on Thursday after visiting troops from a number of different nations fighting in Nato's International Security Assistance Force (Isaf) in Kandahar earlier in the day.

On Wednesday, Ms Rice and Mr Miliband held talks in London, where they discussed ways of getting Nato allies to share the burden of the fighting in the country's south.

Earlier, US Defence Secretary Robert Gates said Nato's future was at risk due to the refusal of some members to participate to the alliance's mission.

Mr Gates said that without more, the willingness of those engaged in combat would disappear and Nato might become a "two-tier alliance".

However, he said he would be spelling out to Nato defence ministers in Vilnius that member nations must do more to train and equip the Afghan army.

On Tuesday, a London-based think-tank, the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS), warned that Afghanistan faced becoming a "failed state" if operations by Nato were unsuccessful.

The IISS report echoed the tone of a number of other studies in the last week, including one from the influential US-based Afghanistan Study Group.

Most of the fighting in the volatile southern provinces is being done by troops from the US, UK, Canada and the Netherlands.

Canada has added to the pressure by threatening to remove its forces from Kandahar next year, unless other countries come up with more troops.

Last week, the US government sent letters to European states pressing them to send troops to southern Afghanistan.

Mr Gates reluctantly agreed recently to send an extra 3,200 US marines to the country, having previously suggested the extra troops should be provided by other countries.

All 26 Nato members have contributed troops to the International Security Assistance Force (Isaf), but many US allies, including Germany, France, Spain, Turkey and Italy, have refused to send significant numbers of combat forces to the south.

The decision has created a rift between them and the US, UK, Canada, the Netherlands, Denmark and Romania, whose troops have borne the brunt of the counter-insurgency fight in recent years.

Gates Hits NATO Allies' Role in Afghanistan

By Ann Scott Tyson and Josh White

Washington Post Staff Writers
Thursday, February 7, 2008; Page A01

Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates and the top U.S. commander of NATO forces in Afghanistan yesterday issued a blunt assessment of the alliance's shortcomings in that country, arguing that the unwillingness of some member states to risk combat casualties is threatening NATO's future and undermining the prosecution of the Afghan war.

"I worry a great deal about the alliance evolving into a two-tiered alliance, in which you have some allies willing to fight and die to protect people's security, and others who are not," Gates told the Senate Armed Services Committee. "It puts a cloud over the future of the alliance if this is to endure and perhaps get even worse."

American and other NATO officials are sparring over force levels, missions and strategy as violence in Afghanistan has reached its highest levels since the U.S.-led invasion and overthrow of the Taliban in 2001. Although coalition forces have defeated the Taliban in many tactical engagements, analysts say NATO remains in a "strategic stalemate" because of lagging reconstruction and governance efforts. The disputes have pitted Washington against its European partners in a manner rarely seen since the end of the Cold War, casting doubts on the credibility and purpose of the alliance.

Gates, who departs today for a two-day meeting with NATO defense ministers in Lithuania, said he will urge European countries to loosen the "caveats" they place on their troops -- rules limiting where they can be deployed or whether they can engage in battle -- and to send reinforcements to Afghanistan.

Gen. Dan McNeill, the NATO commander in Afghanistan, described in a wide-ranging interview how he is hamstrung by the combat restraints on some NATO troops, insufficient forces and intelligence capabilities, and a host of other political and military obstacles that undercut effective operations.

"Caveats deny me the ability to plan and prosecute," McNeill said. "I can't amass them to where I might have a decisive point. . . . Obviously I can't move as quickly as I want to," McNeill said.

McNeill said such constraints have led to unofficial proposals that U.S. forces take charge of the mission in southern Afghanistan, where the Taliban insurgency is strongest and where British, Canadian and Dutch troops now serve -- an idea that he said merits consideration.

"I think it should enter into the dialogue" with NATO, McNeill said. The roughly 27,000 U.S. troops in Afghanistan are concentrated near the eastern border with Pakistan and make up the bulk of the approximately 55,000 foreign troops in the country. McNeill attributed much of the increased violence to the stepped-up military operations.

NATO forces took charge of the Afghan mission in 2006, and the following year saw the worst violence in the country since the war began, with unprecedented military and civilian casualties and a nearly 30 percent rise in attacks, including 60 percent in the southern province of Helmand, according to U.S. military data. As he prepared to take command of NATO forces in Afghanistan in 2006, McNeill recalled, then-NATO Supreme Allied Commander Marine Gen. James Jones gave him simple instructions: "Don't fracture the alliance."

McNeill now finds himself struggling to hold that alliance together. "It doesn't look as though it's fractured," he said on a visit from Kabul, noting that over the past year foreign troops in Afghanistan have expanded by more than 8,000, with reinforcements expected soon from the United States and possibly Britain and Germany. But "there is a hell of a lot of debate back in various countries about what their role should be," he acknowledged.

The growing divide over NATO roles led to a tense encounter in Kabul last year between McNeill and a senior German official. McNeill, who had learned that only about 6,000 of Germany's 250,000-strong military force is deployed abroad, asked if Germany could devote one alpine battalion of about 500 troops to Afghanistan.

"You must understand the political context in our country," the official responded, wagging a finger. "General, that will not happen."

In another sign of allies' reservations, the Canadian government is debating whether to shift its mission to training and mentoring, a move McNeill opposes. "My first choice is to have them stay in the fight," he said. In an earlier news conference, McNeill described troop levels in Afghanistan as "a minimalist force."

Canada's government announced last week that it would continue its combat mission past January 2009 only if another NATO partner deploys an additional 1,000 combat troops to the southern province of Kandahar, where Canada's 2,500 troops are based.

Gates said yesterday that his decision to send 3,200 Marines into Afghanistan this spring stems in part from the shortfalls by NATO partners. Although he praised the Canadians, British, Australians, Dutch and Danes for "doing their part," Gates told the committee that he has written all NATO defense ministers asking them to "dig deeper" to solve the problems in Afghanistan.

Daniel Korski, a senior policy fellow at the European Council on Foreign Relations, said it will be hard for the United States to squeeze more troops out of NATO allies. "It's becoming increasingly difficult for governments to explain this is no longer a peacekeeping operation, this is counterinsurgency and combat, and that's far more dangerous," Korski said.

McNeill said he has also faced pressure from Afghan President Hamid Karzai to curtail operations in some provinces, particularly after civilian casualties. McNeill said he and Karzai have "intensive dialogues about not only where and why we run particular operations but how we intend to run them."

Karzai's government has also opposed U.S. proposals for more aggressive eradication of opium crops. Afghanistan supplies 90 percent of the world's opium, and McNeill estimated the crop finances up to 40 percent of Taliban operations. McNeill said he was pushing the NATO mandate as far as possible to allow his forces to target the "nexus" between opium and insurgents.

Regional interference, including weapons from Iran and fighters from Pakistan, are another challenge for McNeill. But he noted unusual progress made during a three-hour New Year's Eve meeting with the new head of Pakistan's Army, Gen. Ashfaq Kiyani, and the head of the Afghan military, who agreed to share intelligence on insurgent activity and conduct officer exchanges.

Also yesterday, when pressed by senators, Gates estimated that the Pentagon will need at least $170 billion to fund the Iraq and Afghanistan wars during fiscal 2009. The president's budget announcement Monday included a separate $70 billion war-funding request for the first quarter of 2009 but did not estimate costs that would stretch into the next president's administration.

Staff writers Karen DeYoung and John Ward Anderson in Paris and special correspondent Karla Adam in London contributed to this report.

US Congress Hears About NATO Problems in Afghanistan

VOA By Dan Robinson Capitol Hill 07 February 2008

Defense Secretary Robert Gates, and the commander of the International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan, are emphasizing the importance of NATO cooperation in the fight against insurgents. VOA's Dan Robinson reports from Capitol Hill.

Much of Gates' testimony, and questions from lawmakers on the House and Senate armed services committees, focused on Afghanistan, and problems the United States has in getting more NATO support on the ground in the most dangerous areas of the country.

Referring to upcoming NATO meetings in the Lithuanian capital, Vilnius, Gates says he intends to press alliance officials on the need for greater coordination in civil efforts in Afghanistan, and long-term strategy.

"What NATO needs is a three to five-year strategy that looks out beyond the end of 2008, beyond 2009, where do we want to have Afghanistan, where do we see Afghanistan being in three to five years, and what kind of forces will it take, what kind of civil commitment will it take, what kind of economic aid and development," said Secretary Gates.

Gates points to what he calls success in the security and military arenas, including a decline in violence over the past two years in the East where he describes counter-insurgency operations against the Taliban as going very well.

He says NATO commanders meeting in Bucharest in April will approve a strategy with benchmarks he hopes will help educate European publics about the importance of a stronger NATO role.

But he had this response to Republican Senator Susan Collins who asked about prospects that NATO contributions will enable the U.S. to reduce its military presence.

"I've been working this problem pretty steadfastly for many months at this point, and I would say that I am not particularly optimistic," he said.

Gates says there are signs some NATO governments are ready to make more meaningful rather than symbolic contributions, adding he hopes to have clearer indications of this in Vilnius.

Republican Congressman John Kline reflects congressional impatience on the issue. "I again wish you good luck in your talks with our NATO allies, we really need to fix that shortfall," said Congressman Kline.

The head of the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) in Afghanistan, U.S. Army General Dan McNeill, pointed to plans by Poland to increase forces and equipment in coming months.

Such steps will be helpful, McNeill told reporters at the Pentagon, but will likely not enable the U.S. and allies to close what he calls a gap between Afghan national forces and an under-resourced international force.

Adding that a key will be effective capacity in the Afghan army and police, he also underscored the importance of cooperation with Pakistan.

"Anyone who does not consider Afghanistan in a regional context is going to get it wrong, and long term security and stability within Afghanistan will be in a large part dependent on the help and the support of the neighbors," said General McNeill.

Ike Skelton, the chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, told Gates and Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman Michael Mullen that the U.S. and its allies must work hard to avoid a failure of the mission in Afghanistan that would damage U.S. security and NATO.

The United States and Britain made a joint call Wednesday for NATO countries to send more troops to Afghanistan.

Tories seek to extend Afghan mission to 2011 in confidence motion

Last Updated: Friday, February 8, 2008 | 10:34 AM ET - CBC News

The Conservative government confirmed Friday it will introduce a confidence motion to extend Canada's combat role in Afghanistan past February 2009, a move that could trigger a federal election.

"We believe the mission in Afghanistan should continue. It is why the motion seeking to continue the military mission be a matter of confidence," Government House leader Peter Van Loan said Friday.

The motion, which calls for an extension to the mission for two years to February 2011, will be voted on in March. It will be partially based on the review of the Afghan mission prepared by a panel led by former Liberal cabinet minister John Manley.

The Manley report recommended Canada remain in Afghanistan past 2009 if NATO offers more troops and support, especially in the violent southern areas of the country.

But Liberal Leader Stéphan Dion has said that while he will add amendments to the motion, he won't compromise on his belief that the combat mission in Kandahar must end by February 2009. The NDP and Bloc Québécois oppose any mission extension.

Confidence vote on Afghan mission expected for March

Wednesday, February 6, 2008 | 2:18 PM NT - CBC News

Prime Minister Stephen Harper could be ready to put the future of Canada's mission in Afghanistan to a confidence vote, a move that may trigger a federal election.

Harper's minority Conservative government will give notice Thursday that it is preparing a motion to extend Canada's role in Afghanistan past February 2009. The motion won't be voted on until late March. It will be partially based on the review of the Afghan mission prepared by a panel led by former Liberal cabinet minister John Manley.

Liberal Leader Stephane Dion listens in the background at the House of Commons as Prime Minister Stephen Harper explains he will introduce a confidence motion on the Afghan mission in March, a move that could trigger an election.
(Tom Hanson/Canadian Press)

But Liberal Leader Stéphan Dion told reporters on Wednesday that while he will add amendments to the motion, he won't compromise on his belief that the combat mission in Kandahar must end by February 2009.

Asked whether he would be willing to go to the polls over the issue, Dion said he didn't want to speculate with respect to an election.

"Debate will happen, and our party will come with amendments, and we hope that consensus may happen," Dion said.

So far, neither Harper nor Dion seem willing to compromise on the main issue of whether to extend Canada's combat role beyond February 2009.

France hints it will offer Canada troop support

Without offering any specific pledges, French Defence Minister tells MacKay that his country 'would help the Canadians'

CAMPBELL CLARK - Globe and Mail Update February 8, 2008

VILNIUS, LITHUANIA — The Canadian government dispatched a team of Defence Department officials to Paris Friday to discuss the logistics of a possible French deployment in southern Afghanistan.

And although a spokesman for Prime Minister Stephen Harper said it "should come as no surprise" that the government would send officials to follow up its efforts to find a country willing to send troops to Kandahar, the delegation to France is the only one organized so far -- and the country is now seen by Canadian officials as the key hope for a troop commitment.

The French Defence Minister suggested Thursday that his country would help Canada in its search for additional combat troops and equipment, but stopped short of making any specific pledges and urged Canada to be patient.

Canadian Defence Minister Peter MacKay told a meeting of NATO defence ministers that Ottawa needs a firm commitment of 1,000 troop reinforcements before a parliamentary vote on the future of the Afghan mission expected in late March.

His comments indicate that Mr. Harper wants assurances the troops are coming before he stakes his government on an extension of the mission in the vote expected days before NATO's heads of government meet in Bucharest, Romania, April 2 to 4.

Hervé Morin, the French Defence Minister, said he suggested to Mr. MacKay his country would assist if Canada waits a little longer.

“I said that we would help the Canadians. I know that [French President Nicolas Sarkozy] has extraordinary relations with your head of government, and I indicated to him that all this must be done as part of a global reflection on the reorganization of NATO forces,” Mr. Morin said at a news conference.

“And if I had a message to address to Canadian public opinion, it's to have a little bit of patience, since late March is close to early April, and early April is the time of the Bucharest summit.”

Mr. Morin stopped short of pledging troops, however. Dan Dugas, a spokesman for Mr. MacKay, said there was no commitment in the private meeting between the two ministers. Canada has placed high hopes in the possibility that France might be the “partner” they have sought in Kandahar.

Mr. Morin told reporters it was too early to say what France might do, and that published reports that his country was considering dispatching 700 paratroopers to southern Afghanistan were premature. He suggested there must be discussions on how troops could be moved from one region of Afghanistan to another – France has 1,900 stationed in the relatively calm north.

In a closed-door session with counterparts from 25 other NATO countries, Mr. MacKay made clear that Canada will not extend its military mission to Kandahar beyond February of 2009 unless it gets troop reinforcements and equipment help, and spelled out the timeline for a parliamentary vote in late March. It was not delivered as an ultimatum, but understood by all as a call for a commitment before the vote, several sources said.

“Minister MacKay made, in a very clear way, his position known to allies, in terms of what Canada has decided, in terms of the timelines, the political timelines in Canada, in terms of the conditions, if you will, Canada needs to have met, in the perception of the government, in order to allow for an extension of the Canadian effort,”a NATO official said.

Mr. Morin said he understands the Canadian government has domestic political concerns, but added: “It's hard to advise a sovereign state like Canada, but if this sovereign state could give itself a few more days before making a decision, it wouldn't necessarily be a bad idea.”

Mr. MacKay told reporters that Canada would like a single country to commit 1,000 troops to share the burden of heavy counterinsurgency fighting in Kandahar. But he conceded it might have to come from a patchwork of smaller contingents from several countries.

The Netherlands, which approved the extension of its mission in Oruzgan, north of Kandahar, last fall, sought reinforcements and received help through a hodgepodge of contingents.

“The Dutch were able to – I don't mean to sound derogatory – cobble together a combination of countries to fit the bill,” Mr. MacKay told reporters. “Our preference would be a single commitment.”

Alleged abuse of Afghan detainees no longer a problem: Afghan minister

Canwest News Service Friday, February 08, 2008

VILNIUS, Lithuania - Canada should now feel comfortable resuming prisoner transfers to Afghan authorities, Afghanistan's Defence Minister Abdul Rahim Wardak said Friday.

Canada stopped transferring prisoners on Nov. 5 after "a credible allegation of mistreatment" of a prisoner emerged, a recently released government document has revealed.

Wardak said the offender has been imprisoned and that a housecleaning of the corrections system should provide Canada with greater assurance.

"All of the necessary actions which were required have been taken by the Afghanistan government," he told reporters during a two-day meeting of allied defence ministers representing countries involved in the conflict against Taliban insurgents. "So I think they can resume without being worried."

Defence Minister Peter MacKay wouldn't reveal whether Canada would take that step. "There will be an operational decision taken about resuming transfers," he told reporters.

MacKay, speaking at the conclusion of the two-day meeting organized by the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, said Canada is making progress in getting the 1,000-troop reinforcement and necessary equipment from allies to justify extending the 2,500-soldier mission in Kandahar past February 2009.

He confirmed that a team headed by Ian Brodie, Prime Minister Stephen Harper's chief of staff, is in Paris to work out logistics about a possible French deployment in Kandahar.

"We knocked on a lot of doors. Some of them opened," MacKay said. "And France is one of those countries now that we're going to continue to have some discussions about logistically how we can make it happen."

Canada wants a commitment for extra help before an April allied meeting in Bucharest, where Harper and other leaders will debate the future of the troubled Afghanistan mission.

There is rampant speculation of a possible spring election, and the minority Conservative government is looking for help from allies to give Canadians a shot of confidence about the mission. All three opposition parties in the minority Parliament oppose extending Canada's combat role past next February.

"We have a very tight timeline, so there's no room for confusion or pushing these things off," MacKay said.

Canada, which has lost 78 soldiers and one diplomat, has suffered the largest number of deaths on a per-capita basis among the 40 nations contributing forces in the Afghanistan conflict.

Amnesty fails to block Canada's Afghan transfers

OTTAWA (Reuters) - Amnesty International Canada on Thursday lost the first round of its bid to prevent Canadian troops in Afghanistan from transferring prisoners to Afghan authorities, where Amnesty fears they could be tortured.

Canada's Federal Court denied a request by Amnesty and the British Columbia Civil Liberties Association for an injunction to prohibit the transfer of Afghan detainees, while the court conducts a more lengthy review of the issue.

Justice Anne Mactavish ruled that the rights groups had failed to demonstrate "that irreparable harm will likely result unless the injunction is granted".

Canada stopped handing over prisoners to the Afghan authorities last November after receiving evidence that a detainee had been mistreated.

Canada's minority Conservative government says the transfers could resume at any time if it is determined that enough safeguards against torture in place, and the rights groups wanted to block that possible resumption.

According to an Afghan human rights official, Canada has kept up to 20 prisoners at its southern Afghan base in Kandahar since the interruption of the transfers. It has 2,500 troops at the base.

Mactavish said her decision would not prevent the Canadian rights groups from renewing its request for an injunction if transfers resume.

Amnesty said the judge's ruling was "a powerful and unequivocal vindication" of what the group had been saying about the problems with the transfers.

"She's laid out a litany ... of problems, including deficient record-keeping, missing detainees, the serious and very worrying allegations of mistreatment," Amnesty International Canada's secretary-general Alex Neve told Reuters.

Kabul officials sent to monitor detainees

GRAEME SMITH - From Thursday's Globe and Mail February 7, 2008

KANDAHAR, AFGHANISTAN — Under pressure from Canada to act on allegations of abuse, the Afghan government has dispatched two senior intelligence officers to Kandahar in recent days to inspect detention cells and oversee the treatment of detainees.

The move was revealed by a member of Afghanistan's feared intelligence service at a meeting in Kabul yesterday with Canadian and NATO officials, and reflects the Afghan government's strong desire to persuade Canada it is safe to resume transferring detainees to local authorities.

It's part of Kabul's response to Canadian concerns about torture and mistreatment in Afghan custody, said Ahmad Fahim Hakim, deputy chairman of the Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission, who participated in the meeting.

"We hope it will pave the way for transfer of detainees," said Mr. Hakim, whose agency has been pushing for a resumption of the transfers that Canada halted in early November after finding evidence of abuse at the Kandahar National Directorate of Security.

Canada's decision to halt transfers has been a source of embarrassment for the Afghan government, and the discomfort grew more acute over the weekend as Kandahar governor Asadullah Khalid found himself denying allegations that he was personally involved in torture.

The two NDS officers have already started talking with the Canadians and preparing daily reports for President Hamid Karzai on conditions at the Kandahar detention centre, Mr. Hakim said. The reporting covers a list of issues, he said, such as prisoners' health, the quality of their food, their ability to contact family members, whether they know the reasons for their detention and complaints of mistreatment.

The NDS inspectors are also expected to look into the length of detainees' stay in the cramped basement cells of the intelligence agency, which is legally allowed to hold people for 72 hours before filing charges with a prosecutor. Many prisoners have described the NDS holding them for months of beatings and interrogations.

"These two colleagues are not ordinary employees; they're there to function as observers," Mr. Hakim said. "They're well trained, and in our perception they're the most credible people to put things in ... order, immediately taking corrective decisions and measures."

He continued: "So far they've initiated some contacts with the Canadians and shared some observations with them, regarding corrective measures about the way NDS is treating detainees there."

It's unclear how Canadian officials reacted to the news that Afghanistan's notoriously brutal intelligence agency will investigate itself. Canadian officials in Afghanistan are forbidden from publicly discussing detainees, and declined to comment on yesterday's meeting.

The gathering at AIHRC headquarters was also attended by delegations from Britain, Norway, Denmark, the Netherlands, and the United Nations. Other participants described the meeting as a routine exchange of information. Neither Canadian ambassador Arif Lalani, nor his deputy, Ron Hoffmann, were in Kabul at the time.

Mr. Hakim said he understands the Canadians' concerns about their obligations under the Geneva Conventions to avoid handing over prisoners into custody where they face torture, but it's better for the Canadians to reform the Afghan system rather than start a parallel detention centre.

A strong Canadian role in the Afghan detention centres will help the government gain credibility, he said, which in turn will assist in the fight against insurgents. "The strength of the Taliban emanates from the weakness of the government." The AIHRC is looking for foreign assistance for expanded monitoring of detainees in southern Afghanistan, he added, because investigators have difficulty travelling the dangerous roads to visit jails in Helmand and Uruzgan provinces. The Taliban recently claimed they had killed a human-rights investigator on the main highway between Kandahar and Helmand.

Diplomat with 'encyclopedic knowledge' to lead civilian efforts in Kandahar

DANIEL LEBLANC - From Friday's Globe and Mail February 8, 2008

OTTAWA — Ottawa is putting a new face at the top of its team in Kandahar, nominating diplomat Elissa Golberg to oversee Canada's mission in a province that needs aid and development to emerge from decades of war.

Ms. Golberg was named this week to the new position of representative of Canada in Kandahar, after having served as executive director of the Manley panel on the country's future role in Afghanistan.

In fact, her nomination is seen as part of the federal response to last month's Manley report, which urged the government to revamp its aid efforts and offer assistance that addresses the "immediate, practical needs of the Afghan people."

In previous years, the most visible elements of Canada's presence in Kandahar were the 2,500 soldiers in the province. But the internal announcement of Ms. Golberg's nomination made it clear that she will be at the top of the ladder in Kandahar, giving more prominence to Canada's civilian presence.

"Ms. Golberg will be responsible for ensuring a coherent, co-ordinated and strategic approach to Canada's efforts across southern Afghanistan," said David Mulroney, associate deputy minister at Foreign Affairs, in an internal statement.

"She will act as the primary Canadian interface with senior Afghan government officials in Kandahar province."

Ms. Golberg earned a master's degree from Carleton University's Norman Paterson School of International Affairs in 1997. The school's director, Fen Hampson, said she was an "outstanding" student and individual, and will be key to reshaping Canada's role in Afghanistan.

"It's a way to show the flag in another way in Kandahar," Prof. Hampson said of the nomination. "We'll now have a strong and effective diplomatic voice and presence on the ground, much needed."

Ms. Golberg was appreciated for her "encyclopedic knowledge" of international law on the Manley panel, said member Derek Burney, who applauded the nomination.

"It's evidence of a stronger commitment from the civilian side for our mission. As you well know, the military side has dominated the public focus in Afghanistan," Mr. Burney said.

He said the creation of the position heralds a new role for Canadian diplomacy, adding that Ms. Golberg could eventually start running the Provincial Reconstruction Team in Kandahar, which is currently under military command.

"This is not a cakewalk, and I think it's a great signal to others in the department that there are officers who are ready to take on tough assignments," Mr. Burney said.

While there is a growing emphasis on bringing effective aid to Afghanistan, Ms. Golberg is well aware of the need for a continued military role in any dangerous region of the world.

In a 2003 interview with the UN's IRIN News, Ms. Golberg said humanitarian agencies have to work in a secure environment.

"Agencies need to make sure protection does not fall through the cracks at the field level and in operational planning. Sometimes, this demands a more holistic approach. There are times when it's great if beneficiaries get material assistance, but if they don't feel physically safe, then obviously that's problematic," Ms. Golberg said.

At Foreign Affairs, Ms. Golberg was also involved in the Kosovo and Lebanon files, and worked on the Canadian government's response to the South Asia earthquake of October, 2005, and the Indian Ocean tsunami disaster of December, 2004.

"She really lives and breathes public service and the need for Canada to get serious about what it's doing in these highly charged conflict zones," Mr. Hampson said.

Nato leaders launch rearguard action to stop alliance rupturing over Afghanistan

From The Times- February 8, 2008 Jeremy Page in Kabul and Michael Evans, Defence Editor

The Nato mission in Afghanistan will not succeed unless more troops are sent to the south, where the Taleban is concentrated, defence ministers were told yesterday. The claim was made by Søren Gade, the Danish Defence Minister, at the start of a two-day meeting in Vilnius, the Lithuanian capital.

On a joint visit to Kabul and Kandahar, the birthplace of the Taleban and the main city in the south, David Miliband, the Foreign Secretary, and Condoleezza Rice, the US Secretary of State, took up the same theme. Dr Rice said that more troops were needed “to give enough military power to do what needs to be done on the front end [the south] of the counter-insurgency effort”. At Kandahar airfield, Dr Rice told a gathering of troops that they were involved in a fight that would “transform history”.

After Robert Gates, the US Defence Secretary, said at a Senate hearing on Wednesday that the alliance was split between those nations “willing to fight and die to protect people's security and others who are not”, desperate efforts were made yesterday to prevent Nato breaking up into a “two-tiered” organisation. Jaap de Hoop Scheffer, the Nato Secretary-General, pleaded with the defence ministers to tone down their criticisms. It was also pointed out that in the previous 12 months the Nato force in Afghanistan had increased in size by 8,900 troops and that some countries, including France and Poland, had said that they were considering sending more soldiers.

Des Browne, the Defence Secretary, also tried to ease tensions. “Of the 25 [Nato] countries who have deployable forces, 12 of them are represented in the south and southeast of Afghanistan. So the sense that a small number of countries are doing this out of the alliance is not right,” he said, adding that France was also prepared to deploy in the south “in small but significant numbers”.

However, the ministers were aware that unless other alliance countries agree to send fighting troops to help out their colleagues in the three southern provinces of Helmand, Kandahar and Uruzgan, Canada and possibly the Netherlands may withdraw their soldiers from the south. Peter Mackay, the Canadian Defence Minister, said in Vilnius that the alliance had to return to an “all-for-one approach”. He repeated the threat to pull Canada's 2,500 troops out of Kandahar next year unless allies provided an extra 1,000 troop reinforcements.

In an hour-long session with President Karzai in Kabul, Mr Miliband and Dr Rice referred to recent criticisms made by the Afghan leader that the security situation in Helmand province worsened after the British troops arrived in spring 2006. However, at a press conference with his two visitors, President Karzai said that he had been misquoted. He said: “I'm terribly embarrassed that this has come up. That is not what I said. We appreciate the British role in Afghanistan.” He also expressed regret that Lord Ashdown of Norton-sub-Hamdon had not been appointed as United Nations special representative for Afghanistan, even though the Afghan leader personally blocked his candidacy, fearing that he would be too similar to a British colonial viceroy.

Iran backs peace in Afghanistan

Press TV (Iran) Thu, 07 Feb 2008 - An Iranian Foreign Ministry official says the Islamic Republic has always backed the establishment of peace and security in Afghanistan.

Mohammad-Ebrahim Taherian, director of the Afghanistan Affairs Office at Foreign Ministry, said Tehran believes that establishing security in Afghanistan is in the interest of its neighbors and the international community.

Speaking in Tokyo on the second day of a meeting of the Joint Coordination and Monitoring Board - a committee working to implement Afghanistan's five-year reconstruction plan - Taherian also said Iran has taken the responsibility of granting a $560m gratuitous loan to Afghanistan over a five-year period.

Iran has assisted Afghanistan in infrastructure installations, technical and educational services and cash aid, he said, adding, “Iran's major assistance to Afghanistan has been the construction of infrastructure such as bridges, roads and electricity supplies.”

He also voiced the Islamic Republic's deep concern over the increasing production of narcotics in Afghanistan. He blamed drugs for security woes and an expansion of terrorism in Afghanistan.

Where the sniping has to stop

The Economist 02/07/2008

Afghanistan’s problems—desperate poverty, fragile and corrupt government, and a drug-financed insurgency—can’t wait for prickly politicians to sort out their differences.

MIGHT Afghanistan’s “forgotten war” yet defeat the most successful military alliance in history? Last year saw NATO-led troops engage in their deadliest fighting yet in support of the government of Hamid Karzai. The winter snows that blanket Afghanistan’s mountains have for now quietened the frontlines. But roadside bombings and suicide attacks—tactics the Taliban have picked up with increasingly lethal effect from al-Qaeda operatives in Iraq—still take their toll among Western forces and ordinary Afghans.

Yet it is not the spectre of military defeat that haunts NATO. It is a failure of political will. This week, as alliance defence ministers gathered in Vilnius, and Condoleezza Rice, America’s secretary of state, and David Miliband, Britain’s foreign secretary, dropped by unannounced in Afghanistan, all could agree that the job of stabilising the country needs more troops and a better co-ordinated reconstruction effort. But the political sniping over who should be doing what has reached an intensity that only the Taliban can celebrate.

More soldiers will turn up before the snows melt and before NATO leaders gather for a summit in Bucharest in April. America is sending an extra 3,200 marines; a report by two prominent former officials, Thomas Pickering and General James Jones, recommends deploying still more as troop levels drop in Iraq. Poland hints it may add to the more than 1,000 soldiers it deployed last year. France has just sent more aircraft, may soon send a few extra troops to help train and fight alongside Afghan army units, and is thinking of other ways it might help. The fresh troops Britain is shortly to rotate in will have more armoured vehicles and helicopters.

The trouble is that “there are certain allies that are in much more dangerous parts of the country,” as Miss Rice put it not-so-diplomatically this week—and some who just won’t go. Canada, Britain and the Netherlands, the NATO members, along with America, bearing the brunt of the fighting in the volatile south and east of the country, would welcome some relief. A report commissioned by Canada’s government recommended last month that the hard-pressed Canadian contingent in Kandahar province stay on beyond 2009 only if another 1,000 soldiers can be found from somewhere to help out. No volunteers so far, though Canada’s withdrawal would be a serious blow.

Germany is under greatest pressure to help: its soldiers are confined by parliamentary edict to the safer north. Some German commentators fret that this is badly straining NATO and putting the country’s loyalty to the alliance in doubt. But few politicians are ready to make the public case for deploying forces to the more dangerous south.

America’s defence secretary, Robert Gates, also gets a medal for damaging alliance solidarity. He infuriated both Britain and the Netherlands by suggesting that European troops operating in the south were not much good at counter-insurgency tactics. Yet even he knows that one thing worse than fighting a war by coalition is having to fight without one.

Another blow was President Karzai’s decision to veto the appointment of Britain’s Paddy Ashdown as the UN’s much-needed co-ordinator of the disparate international reconstruction effort. Mr Karzai was reportedly miffed at British plans to entice some Taliban to camps, offering them basic military equipment if they would join the fight against extremists—rather as America has been doing with Sunni groups in Iraq.

But Afghanistan’s problems—desperate poverty, fragile and corrupt government, and a drug-financed insurgency—can’t wait for prickly politicians to sort out their differences. It is those politicians, rather than the troops battling the Taliban, who are courting defeat.

Turkmenistan, partners to revive Afghan gas project

ASHGABAT, Feb 7 (Reuters) - Partners in a proposed natural gas pipeline through Afghanistan will meet in April to discuss ways to breathe new life into the stalled multi-billion project, a Turkmen government source said on Thursday.

The idea of the pipeline has been floating around for over a decade, but conflict in Afghanistan has hampered efforts to embark on the project which aims to export Turkmen natural gas to Pakistan and India.

The Asian Development Bank (ADB), which has conducted a feasibility study into the project, is organising a meeting in Islamabad to discuss potential Turkmen gas prices and other technicalities, the source said.

"Signing a general agreement, including the price for Turkmen gas, will be on the agenda," the source said.

The project is important for Turkmenistan, Central Asia's top gas exporter, as the former Soviet nation explores ways to diversify supplies away from Russia, which controls its pipeline network through gas monopoly Gazprom.

The West views Turkmenistan's Caspian deposits as an alternative energy source for Europe as well, and is trying to woo Turkmenistan to engage in projects bypassing Russia.

The West particularly wants Turkmenistan, which borders Iran, to step up work on the U.S-backed trans-Caspian pipeline, designed to help Europe diversify gas imports away from Russia.

Washington tentatively supports the Afghan proposal but opposes a similar pipeline plan with Iran because it has accused the Islamic Republic of attempting to develop nuclear weapons, an accusation Tehran denies.

Locked away under Soviet rule and then the 21-year reign of former present Saparmurat Niyazov, Turkmenistan is now opening up to new projects under its more reformist leader, Kurbanguly Berdymukhamedov, who came to power a year ago.

Turkmenistan, which has yet to publish its total natural gas reserves, has said it has enough gas for all export projects.

According to BP's annual statistical review, Turkmenistan's proved natural gas reserves stood at 2.9 trillion cubic metres at the end of 2006.

Turkmenistan's new-found enthusiasm in oil diplomacy raised concern among investors at the end of last year when it halted daily deliveries of up to 23 million cubic metres to Iran, citing technical issues.

Ashgabat has not commented on its actions and it remains unclear when exports might resume. (Writing by Maria Golovnina; editing by James Jukwey)

Afghanistan: The Need for International Resolve

ICG Asia Report N°145 - 6 February 2008

Afghanistan is not lost but the signs are not good. Its growing insurgency reflects a collective failure to tackle the root causes of violence. Six years after the Taliban’s ouster, the international community lacks a common diagnosis of what is needed to stabilise the country as well as a common set of objectives. Long-term improvement of institutions is vital for both state building and counter-insurgency, but without a more strategic approach, the increased attention and resources now directed at quelling the conflict could even prove counterproductive by furthering a tendency to seek quick fixes. Growing tensions over burden sharing risk undermining the very foundations of multilateralism, including NATO’s future. The U.S., which is demanding more commitment by allies, must realise that its unilateral actions weaken the will of others. At the same time, those sniping from the sidelines need to recognise that the Afghan intervention is ultimately about global security and do more.

The caveats and short-term mandates imposed by many Western capitals on their troops hinder real planning and raise doubts about the depth of commitment. Countries that consider themselves major players in NATO such as Germany, France and Italy need to assume a greater share of the burden, including the combat burden. While the Afghan people, the insurgents and neighbouring countries each in their own way need to know that resolve is strong, the international community is increasingly fragmented, allowing the insurgency to gain momentum and further emboldening spoilers. Despite growing calls for “coordination”, international efforts are marred by inability to agree on priorities and plans, even with regard to counter-insurgency. Some influential actors are pressing untimely and destabilising initiatives, such as the UK’s recent public talk of negotiations with the Taliban and recruitment of militias. There are major disagreements over other vital areas such as counter-narcotics, with the U.S. continuing to press for aerial eradication of opium poppies despite resistance from nearly every other actor.

The recent attempt to install a senior and dynamic former British political leader and international official, Paddy Ashdown, as a strengthened UN representative was scuttled by President Hamid Karzai, apparently out of concern for Afghan sovereignty and his own authority. A stronger hand, however, remains essential to bring coherence to international efforts, both among the multiple players and in their approach to the Afghan administration. The international community has never had executive authority in Afghanistan, but it controls most military and financial resources. This leverage should be better used to build Afghan capacity and accountability at central and, even more importantly, local levels which would be the ultimate guarantor of a stable, sustainable state.

Unfortunately international players have too often created parallel foreign structures such as Provincial Reconstruction Teams (PRTs), even in areas where the security situation does not call for such a militarised approach, while tolerating subversion by a self-interested local elite of important procedures like the vetting of candidates at elections and the appointments board for government positions, as well as police reform. The nascent institutions of state are also being corrupted by burgeoning poppy production. If this is to change, the international community will need to stand up to those in power who are involved in the drugs business, as well as press for a comprehensive, national approach to building alternative livelihoods.

The term “international community” in this context means the U.S. and its Western allies, the dominant players in Afghanistan. The country’s powerful neighbours have mostly played negative roles during the conflict. The ability of the insurgents to enjoy sanctuary for their command and control structures in Pakistan and to recruit there are major factors in the violence. Iran has at times been constructive, notably in negotiation of the Bonn Agreement in 2001, but is likely to use Afghanistan as a theatre in which to hurt the Americans through proxies if its relations with Washington continue to deteriorate. If Afghanistan is to be stabilised, the U.S. must understand that the country’s interests with regard to the tough neighbourhood in which it lives may sometimes differ from its own.

The UN mission (UNAMA) has lost too much of its policy leadership role in recent years. This is partly the result of the way international engagement has been designed, with the lead in various sectors divided among individual nations and other institutions – most strikingly NATO – being prioritised. In addition, the UN has failed to seize the initiative and perform the function of coordinator and driver of international efforts set out in its mandate.

The world witnessed on 11 September 2001 the consequences that a failed state can have for global security. If the international community does not stay the course in Afghanistan, the price could be inordinately high, including:

• a return to civil war, with factions divided along regional and ethnic lines;
• a narco-state with institutions controlled by multiple organised criminal gangs;
• a Pashtun-dominated south largely abandoned to lawlessness; and
• increased intervention by regional powers seeking to protect their interests.

Such an unstable Afghanistan, in which extremists have a strong foothold, would again pose a serious threat to global security. Western governments need to acknowledge the importance of defeating this threat at its source and then present the case far more convincingly than they have done to publics which appear increasingly unwilling to accept casualties or long-term commitment of adequate resources.

Streamlined military-to-military, civilian-to-military and civilian-to-civilian coordination is required. Priorities and interests must be reconciled, with a view to ensuring that:

• there is genuine commitment to coordination mechanisms;
• troop-contributing countries are prepared to deploy their forces, with the required mandates, wherever in the country they are needed;
• the focus of international efforts is on institution building rather than supporting individual Afghan players;
• the culture of impunity is tackled; and
• strategic interests in the region are reassessed, leading to efforts to address the Pakistan problem realistically and to insulate Afghanistan as much as possible from the U.S.-Iran confrontation.

This is not a time for finger pointing or scaling down commitments. Neither Western publics nor the Afghan people have boundless patience; their support will disappear if the drift is not halted quickly. Other than rhetorically, the international community has aimed too low in Afghanistan, pandering to patronage networks rather than respecting the wishes of ordinary Afghan men and women for accountability and more inclusive peacebuilding. While addressing their own shortcomings, the internationals must also hold the Kabul government accountable for its failings. The situation is not hopeless, but it is bad, and an urgent collective effort is needed to tackle it.

RECOMMENDATIONS

To the International Community, especially the U.S., other NATO Member States and States with Troop Commitments and Assistance Missions in Afghanistan:

1.  Emphasise that efforts will be maintained and adequately resourced as long as needed, including:

(a)  commitment of troops, backed by the necessary mandate and associated military resources; and

(b)  satisfaction of the requirements for Operational Mentor and Liaison Teams (OMLTS) to train the Afghan security forces.

2.  Allocate adequate resources for outreach programs to communicate the importance of the mission to domestic constituencies.

3.  Support development of a Contact Group of key international players, led by appropriate UN representatives and including the European Union (EU), NATO, the U.S., the UK, Germany and Canada, to meet regularly in Afghanistan, New York and capitals to steer strategic planning of the international engagement.

4.  Demonstrate real commitment to coordination mechanisms such as the Joint Coordination and Monitoring Board (JCMB).

5.  Abolish the lead nation/key partner approach and give the UN more specific responsibility to coordinate international efforts in areas such as justice and sub-national governance, with emphasis on local capacity building.

6.  Reassess relations with Afghanistan’s neighbours, in particular the strong support given to Pakistan’s military-backed government, and seek to insulate Afghanistan from the consequences of U.S.-Iranian differences.

To the Joint Coordination and Monitoring Board (JCMB):

7.  Encourage the mutual accountability and greater effectiveness of donors and Afghan authorities by:

(a)  insisting on the proper functioning of the Consultative Board for Senior Government Appointments as agreed in the Afghanistan Compact and following through on Kabul’s commitments to transitional justice and disarmament;

(b)  requiring donors to send regular reports on assistance programs to the finance ministry or risk losing their seats on the JCMB; and

(c)  reducing the number of Consultative Groups (CGs), requiring them to meet more regularly, and equipping each group with a secretariat to follow up on actions between meetings.

To the United Nations Secretary-General:

8.  Ensure that the UN Assistance Mission in Afghanistan (UNAMA) has sufficient resources to fulfil its mandate by:

(a)  reassessing staffing levels and meeting them through a streamlined and transparent appointments process; and

(b)  reviewing and encouraging member states as necessary to meet fiscal and material needs in the conflict-hit areas, particularly in transportation and communications.

9.  Stimulate greater coordination with the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force (ISAF), including by basing UN liaison officers at ISAF headquarters and increasing contact at regional levels.

To the United Nations Security Council:

10.  Emphasise at the next renewal of UNAMA’s mandate:

(a)  a regional approach to UN programming inside Afghanistan, including building up regional offices; and

(b)  close cooperation with ISAF, in particular the contribution that UNAMA’s analytical resources should make at all levels of planning.

To NATO/ISAF:

11.  Harmonise the mandates of the Provincial Reconstruction Teams (PRTs) by emphasising their security sector roles and phasing out development activities in areas where civilian-led approaches by the UN and others are more appropriate.

12.  Seek the transition of Afghan National Army (ANA) training and mentoring to ISAF command contingent upon the alliance and its members providing the necessary resources.

13.  Emphasise at the renewal of ISAF’s mandate the importance of integrating UNAMA political input at every level of operational planning.

Afghan Gov't Urged to Support Sentence

The Press Association 2/07/2008

KABUL — Conservative clerics and elders demanded Thursday that the Afghan government not interfere with a controversial death sentence handed down to a young journalist convicted of insulting Islam for distributing a report questioning polygamy.

Sayed Parwez Kaambakhsh, 23, was sentenced to death on Jan. 22 by a three-judge panel in the northern city of Mazar-i-Sharif for handing out a report he printed off the Internet to fellow journalism students at Balkh University.

The article questioned why men can have four wives but women cannot have multiple husbands. Kaambakhsh has appealed his conviction.

More than 100 tribal and religious leaders convened Wednesday in Gardez, the capital of the conservative eastern province of Paktia, and demanded that the government support the sentence.

"Kaambakhsh made the Afghan people very upset. It was against the clerics and Islam. He has humiliated Islam," Khaliq Daad, head of the Islamic council of Paktia, said Thursday. "We want the Afghan president to support the court's decision."

Kaambakhsh's case sparked a protest in Kabul last week and an international outcry, with a number of organizations demanding the case be annulled and Kaambakhsh set free.

U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice planned to raise the case with President Hamid Karzai in talks here Thursday. Rice flew to the Afghan capital along with British Foreign Secretary David Miliband to deliver a joint message of support and to prod Afghan officials as the United Sates continues a drive to recruit more NATO troops for Afghanistan.

A government spokesman said this week that Karzai was concerned about the death sentence, but would not intervene until the courts have their final say.

Daad criticized the government and various organizations that have come out in Kaambakhsh's defense, accusing them of interfering with the judicial process.

He said the clerics and elders worried that Kaambakhsh would be let off the hook like Abdul Rahman, a Christian convert imprisoned in 2006 on charges of apostasy who was whisked off to Italy, where he had been granted asylum.

The Committee to Protect Journalists reiterated its call for Karzai "to have the case transferred immediately to Kabul and expedited through the appeals process so that he can be officially exculpated."

Reporters Without Borders, another press rights group, also pressed the Afghan government to transfer the case and the conviction "quashed."

What next in South Waziristan?

Dawn 8 Feb 08 By Ismail Khan -

THE wheel has come full circle in South Waziristan. It has been a little over three and a half years since the launch of the military operation in areas dominated by the Mehsud tribe after the government had used similar tactics to force tribal militants to submit to state authority and expel foreign militants.

The three-pronged operation is a repeat of a similar exercise that led the military into the Mehsud territory between March and July of 2004. The military did prevail after encountering stiff resistance but what it had won through hard battle it lost through negotiations in Sararogha in February, 2005. A senior government official at the time had asked: “Whose compulsion is it to strike a deal, ours or the militants?”

Predictably, the agreement collapsed sooner than expected and the militants resumed attacks on security forces, leading to the capture of 242 soldiers last August. Grudgingly, the government agreed to a prisoners’ swap, freeing 24 militants, some of them convicted of being alleged suicide bombers.

In the words of a senior military officer: “This was a bitter pill that we had to swallow.”

For almost four years since the ill-fated Shakai agreement, Pakistan’s policy in Fata, in the words of a former senior American official, has been on “auto pilot”.

Little wonder then that the military finds itself sucked into another operation in South Waziristan. The government has imposed a debilitating economic blockade on the Mehsud tribe and very little is coming out of the embattled zone in terms of information.

It has caused the displacement of a large number of Mehsud tribesmen, including women and children, who had to walk on foot for miles to reach the relative safety of Tank and Dera Ismail Khan.

To ensure unity of command, the political administration has deliberately been kept outside the loop.

Those familiar with the military’s operational strategy to “box in” Baitullah Mehsud believed that it was going well and according to plan.

Assessment by government agencies that the Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan (TIP) formed in December has failed to present itself as a single platform of militant groups operating in the tribal region and the settled district also helped reshape the government’s strategy to deal with the Mehsud militant commander.

Baitullah, the amir of the Pakistani Taliban, told Al-Jazeera that the TIP had been set up to counter the government’s attempts to divide militant groups. He said the TIP would coordinate all activities and respond collectively, be it negotiations with the government or operations.

However, government officials say this does not seem to be the case. Militants in Ahmadzai Wazir in South Waziristan, widely seen as pro-government, are staying neutral. In fact, they have pushed back attempts by pro-Baitullah militants from their own Ahmadzai Wazir clansmen to return to the Wazir area and use it as a fall-back position.

In North Waziristan’s regional headquarters of Miramshah, militant commander Hafiz Gul Bahadar is in direct contact with the government and has extended the ceasefire till February 17. He has avoided to be drawn into the conflict, despite last week’s missile attack in Mirali that reportedly killed Abu Laith Al-Libbi, though the groups operating in the area are not under his control.

In Bajaur, surprisingly, militants loyal to Maulana Faqir Mohammad, a senior figure second only to Baitullah, are also keeping their cool and have so far refrained from escalating the fighting.

But the announcement by a spokesman for Mr Mehsud declaring ceasefire and acknowledging that the decision has been taken in view of the government’s flexibility has spawned new questions.

Denials notwithstanding, there are credible reports that talks did take place in Razmak, North Waziristan, last week. What transpired and what was offered by both sides to lead to the cessation of hostilities is not known.

But it has caused quite a bit of confusion. The military insists that the halt in operation is the result of harsh weather conditions and it had nothing to do with the ‘unilateral’ ceasefire by militants.

Whatever may be the reason for the ceasefire, it would undoubtedly bring some relief to the government and political parties which are now only days away from the February 18 elections.

But one key question remains: What happens next? Negotiations are certainly desirable but it will not shoo away the cat of militancy that is now prowling not just in the tribal regions but also in parts of the NWFP. Clearly, the government still does not appear to have an exit plan.

While the military operation may be important in enabling the government to talk from a position of strength rather than the hitherto weak position, perhaps more important is how it conducts the negotiations and what plan it has to strengthen its writ over the largely-lawless tribal regions in the medium- to long-term in the post-military operation scenario.

In the words of a senior official: “Instead of waiting for the militants to open up another front, the government needs to open its own front in a positive manner by ensuring quick and cheap justice, better social service delivery and better security.”

This will happen only if the federal government allows for the much-needed structural changes in the administrative system.

Describing the present administrative system in the NWFP and Fata as “weak, demoralised and despondent”, Governor NWFP Owais Ahmad Ghani warned last week that the government system in settled districts and the political system in tribal regions were “heading towards a state of collapse”.

Admittedly, the ceasefire will bring immediate peace to the restive tribal region and areas where Mehsud has influence but how long does this new ceasefire last, given past suspicions and frequent breakdown of talks, remains to be seen.

The apprehension is that unless the government comes up with a strategy on how to deal with the situation it will run the risk of getting sucked into another military operation in the tribal areas and at a much bigger cost.

Editorial: Baitullah in peace mood?

Dawn 8 Feb 08 - BAITULLAH Mehsud’s decision to order a unilateral ceasefire will be viewed with some scepticism. It is difficult to hazard a guess as to what prompted this fanatic rebel chief to make a move which is, on the face of it, sensible. The security forces claim credit for the change in Baitullah’s stance and say their troops have broken the militants’ back in Swat and Waziristan, where they are claimed “to be on the run”. But a spokesman for Baitullah says he has ordered a ceasefire because the security forces have ‘minimised’ their operations. The army denies having received any communiqué from the Taliban offering a ceasefire. Hence its operations will continue. An army spokesman even hinted that Baitullah’s offer could well be a ruse for gaining time to regroup.

What is disturbing is that the unilateral ceasefire coincides with Interior Minister Hamid Nawaz’s disclosure that the government has decided to form a ‘grand jirga’ to ensure peace in Waziristan. Although the minister claimed that it is the Mehsuds who have initiated the peace moves, because the security forces have cut off the rebels’ supply lines from three sides, one can only hope that the government does not plan to go soft vis-à-vis the militants and let them have their way. Which way the war is going is difficult to tell. But if the government is right in claiming that the troops have gained the upper hand and the Taliban leadership is willing to negotiate, then peace should be given a chance, albeit on the government’s terms. Let us note that Baitullah’s offer extends to the entire country, which means that — if the Taliban do not violate their word of honour — suicide bombings and car-bomb blasts should stop. Therefore, one should not have to wait long to test the credibility of this peace offer.

The grand jirga the government is planning to constitute is to include representatives from all tribes, besides some political leaders as guarantors to ensure that the parties abide by the peace terms. In the past, deals have often broken down, with both sides blaming each other. The government, however, must not betray any signs of leniency. While it ought to demonstrate understanding for the customs and traditions which all central governments have followed in dealing with the tribal people’s historical rights, it must make it clear that the security forces will carry out their duty and take immediate action if the Taliban show any signs of breaking the law. The deal, if it is clinched, must obtain guarantees from the Taliban that, besides ceasing armed activity, they must abjure all terrorist acts that target not only security personnel but also innocent men, women and children. Baitullah is a criminal whose men have slaughtered captured soldiers. It should not turn out to be a measure of the government’s weakness that it has to negotiate with this criminal instead of giving him justice.

Retired Generals Turn on Musharraf

By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS Published: February 7, 2008

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan (AP) -- A group of retired Pakistani generals and admirals is stepping up its unprecedented campaign against President Pervez Musharraf, even joining in a public protest to demand that the former military chief resign.

The government has played down the role of retired military officers of the Ex-Servicemen's Association since last month, when they called on Musharraf to relinquish the presidency citing ''the supreme national interest.''

Some of the dissident officers, including former army chief Mirza Aslam Beg, staged a brief public rally Tuesday in Rawalpindi and demanded that Musharraf resign.

Some Pakistani analysts and Western diplomats believe the former generals, admirals and air marshals retain strong ties to their successors on active duty.

While the military leadership remains loyal to Musharraf, the protests by retired servicemen point to deep fissures within the armed forces, which have supported Musharraf since he seized power in a military coup in 1999.

''Even for those who are aware that opposition to Musharraf was increasing within the rank and file, the degree of vehemence, even venom, of opposition was a revelation,'' Shaukat Qadir of the Islamabad Policy Research Institute wrote in the Daily Times newspaper.

Authorities have not been reluctant to crack down on Musharraf's civilian critics. But heavy-handed action against distinguished former soldiers could incite a backlash among the military ranks, even among those who have not broken with the president.

''Can you imagine what will happen if the police attack and beat Pakistan's greatest national heroes who saved the nation,'' said retired army Lt. Gen. Hamid Gul, a former head of Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence agency and a member of the association.

In addition to Musharraf's resignation, the retired service members are demanding the reinstatement of 60 judges -- including the Supreme Court's chief justice -- before parliamentary elections on Feb. 18, as a guarantee that the ballot will be free and fair. Past protests have regularly been broken up by riot police.

Pakistan has been ruled by the army for more than half of its 60-year history, and some of Musharraf's critics from the ranks of retired army officers were themselves linked to military regimes when they were on active duty. Some Pakistanis accuse them of standing up for democracy only after leaving military service and enjoying the prestige and financial benefits of an armed forces career.

Musharraf's spokesman Rashid Qureshi dismissed the retired officers Wednesday as ''insignificant'' and ''spent cartridges.''

The most public critics of Musharraf within the Ex-Servicemen's Society come from the air force and navy -- services not tainted by association with military rule.

The most prominent former army general in the group is Beg, the former military chief who served during the turbulent transition to democracy following death of military dictator Gen. Zia ul-Haq in a 1988 plane crash.

Regardless of their backgrounds and motives, the former top officers appear united in their belief that Musharraf's rule has badly hurt the reputation of the armed forces as a whole and brought into question the unity of the Pakistani state.

''He must go, the sooner the better ... to rescue the nation from the escalating political turmoil,'' said former air force chief Asghar Khan.

Musharraf's popularity has suffered badly over the past year, as Pakistani troops have sought to seal the border with Afghanistan to prevent insurgents from using the lawless frontier area as a staging ground. Hundreds have died in the fighting.

''He is fighting America's war, but the majority of the people are now anti-American,'' retired Vice Adm. Ahmad Tasnim said of Musharraf. ''Everybody is asking, why should our own soldiers kill our own people?''

Musharraf declared a state of emergency on Nov. 3, suspending the constitution and arresting most top judges, including the Supreme Court's chief justice. He retired as head of the armed forces on Nov. 28, a day before he was inaugurated as a civilian president for a new term.

The former officers' criticism has been welcomed by Pakistan's opposition parties. At a press conference last month, the retired officers joined opposition politicians in calling for the restoration of an independent judiciary and for free and fair elections.

''This is understandable ... people of all ranks are genuinely worried by what will happen to the country and what will happen to them,'' said retired Gen. Ahmed R. Malik.

Khatami furious over election disqualifications

* Former president says this trend jeopardises the revolution and society’s wellbeing

Daily Times 8 Feb 08 - TEHRAN: Iran’s ex-president Mohammad Khatami labelled the mass disqualification of reformist candidates for parliamentary elections as a “catastrophe” which threatens the Islamic revolution, the press reported on Thursday.

“The disqualification by the executive committees is a catastrophe,” he said in comments first reported by the ISNA news agency late Wednesday. Executive committees working under the interior ministry last month disqualified over 2,000 mainly reformist candidates who were judged unsuitable to stand in the March 14 vote. Reformist officials have said the disqualifications have wrecked their chances of challenging the current conservative dominance of parliament.

Jeopardises the revolution: “To see that the credentials of good, Muslim people being rejected is a problem,” lamented Khatami. “But a big and more sorrowful problem is the trend (of disqualification) which I believe jeopardizes the revolution, the system and the wellbeing of society,” he added. Khatami’s comments were his latest outspoken attack on the vetting process, which also destroyed reformist hopes in the last parliamentary election in 2004.

The former president, who was seen as the main inspiration behind the main reformist coalition, has in the last months broken over two years of silence to make bitter attacks on the government and the handling of elections. “If the (disqualification) trend becomes permanent, it is very dangerous.

“We should, without narrow-mindedness, guard the true values of our revolution,” he said in comments at a memorial service for the late reformist politician ex-deputy culture minister Ahmad Borghani. In order to stand, candidates must meet a number of qualifications, one of which is sufficient loyalty to the Islamic revolution and the idea of clerical leadership enshrined by its founder Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini

The second phase of vetting is now being carried out by supervisory committees of the Guardians Council, which conducts further investigations into the hopefuls approved by the interior ministry. Khomeini’s own grandson Ali Eshragi was disqualified at this stage after investigators asked neighbours questions over his personal life, it emerged on Wednesday. The Guardians Council itself will give the final say on the candidates and is to publish the final list of those allowed to stand on March 4. afp

Official: al - Qaida Near Tipping Point?

By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS Published: February 7, 2008

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Al-Qaida's embrace of violence may be undermining the terrorist group's support in the Muslim world, the nation's top intelligence official said Thursday.

''The question becomes, are we reaching a tipping point to witness the decline of this radical behavior?'' said Director of National Intelligence Mike McConnell at a House Intelligence Committee hearing. ''We don't know but we are watching it very closely.''

Most victims of al-Qaida bombings and attacks are Muslims, McConnell said. In Iraq, the violence perpetrated against Iraqis by insurgents associated with al-Qaida pushed local tribes to turn against the group and has led to improved security, he said, adding that the same pattern may take hold elsewhere.

''In the last year to 18 months, al-Qaida has had difficulty in fundraising and sustaining themselves,'' McConnell said.

CIA Director Gen. Michael Hayden said there seems to be increasing willingness in the Islamic world to question al-Qaida's vision. As evidence, he pointed to the fact that al-Qaida's second-in-command, Ayman al Zawahiri, now has a Web site to which readers can submit questions.

''I think it is a remarkable step and I don't think reflective of overconfidence on the part of al-Qaida leadership,'' Hayden said.

More than 1,300 Pakistanis -- civilians and troops -- were killed in terrorist attacks and armed clashes in 2007, more than in the six previous years combined.

''Pakistanis have generally viewed (al-Qaida) to be more a threat externally, to us, for example, than it is to them. They no longer see that. What we have is a nexus of al-Qaida and Pashtun separatists and extremists,'' Hayden said. ''This is a threat to the identity and stability of the Pakistani state. That's new.''

The United States is helping to train Pakistani special forces, the Pentagon confirmed Wednesday.

''The dialogue we are engaged in now is, how do we help them help themselves?'' McConnell said.

McConnell said he would like the United States to play a more direct counterterrorism role in the lawless tribal area of Pakistan that borders Afghanistan but Pakistan has not agreed.

''I would like to see us have much more aggressive activity, but what that connotes is a potential to invade a sovereign country. So that becomes a very problematic issue,'' he said.

Also in the hearing -- an overview of global threats to the United States -- McConnell said North Korea is continuing to enrich uranium and proliferate nuclear technologies despite its stated commitment to full denuclearization. Pyongyang missed a December 31 deadline for a full declaration of its nuclear program, he said.

He said the intelligence community has ''medium confidence'' North Korea is still enriching uranium, down from ''high confidence'' last year.

Russia and China are investing heavily in space, McConnell said, and may be developing a capability to strike U.S. satellites, including those that make up the global positioning system, or GPS.

''If the trend continues, Russia and China will have an increased ability to target ... navigation systems, and the effort will be to control our ability to use precision-guided munitions,'' McConnell said.

At home: Beautiful Afghan rugs are splendid poverty fighters

By Maria Puente, USA TODAY – 7 Feb 08

It's an age-old question: What can any one person do to fight global poverty? You can shop. For luxury rugs.

That's the answer offered by Arzu, a non-profit, for-benefit corporation that is bringing the traditional rugs of Afghanistan to the Western market while providing stable employment, education and health care benefits to female weavers and their families.

"This is a new trend in social entrepreneurship," says Connie Duckworth, president of Arzu ("hope" in the Afghan language Dari), a retired Goldman Sachs highflier. "The biggest empowerment for women is a job and the ability to earn income. The idea was to (find) the highest-quality high-end product that can be produced for export."

The answer: Afghan wool rugs, which have been coveted for millennia. But near-constant conflict in recent years had diminished rug production and quality and threatened the loss of traditional patterns and techniques.

Arzu aims to reverse that. It employs the weavers — so far, 700 women, plus their families, in 10 villages — and pays them a salary plus bonuses for finished rugs. Proceeds of the sales of the rugs, about $1,000 for a small one and up to $18,000 for large, are invested in village schooling and health care.

"Each rug is unique, and we know who made it and their family circumstances," Duckworth says. "They get away from the idea that charity items are junk made for tourists."

Since fall 2004, nearly 700 rugs have been sold through trunk shows in high-end markets around the USA, through the website (ArzuRugs.org) and through architects and interior designers. She hopes to produce up to 1,200 rugs a year soon.

No power? Don't be left in the dark - Power outages are an irritating fact of modern life — and so is stumbling around looking for a flashlight and cursing the darkness. Now Energizer is offering a family of lighting products to reduce the darkness, the stumbling and the cursing.

The Energizer Light On Demand line includes seven products, ranging from a nightlight ($24.99) to an All-in-One Light Center with four detachable area lights in a charging base ($70).

Some of the products have a "find-me" light: It senses