In this bulletin:

• Suicide bomb exacts huge toll at Kandahar dogfight
• Taliban suicide bomber attacks Canadian convoy, kills civilians
• UN Leads Condemnation of Afghanistan Suicide Bombing
• President Hamid Karzai Left for Qatar
• Karzai woos Qatari businessmen
• No Clash of Civilizations at U.S. Islamic World Forum
• Iraq-Afghan crisis need political solution: Ex-ISI chief
• Afghan student's defenders may doom him
• British Soldier Killed In Afghanistan
• Aust to play greater role in Afghanistan war strategy
• Troops likely to stay in Afghanistan until 2015
• Merkel stands firm on German refusal to deploy to southern Afghanistan
• Germany Faces Political Dilemma in Afghanistan
• Broader political consensus towards extending Canadian mission till 2011
• The national Post editorial board: The Liberals' many Afghan policies
• Kandahar needs more Canadian combat and reconstruction: Afghan leader
• Afghan soldier, several militants killed in clash in eastern Afghanistan
• AFGHANISTAN: Mass deportation from Iran may cause crisis, official warns
• Iranian firm sign $2mn contract for dam construction in Afghanistan
• Hamid Karzai's Leadership
• Investigation into mistreatment of detainees in our custody deliberately stalled, critics say
• Politicians need to back soldiers

Suicide bomb exacts huge toll at Kandahar dogfight

GRAEME SMITH - From Monday's Globe and Mail February 18, 2008

KANDAHAR, AFGHANISTAN — The worst attack in Afghanistan's rising insurgency has killed a major police commander and his men, weakening Kandahar's defences and rattling the confidence of an already frightened city.

Bloodstains, sandals, and hunks of flesh littered a rocky field on the city's western outskirts where an explosion ripped through a crowd yesterday morning.

Hundreds of men had gathered in the first warm days of the season to watch a dogfight, a popular sporting event, when witnesses saw a suicide bomber push his way into the throng.

Most estimates of the dead were far higher than the Interior Ministry's official count of 65: The hospital registered at least 74; Kandahar's governor said 80; and local health and security sources put the number at between 105 and 125.

The true scale of the carnage will likely remain a mystery because many tribesmen took their dead for burial without contacting authorities.

Even the number of injured cannot be known, said Sharifa Seddiqi, director of the city's hospital, because many people gave up on the jammed emergency wards and took their wounded for private care. "We can't know the real total," she said.

The death toll will probably surpass last year's suicide bombing in the northern city of Baghlan, which killed about 70 people, security officials say, and one death in particular will have serious consequences for the war: that of Abdul Hakim Jan, a well-known police commander.

Mr. Jan appears to have been the bomber's main target. An uneducated warrior with several tattoos and a fondness for blue clothing, his feud with the Taliban stretched back to the birth of the movement in 1992. He resisted the Taliban so fiercely in those early years, he said, that he once armed his wives with Kalashnikov rifles in case of Taliban attack.

Recently his band of auxiliary police served as guardians of Arghandab district on the city's northern flank, a role that grew more important after last year's death of another former mujahedeen, Mullah Naqib, who also protected that key district.

"He was the biggest, strongest commander in Arghandab," said Kalimullah Naqibi, Mr. Naqib's son.

Mr. Jan was relaxing on a blanket spread in front of his sport-utility vehicle, surrounded by bodyguards, when the bomber approached within a few metres and detonated himself.

"I saw two people with their heads blasted off," said Janan, 35, weeping at the scene. "So many people are dead."

Some witnesses described the bomber wearing a police uniform, but others disagreed. Several people claimed they saw frightened police firing at civilians in the aftermath, possibly killing up to a dozen people, but authorities did not confirm any shooting.

Malim Akbar Khan Khakrezwal, a former intelligence chief for Kandahar and now a prominent tribal elder, visited the blast site and inspected the corpse of the suspected bomber, wrinkling his nose as he leaned close to the remnants of the ruined body with short dark hair.

"He is a foreigner, I think," Mr. Khakrezwal said, referring to the bomber. "Where was our intelligence? Where was NATO? We have a lot of foreigners helping us, but they didn't find him. Why were they sleeping?"

The retired major-general, who belongs to the same tribe as the slain police commander, said Mr. Jan had not long ago confided in him about recent Taliban attempts on his life.

Insurgents telephoned him with threats, saying he should allow Taliban into the district or else face death. Mr. Jan defied the insurgents and the authorities later discovered - and defused - a cache of artillery shells wired to explode under the same dog-fighting field that Mr. Jan regularly attended. Another booby trap, a land mine on the road, also seemed intended for the police commander.

"The governor told him many times, stay away from the dogfights and other big ceremonies," Mr. Khakrezwal said. "But he said, 'No, I'm always at war, always fighting, and never killed so far.' "

A Taliban spokesman said it's too early to confirm or deny whether the insurgents were involved, but they are widely suspected. The Taliban have previously denied responsibility for attacks that inflict many civilian casualties.

Several sources described Mr. Jan's younger brother, Talib Aga, or his deputy, Ahmed Aga, as possible successors, but it's unclear how quickly they can repair the damaged police ranks. Estimates of the number of police killed alongside their commander ranged from 10 to 50, with others injured.

That may represent a significant loss; although such an important district may have hundreds of police on its official payroll, usually a small fraction of those forces exist.

The disorder within police ranks was aggravated over the weekend by Governor Asadullah Khalid's decision to fire between 100 and 250 officers in Maywand district, catching his Canadian allies by surprise. The police units were accused as a group of rampant corruption and relieved of their posts, a provincial official said; they have been replaced by freshly trained recruits from elsewhere in the country.

Ahmed Wali Karzai, provincial council chairman, said the losses and firings among the local security forces won't leave Kandahar any more vulnerable than before.

"Our enemy had a great victory," Mr. Karzai said, referring to yesterday's attack. "But the people of Afghanistan have lived with this kind of violence for 30 years. Most of them are not afraid."

But the city was uneasy last night: A mining crew collapsed a rock face outside the city after dark, causing a flurry of panicky telephone calls among residents as they tried to establish whether the loud noise was another insurgent attack.

Taliban suicide bomber attacks Canadian convoy, kills civilians

Canwest News Service Monday, February 18, 2008

KANDAHAR, Afghanistan -- For the second time in two days, a suicide bomber has attacked and killed dozens of Afghans inside an area of Canadian military responsibility.

At about 2:30 p.m. local time today, an assailant crashed his explosive-laden vehicle into a small convoy of Canadian armoured vehicles travelling along a highway near the town of Spin Boldak, a few kilometres from a busy Afghanistan-Pakistan border crossing.

The vehicle exploded, killing at least 35 Afghan civilians who lined the highway, according to the governor of Kandahar province, Asadullah Khalid.

There are unconfirmed reports that three Canadian soldiers in the convoy were slightly wounded. A Taliban spokesman told Canwest News Service that his group is responsible for the attack. He described the suicide bomber as a Kandahari named Abdul Rahman.

The Taliban spokesman went on to claim, falsely, that the blast killed only Canadian soldiers and Afghan National Security Force members. "There were no civilian casualties," insisted Qari Yousuf Ahmadi.

He added that Taliban insurgents were not responsible for the deadly attack Sunday, when a suicide bomber blew himself up at a dog-fighting rally just outside Kandahar City.

That incident claimed the lives of at least 100 Afghans, Khalid confirmed at a press conference today. It was initially thought that 80 Afghans were killed Sunday. The attack was the worst terrorist strike in Afghanistan since Taliban insurgents were removed from power in 2001.

A hub for travellers going between the two countries, Spin Boldak is only a few kilometres from a Canadian forward operating base, where soldiers regularly launch regional patrols and train Afghan security forces.

Tens of thousands of people use the border crossing every day. Because a general election was being held in Pakistan, the border was to have been closed.

According to reports, many of the civilians killed in today's explosion were roadside vendors selling fruits and vegetables to travellers. More than 100 wheelbarrows filled with fruit were destroyed and 20 shops damaged, according to sources.

Khalid also said today that he had warned coalition forces against conducting patrols outside Spin Boldak, because Afghan forces were aware that a suicide bomber was in the area.

He said he first raised the issue Sunday, and repeated the warning a number of times. But he was ignored, he claimed.

A Canadian military official gave reporters at Kandahar Airfield only a cursory briefing of today's incident in Spin Boldak. A more detailed response is expected this evening.

UN Leads Condemnation of Afghanistan Suicide Bombing

Feb. 18 (Bloomberg) -- United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon led international condemnation of a suicide bombing in Afghanistan that killed as many as 80 people, one of the deadliest attacks since the fall of the Taliban in 2001.

The blast in the southern city of Kandahar yesterday ``is a tragic reminder of the insecurity'' that is undermining efforts to rebuild the country after decades of war, Ban's spokeswoman Michele Montas said in a statement in New York.

Ban's condemnation was echoed by the UN Security Council and the U.S. and British governments, which are the biggest contributors to the NATO-led force fighting Taliban insurgents in the South Asian nation.

The attack, and one in neighboring Pakistan's northwestern tribal town of Parachinar that killed about 40 people a day earlier, show al-Qaeda's influence over local insurgents, said terrorism analyst Rohan Gunaratna.

``Al-Qaeda has always called for martyrdom operations,'' said Gunaratna, head of the Singapore-based International Centre for Political Violence and Terrorism Research. ``The world's highest number of such attacks are experienced in Iraq, followed by Afghanistan and Pakistan.''

Yesterday's blast tore through a crowd of men and boys watching a dog fighting contest on the outskirts of Kandahar, Agence France-Presse reported.

Nobody claimed responsibility for the attack, which the regional government blamed on the Taliban, AFP said. Dog fighting is a popular pastime in Afghanistan that was banned by the Taliban during the movement's 1996-2001 rule.

The bombing was ``one of the deadliest in Afghanistan in recent years,'' Ambassador Ricardo Alberto Arias of Panama, which holds the rotating presidency of the Security Council, said in a statement posted on the UN's Web site.

The Security Council members ``reiterated their concern at the increasing threat to the local population, national security forces, international military and international assistance efforts posed by the Taliban, al-Qaeda, illegal armed groups, criminals and those involved in the narcotics trade.''

The bombing was a ``cowardly and abhorrent act of terrorism,'' U.K. Foreign Secretary David Miliband said in a statement. ``It is all the more important that we support the government of Afghanistan in pursuing those responsible and establish proper security in this and other cities.''

It is a reminder ``that the extremists offer nothing but violence and death,'' White House national security spokesman Gordon Johndroe said in a statement. ``The Afghan people will not allow them to stop the march to democracy and security.''

The U.S. and Britain have about 15,000 and 7,800 soldiers respectively under North Atlantic Treaty Organization command in Afghanistan.

Suicide bombings in Afghanistan have risen sevenfold over the past two years, with more than 80 percent of the attackers receiving training or shelter in neighboring Pakistan, the UN said in a report last year.

Most attacks in the two countries are carried out by the Afghan Taliban and Baitullah Mehsud's Pakistani Taliban group, Gunaratna said. ``Al-Qaeda has greatly influenced these groups to adopt the tactics of suicide bombing,'' Gunaratna added.

Pakistan's government has blamed Mehsud for organizing the Dec. 27 assassination of former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto.

The Taliban carried out 140 suicide bombings in Afghanistan last year, some of which showed ``unusual sophistication in planning and execution,'' the International Institute for Strategic Studies said in a report published Feb. 5.

The number of people killed in terrorist attacks and sectarian violence in Pakistan more than doubled last year to 2,116 from 967 in 2006, the Interior Ministry in Islamabad says.

President Pervez Musharraf says he has deployed 100,000 soldiers to the tribal areas bordering Afghanistan since 2003 to combat Taliban and al-Qaeda extremists.

Still, U.S. intelligence agencies are critical of Musharraf's efforts to control extremists and say al-Qaeda leaders have established bases in the tribal region bordering Afghanistan.

The U.S., which has pumped $10 billion into Pakistan since Sept. 11, 2001, with the aim of securing the country against al- Qaeda, is depending on today's parliamentary elections to further a transition to civilian government from Musharraf's previous military rule.

``As long as al-Qaeda maintains a presence in Pakistan's Federally Administered Tribal Areas, there will be no peace in Afghanistan,'' said Gunaratna.

President Hamid Karzai Left for Qatar

Arg, Kabul – H.E Hamid Karzai, President of the Islamic republic of Afghanistan left Afghanistan this morning for Doha of Qatar to participate in the conference titled “US- Islamic World Forum”.

In addition to his address of the Conference, which focuses on the opportunities to improve US –Islamic World relations, President Karzai will also meet with the Heir Apparent and Deputy Emir H H Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani and the Prime Minister and Foreign Minister H E Sheikh Hamad bin Jassem bin Jabor Al Thani and a number of Qatar’s investors and traders.

The President is accompanied on this trip by Dr. Rangeen Dadfar Spanta, Minister of Foreign Affairs, Dr. Zalmai Rasoul, National Security Advisor, Muhammad Amin Farhang, Minister of Commerce, Taj Ayoubi, Advisor to the President on International Affairs, Muhammad Umer Daudzai, Chief of Staff to the President, and Humayun Hamidzada, Spokesman to the President.

Office of the Spokesperson to the President

Karzai woos Qatari businessmen
Web posted at: 2/18/2008 1:51:31, Source ::: The Peninsula

Doha • The visiting President of Afghanistan, Hamid Karzai, yesterday called on businessmen in Qatar to invest in his country, saying it is blessed with immense natural resources and the economy is gradually becoming vibrant.

Addressing a luncheon meeting with leading Qatari businessmen at the Sheraton Doha, Karzai said: "We are not a poor country although we have several problems." Business and investment climate in Afghanistan is very conducive and returns are handsome.

Prominent Qatari businessmen, including the board member of the Qatar Chamber of Commerce and Industry (QCCI), Ali Abdul Latif Al Misnad, were present. Sheikh Khalid bin Thani Al Thani, Sheikh Ali bin Abdullah Al Thani and Sheikh Abdullah bin Thani Al Thani also attended.

There are five mobile phone operators in Afghanistan, including the UAE's Etisalat, and they are operating successfully. There are 4.6 million mobile subscribers in the country and the penetration rate is expected to grow at between 10 and 15 percent annually.

Afghanistan's economic development began in 2002. Before that there were no commercial banks in the country. Today, there are six local and 10 foreign banks operating in the country.

There was just one flight a day coming in and going out of the country. Now there are six flights a day, the President who was here to take part in the 'US-Islamic World Forum' said.

Al Misnad briefed the meeting about Qatar's booming economy and investment and business prospects here.

No Clash of Civilizations at U.S. Islamic World Forum

Amb. Marc Ginsberg, Sun Feb 17, 4:36 PM ET - Dateline Doha Qatar Day 2 of the U.S.-Islamic World Forum

If the sentiments expressed at this year's conference, sponsored by the Brooklings Institution's Saban Center and the Govt of Qatar, are any guide, Americans can perhaps be reassured that the once feared "clash of civilizations" between the U.S. and the Islamic world has not taken root in the Middle East. No doubt there remains tremendous disappointment with Bush administration Mid East foreign policy throughout this volatile region. Nevertheless, there is palpable desire among conferees to cooperate, communicate, and explore new policy changes to fix the gulf that has clearly divided America and other Muslim states since 9/11. That was not the spirit that I found at the conference a few years ago.

Presidential politics was front and center on the 2nd day of the U.S.-Islamic World Forum. Joe Klein of TIME magazine hosted a roundtable composed of prominent Muslim leaders from Palestine, Egypt and Indonesia to discuss what the Muslim world hopes from America in the next administration. In a tribute to how much the U.S. campaign has penetrated the hearts and minds of Muslims, there was an impressive display of unanimity among the panel. In an echo heard from home, the words "change" and "hope" were used often by the panel to describe what they most wanted from the next president. The U.S. presidential campaign is very much a front page story in all of the Arab media that I have seen here, illustrative of how much the world is focused on its ins and outs. Of course, it was no surprise that the Indonesian rep favored the candidate that had attended public school in Jakarta (hint, he is the current junior senator from IL).

In a further impressive display of how far collective Muslim sentiments have changed toward the U.S., the keynote speakers agreed that the next American president will have a new window of opportunity to reverse perceptions and attitudes that have brought America's standing in the Muslim world to new and dangerous lows.

Representing the Muslim world, Afghanistan's President Hamid Karzai, Qatari Prime Minister Sheikh Hamad Al Thani, and Turkey's Foreign Minister Ali Babacan all advised the next American president to focus on the fight against Al Qaeda and avoid inflaming Islamic sentiments that actually reject Bin Ladenism and could be enlisted in the struggle against extremism. Karzai urged the gathering to remind the American public that terrorism incited by Al Qaeda and the Taliban has taken far more innocent Muslim lives throughout Afghanistan, Pakistan and the Arab World in 2007 than the American people have endured since 2001. and that Muslim states have come up short combatting the threat of extremism in their midst.

U.S. keynote speakers included former SecState Albright and current UN Ambassador Zalmay Khalizad. Both urged their Muslim audience to help the next American president, whoever that may be, to help prevent Pakistan from becoming a failed state and preventing its nuclear weapons from falling into the wrong hands and to take a more assertive role in solving the Arab-israeli conflict. Much to the surprise of American attendees, there was nary a call for an immediate U.S. withdrawal from Iraq. Muslim attendees favor an eventual withdrawal of U.S. troops, but not a precipitous withdrawal that would leave Iraq in the hands of extremists.

Task forces on security, culture, human development have brought together panels of experts from the U.S. and the entire Muslim world to plan new initiatives. There was even an Iranian hip-hop artist in attendance.

Conferences such as these are essential bridges to rebuild renewed trust and confidence between the U.S. and Muslim nations. It is reassuring that the resentment and anger that hallmarked past years seems to be giving way to a far more open and receptive Muslim audience with perhaps unduly high expectations of what any president can do to help solve this region's problems. Memo to the next president: from Morocco to Indonesia, if we (and they) don't blow the opportunity, there is a chance to make the "long war" a far shorter war.

Iraq-Afghan crisis need political solution: Ex-ISI chief
18 Feb 2008, 0600 hrs IST , PTI – Times of India

TORONTO: Iraq and Afghanistan crisis cannot be solved by the use of force, time has come to cut a deal and that policy makers from the West should start considering a political solutions, Pakistan's former intelligence chief has said.

"Musharraf is absolutely right when he says look we have been defeated, we can't do anything more. Just like Russians who used 120,000 troops over a decade in Afghanistan, Pakistan now has deployed 80,000 troops while the Western countries has contributed 31,000 (including Canada's 2,500)," former ISI Chief Hamid Gul said in an interview.

"There is nothing more that the NATO or the ISAF or the Americans can do in Afghanistan. NATO will be defeated," he said, adding that the time has come to cut a deal.

Referring to Pakistan's inability to control its border with Afghanistan, allowing Taliban militants to travel freely between the two countries, Gul said "it is unreasonable to think that Pakistan could seal the border."

"This border is impossible to seal," he said. "The Russians could not seal it. The British could not seal it in 98 years of their rule over this area. The Russians stayed there for 11 years and they could not seal it. How can you seal a border that is 2,400 kilometers long? And it has very difficult geography, very difficult terrain."

The former ISI chief termed bombing of a madrassa by the US forces "a watershed, because this was done by the Americans, there were no terrorists there. Nobody here is surprised that the US was behind it."

Afghan student's defenders may doom him

An international outcry is brewing on behalf of the 23-year-old, condemned to death on blasphemy laws. But protests may increase religious conservatives' resolve to assert their independence.

By Bruce Wallace, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer - February 18, 2008

KABUL, AFGHANISTAN -- Family members describe Sayed Parwez Kaambakhsh as a frightened young man, sitting in a cramped Afghan prison cell alongside 30 hard-core criminals, hoping an apology will save him from execution for blasphemy.

But to the outside world, the 23-year-old student and journalist has become a cause: a symbol of Afghanistan's clashing constitutional commitments to freedom of expression yet also to Islamic law that allows apostasy to be punished by death. His sentence, imposed after a closed-door trial during which he was not permitted a lawyer or a hearing, has become a rallying cry for foreign critics who want Afghanistan to hew to international norms on human rights.

The question now is whether international protests will save Kaambakhsh from a firing squad, or instead stiffen the spines of religious conservatives who fear that Afghanistan's morals are being diluted by imported Western values.

The student's troubles began when he downloaded an article written by an Iranian writer living in Europe that questioned the Islamic precept of allowing men to take several wives. Kaambakhsh, a journalist in the northern city of Mazar-i-Sharif, was arrested in October after he circulated copies of the article at the city's Balkh University.

He was convicted and sentenced to death on Jan. 22. Kaambakhsh has told his family he expects to die, but many Afghans expect the death sentence to eventually be rescinded. The student still has the right to appeal to two higher courts and, as a last resort, President Hamid Karzai has authority to commute his penalty to a jail term.

"We have talked to experts in Sharia [Islamic] law who say there are no executions for blasphemy when the accused apologizes," said Sayed Yaqub Ibrahimi, the condemned man's brother. "And my brother has apologized lots of times."

But many Afghans also say the mounting international pressure against the death sentence is creating a populist backlash against foreign meddling in the country's justice system. That hostility complicates matters for Karzai, whose room to maneuver is already limited by his deepening unpopularity and the perception that he is a U.S. puppet.

"These are the worst kinds of cases for Karzai," said Sherin Aqa Manawi, deputy head of the Ulema Council, Afghanistan's central body of religious scholars. "It was a normal case before the courts until the West made it into a big deal. But when the West interfered, they cornered Karzai.

"He is caught between showing the West that he's bringing democracy and human rights to Afghanistan," said Manawi, "and on the other hand showing Afghans that he supports their religious leaders."

Kaambakhsh's brother calls the sentence "a very emotional decision by the court," whose prosecutor and judges lacked the sophistication to understand the difference between downloading an article and writing it.

"The judges did not even know the difference between a keyboard and a monitor," Ibrahimi said.

Afghans who are aware of the debate are divided over the sentence. Some, -- such as Ahmad Romal, a 21-year-old Kabul University student -- argue, "If there is no death penalty, then these kinds of un-Islamic activities will continue."

Others say the sentence represents the religious extremism that was supposed to have been banished with the defeat of the Taliban in 2001. "We shouldn't let anyone implement laws like the Taliban did," said Mohammed Abraham, 65, a former teacher. "I hope they forgive him and give him a chance."

Organizations ranging from the United Nations mission in Afghanistan to Reporters Without Borders have joined a Western chorus urging Karzai to spare Kaambakhsh.

U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and British Foreign Secretary David Miliband raised the case with the Afghan president during meetings this month in Kabul. And NATO Secretary-General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer warned last week in a major speech to a security conference in Munich, Germany, that "there should be understanding from our Afghan friends that we have great difficulty to accept a death sentence for a young journalist for downloading an article from the Internet."

"Public support in our societies for our soldiers' presence in Afghanistan will erode," he said, "if we do not agree on the universal values we are defending, together with our Afghan friends."

Karzai has said only that "at the end of the day, justice will be done in the right way." Afghan critics of Kaambakhsh's death sentence fear that the foreign pressure could prove counterproductive.

"The international community should know that Afghanistan has its rules and laws," said Habiba Danesh, a parliament member who agrees that Kaambakhsh should have been allowed a defense lawyer and an open trial. Still, she said, "Afghanistan should be left to make its decision in light of its judicial system."

There is also lingering ill will from a 2006 case in which an Islamic court passed a death sentence against Abdur Rahman, a Muslim who converted to Christianity. After a storm of international protest led by the Bush administration, his conviction was dismissed for technical reasons and Rahman fled to Italy.

Some Afghans still argue that Rahman escaped justice. And they are suspicious about Kaambakhsh's motives. Manawi of the Ulema Council accuses many young journalists of "intentionally creating trouble in order to get famous, or even as a way to get citizenship in Western countries."

The condemned man's brother said pressure on Karzai from foreign governments can be helpful if it remains low-key. Letters to Karzai and the Supreme Court are fine, Ibrahimi said. But a drumbeat of foreign criticism could further sour public opinion.

"Afghans are an emotional people, and they take decisions emotionally," he said. "If there is pressure from outside, and people see it on TV, it will cause a big reaction by fundamentalist groups. Fundamentalist groups want to make an example of this case. They want to shock young Afghans. "The mullahs can turn people against my brother," he said.

British Soldier Killed In Afghanistan

Updated:11:56, Monday February 18, 2008

A British soldier from the 2nd Battalion The Yorkshire Regiment has been killed in Afghanistan, the Ministry of Defence has said. Next of kin have been informed.

The soldier died on Sunday evening when his patrol was hit by an explosion near Kajaki in Helmand province. Another soldier was hurt in the incident but his injuries are not life-threatening.   

In a statement the MOD said: "Just before 2100 hrs local time soldiers from the 2nd Battalion The Yorkshire Regiment, as part of their Operational Mentoring and Liaison Team (OMLT) role, were taking part in a foot patrol with 40 Commando Royal Marines near Kajaki, Helmand Province, when they were caught in an explosion.

Medical treatment was administered at the scene and both soldiers were evacuated to Camp Bastion by emergency response helicopter. Sadly one of the soldiers was pronouced dead on arrival. Next of kin have been informed and there will be 24 hour period of grace before further details are released.

A suicide car bomber targeting a Canadian military convoy detonated his explosives at a busy market in southern Afghanistan on Monday, killing 35 civilians, a police official said.

At least 28 people were wounded in the attack in Spin Boldak, a town in Kandahar province near the border with Pakistan, said Abdul Razeq, the Spin Boldak border police chief. Two Canadian soldiers were wounded, he said.

The attack follows Afghanistan's deadliest suicide attack when more then 100 people were killed in an explosion on Sunday at a dogfighting contest in Kandahar province.

Aust to play greater role in Afghanistan war strategy

Posted Mon Feb 18, 2008 - Federal Defence Minister Joel Fitzgibbon says Australia's input into the war strategy in Afghanistan has been substantially upgraded by NATO.

NATO has responded to pressure from Australia and agreed to allow greater access to intelligence information. Mr Fitzgibbon has been critical of the former coalition government for not being aware of crucial planning in Afghanistan.

He says Australia will now be involved in high-level meetings. "We just haven't been participating in these group meetings in the past," he said.

"Sure the former government would have from time to time talked to their counterparts, the secretary for defence, the secretary of state but we haven't been involved in the forums where the real planning has been undertaken. In future we will be."

Troops likely to stay in Afghanistan until 2015

Norway's defense minister has given her first concrete estimate of when Norwegian troops may be brought home for good from Afghanistan. Defense Minister Anne-Grete Strøm-Erichsen doesn't think soldiers can be withdrawn from Afghanistan for at least seven years.

She told newspaper Dagsavisen on Monday that NATO (and NATO member Norway) can't pull out until the Afghan army "functions well." That's likely to take another seven years, she said, noting that the Afghan army now has 40,000 soldiers, and needs at least 80,000.

Norway currently has around 500 soldiers in Afghanistan and another 200 will travel to the war-torn country next month. Around 150 will be brought home just before summer.

Norway's foreign ministry, meanwhile, is having trouble finding qualified ambassadors to send to Afghanistan and Sudan. Newspaper Dagens Næringsliv recently reported that the ministry is conducting another round of recruiting efforts for the embassies in Kabul and Khartoum, this time offering higher pay and better working conditions.

Afghanistan and Sudan receive around NOK 1.3 billion (USD 240 million) annually in foreign aid from Norway.

Merkel stands firm on German refusal to deploy to southern Afghanistan

The Associated Press, Monday, February 18, 2008 - BERLIN: Chancellor Angela Merkel stood firm Monday on Germany's refusal to deploy troops to southern Afghanistan, making clear that she plans to maintain that stance in the future despite pressure from allies in NATO.

Germany's Afghan mission is governed by a parliamentary mandate that is due for renewal in the fall. It caps the maximum number of troops at 3,500 and limits them to the country's relatively calm north.

"Our mandate is how it is. Beyond the term of the mandate, we have no plan at the moment to go to the south," Merkel told reporters. "We think we have a great deal to do in the north, and that the situation there is far from being so stable that we could now say that we will operate in the south in future."

Germany, along with other European allies, has resisted pressure from the U.S. and others to send combat troops to the resurgent Taliban's southern heartland. Officials argue that would distract from the task of maintaining stability and aiding reconstruction in the relatively calm north.

"I view with a certain amount of concern some discussions that are being conducted in NATO now," Merkel said. She recalled that the alliance had decided to give allies responsibility for particular regions, and that Germany had been asked to take on the north.

"The overall security situation in Afghanistan shows significant shortcomings — that goes for the south and the east, but that also goes for the north," she said. "I think the most important thing is that we show a certain constancy and stability toward the Afghan population in our commitment."

"It would be really bad if we, because it is a little bit quieter in the north, opened up gaps there, went to the south and left a vacuum behind in the north which the Taliban would immediately push into," Merkel added.

The chancellor also pointed to a need for greater coordination in Afghanistan, particularly with the government of President Hamid Karzai.

She said that, on issues such as the rebuilding of the country's police, too little was heard from Afghan authorities about what they would like to see happen.

German media recently reported that the government plans to expand by 1,000 the maximum number of soldiers in Afghanistan when parliament next renews the mission's mandate.

In addition, the weekly Der Spiegel reported Monday, without citing sources, that Germany is considering ending an arrangement under which the country's KSK elite unit is authorized to serve in Afghanistan under the U.S.-led Operation Enduring Freedom.

The reports are "premature and cannot be confirmed by me," Merkel said.

Germany Faces Political Dilemma in Afghanistan

DW - While experts say Germany will likely increase its military involvement in Afghanistan, the subject remains politically taboo. The gap between German rhetoric and reality is likely to increase as elections near.

The German Army's Afghanistan mission is testing Berlin's long-held prohibition against involvement in foreign combat missions like never before. Yet Germany's resistance has more to do with politics than moral qualms, experts say. 

The German government has spent recent weeks insisting that it has no plans to significantly increase its involvement in Afghanistan. It stood firm even as NATO allies, particularly the United States, pressured Germany to increase involvement in fighting Taliban forces in southern Afghanistan.

With national elections scheduled for 2009, elected officials aren't going to commit political suicide by proposing Germany fight alongside NATO allies in southern Afghanistan, said Thomas Bauer of the Center for Applied Policy Research at the University of Munich and an expert in German foreign affairs.

"The moment this government decides to send in combat troops to the southern part of Afghanistan, they will lose the next election," Bauer said.

Germany: a reluctant warrior - The Social Democratic Party (SPD), will try to win the next elections by portraying their coalition partners, Chancellor Angela Merkel's Christian Democratic Union (CDU), as pro-military. To win votes, the Left Party will try to portray both the SPD and CDU as warmongers. "Pushing this pacifist button" wins elections, Bauer said.

All of Germany's main political parties, with the exception of the Left Party, understand Germany has a global responsibility which includes sending forces abroad and want to increase participation in NATO's International Security Assistance Force (ISAF). But they are afraid of voter backlash, experts say.

Germans remain deeply uneasy about taking part in military missions. There's the specter of World War II and a long tradition of pacifism born during the Cold War.

This unease is shown by the limited scope parliament gave the Bundeswehr in Afghanistan. The military can send a maximum of 3,500 soldiers to work out of the relatively peaceful north of the country where it is involved in rebuilding as well as peacekeeping and stabilization efforts.

"It is important for NATO to be seen as a community that implements its security strategy as a whole," German Defense Minister Franz-Josef Jung said recently, while insisting that Germany will not participate in fighting in the south.

Increased involvement a tough sell - The German public is overwhelmingly opposed to increasing the presence in Afghanistan. Two out of every three say they want Germany out of Afghanistan as soon as possible.

This has led to a certain amount of dishonesty in the political discourse surrounding Afghanistan. Germany's troop contribution to a Quick Reaction Force is a perfect example of the divide between rhetoric and reality, said Citha Maass, the Afghanistan expert at the Berlin-based German Institute for International and Security Affairs.

Germany agreed to send an additional 200 combat troops in July to take over for a Norwegian contingent. This force will be based in the north, but will assist allies in other regions. These troops will have a combat component, Maass said.

"Instead of discussing publically that you need some combat function, the government tries to hide it," she said.

On Friday, Feb. 15, after denying press reports for days, the German government admitted it will discuss raising the number of troops in Afghanistan when the parliamentary mandate comes up for renewal in the fall. There's also the possibility of changing the length of the mandate so that it doesn't require renewal during election campaigning, according to press reports. Germany is, however, expected to stand firm on refusing to join fighting in the south.

Germany shirking its duties - Norine MacDonald has spent most of the past three years doing field research in Afghanistan as the president of the Senlis Council, a security and development think tank. She said Germany's reluctance to get involved with fighting the Taliban and al Qaeda forces in southern Afghanistan is outrageous and incomprehensible.

German politicians lack the political will and the political skill to speak about the reality of the threat in Afghanistan, MacDonald said, something which she feels is "deeply irresponsible."

"Germany is trying to create an alternate version of reality about Afghanistan," she said. "Unless you are going to go fight in the south, you are not part of the NATO efforts to stabilize Afghanistan."

Unclear political goals in Afghanistan - The Taliban and al Qaeda forces control secondary roads in Afghanistan's south and are moving closer to Kabul each month,. Of NATO members, only the United States, Canada, the Netherlands and Great Britain currently have troops are currently fighting in the South.

There's increasing worry among experts that the NATO mission could fail to contain the Taliban.

Part of the problem is that no one really knows what the ultimate goal is in Afghanistan, said Andreas Heinemann-Grüder, a senior researcher at the Bonn-based BICC, an organization which focuses on peace building and conflict resolution issues.

"The point is that they don't know what they're striving for," Heinemann-Grüder said. "What is ultimate goal for these combat missions? I don't see any political strategy behind the military effort."

For many Germans, the messier the situation in Afghanistan gets, the more reason for Germany to end its involvement. But it shouldn't take a terrorist attack on German soil for the country to realize that isolation is not an option, said Bauer of the Center for Applied Policy Research. Having the Taliban destabilize Afghanistan puts Germany at risk, even if it seems intangible to many people.

MacDonald agreed, calling Afghanistan Germany's "new back yard." "The world has shrunk so much we know that what happens in southern Afghanistan is happening on the border of every Western country," MacDonald said.

Broader political consensus towards extending Canadian mission till 2011

Lalit K Jha - New York, February 18, 2008 (Pajhwok Afghan News): As the Canadian Parliament is all set to debate; a week from now, the future of its mission to Afghanistan, there appears to be gradually developing a broad political consensus towards extending Canada’s military mission till 2011.

However, the exact nature of the future of Canada’s military mission, which as per existing Parliamentary mandate ends February 2009, depends on the “intense negotiations” that now follows between ruling Conservative and the Opposition Liberal Party.

A common position by these two main political parties of Canada would ensure the passage of the Afghan motion, which was tabled in the Parliament last week, without the support of two other parties Block Quebecois (demanding pullout after 2009) and the NDP (demanding immediate withdrawal).

While the ruling Conservative Party has 124 seats, the Liberals have 103 MPs in the Canadian Parliament against 51 of Block Quebecois and 29 of the NDP.

Statements coming from Capital Ottawa strongly indicate as the leaders of the two parties – Conservative and the Liberals – start negotiation, there could be some changes in the motion tabled by the Prime Minister, Stephen Harper, accommodating some of the views of the Liberals, as articulated in the open letter written by the Leader of Opposition, Stephane Dion.

“The mission must end – we must have a clear end date of February 2011, not a further review date that will lead us down the path of a never-ending mission,” Dion wrote to Harper and argued that the mission must be about more than the military.

It appears that there is some common ground between the two parties is also reflected in the motion tabled by the Canadian Prime Minister, which recommends extension of the Canadian mission till 2011 on the condition that NATO provides some 1,000 troops to the Kandahar region.

Referring to the response from the Liberal Party to Harper’s position on the issue, the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons and the Minister for Democratic Reforms, Peter Van Loan, said: “We are very pleased to see there is a considerable amount of common ground between the parties.”

Participating in a brief parliamentary debate on the issue on Friday, Peter Van Loan said: “We now have what I think can be truly called not a Liberal position or a Conservative position but a Canadian consensus. Part of that consensus is a view that the mission should end in 2011.”

The Minister’s statement was in response to a question from the Liberal leader Ralph Goodale.

“Does the government agree that Canada's mission in Kandahar, which must change to one of training, reconstruction and development in February 2009, must also have a clear end date in February 2011, not a vague approximation around 2011 and not just a review date, but a clear end date in February 2011? Does the government agree with that?” he asked.

Peter Van Loan further said: “There is considerable common ground on the most fundamental questions about the future of the mission in Afghanistan. Of course, the most fundamental of those questions is, do we wish to see the military mission in Afghanistan continue beyond 2009? On that issue there is common ground between the two major parties in the House of Commons.”

About the other two parties, the Minister said: “The Bloc Québécois and the NDP have a different view. That is fine. That is fair, but the important part is that we have worked toward a consensus. We will debate that in the House, but the most important thing is to arrive at a Canadian position that honours the commitments we have made in Afghanistan.”

One of the most encouraging elements of common ground between the leader of the Liberal Party and Harper’s government on the future of the mission in Afghanistan, Peter Van Loan said was his statement earlier this week that he did not believe politicians should be dictating operational decisions to our soldiers in the field.

“That has been the government's position on the question of Taliban prisoners and those who have been taken by our soldiers in the field. I am glad to see that the leader of the Liberal Party now agrees with us on the importance of those decisions and what information is disclosed being an operational question for the armed forces. I think that is an important piece of common ground that we have arrived at,” he said.

Terming it as one of the most important mission for Canada, Peter Van Loan said the Harper Government has been in constant touch with the NATO partners on this issue.

“The Prime Minister has regularly reported publicly and to the House on his discussions with other national leaders like the prime minister of Great Britain, the president of France, the prime minister of Germany and the like. We will continue to do that,” he said.

“What is important though is that we do have an element of burden sharing from our allies. That is something I know that the Liberal Party and the Conservative Party have in common,” the Minister said.

The national Post editorial board: The Liberals' many Afghan policies

February 15, 2008, by Marni Soupcoff - Editorial

It's now taken as an axiom by parliamentary reporters that no party in the House of Commons wants to fight a general election on the issue of the war in Afghanistan. This supposedly includes the Conservatives. But the temptation for leader Stephen Harper to go ahead and take his case to the country must be growing every day.

The Prime Minister has a coherent position: He is in favour of fighting the Taliban for as long as it takes to put Afghan democracy on its feet, but he has made continued Canadian participation in the campaign contingent on stronger support from NATO partners. He has not only stood up for Canadian interests on that stage, but he has displayed statesmanship at home by accepting the possible need for a fixed stop date for the mission and talking to the Liberals about a way that it can be seen through until that time -- securely, effectively and with majority support in the House. Perhaps the head of a minority government has no choice but to behave deferentially toward Parliament, but it's nice to see it happen, all the same.

The Liberals deserve credit for coming to the table with Mr. Harper, and for distancing themselves from the New Democrat bring-everyone-home-now ideology, which has a great deal of support in the Liberal ranks but which would hurt Canada's standing in NATO and jeopardize the credibility of future fighting efforts by our soldiers abroad. But the Liberals' mixed messages are beginning to give us a headache. Early this week, it seemed that the Liberals and the Conservatives had arrived at the practical basis for a parliamentary coalition on Afghanistan. Since then, the Liberal negotiating position has become less clear. Consider the following slew of contradictory signals.

The Liberal amendment to the government's motion on continuing in Afghanistan until 2011 demands that some other country's troops will take over the main responsibility for active counterinsurgency the Kandahar region. It does not state that Canada's overall force commitment will be drawn down -- only that the new mission priorities will be "training and reconstruction."

And yet: According to Liberal deputy leader Michael Ignatieff, the party does not want to "second-guess generals" by insisting categorically that Canadian soldiers cannot go into battle if they are needed. To add to the confusion, a Liberal press release issued Tuesday, after the late-night caucus meeting, says that "Canada's combat mission in Kandahar should end as scheduled in February, 2009."

That same press release tells us that the Liberals favour having Canadians remain in Kandahar until 2011, "providing security for reconstruction and development projects … and continuing Canada's responsibility for the Kandahar Provincial Reconstruction Team."

Put it all together, and the Liberal view seems to be that it wants the Canadian Forces in Kandahar, but not in combat, although it doesn't under any circumstances want to tell the generals not to fight. Meanwhile, Liberal MP Denis Coderre is telling the press that the full Canadian battle group would not, in fact, remain in Kandahar under the Liberal proposal -- and Liberal MP Keith Martin is saying the exact opposite.

Feeling dizzy yet?

If the Liberals were displaying such disarray and mealymouthedness in the midst of an election campaign, they'd be hemorrhaging votes to both the Conservatives and the NDP. And they already have more than enough problems defining a Liberal ideology in the face of a united right that has governed for two years without presenting them with social-conservative straw men to whale on.

Ask yourself this question: Do you want the head of such an obviously divided party trying to define and communicate military objectives to our field commanders in Afghanistan? That would truly be a fiasco -- one worse, all things considered, than if power were just turned over to Jack Layton, who could at least be counted on to fulfill a straightforward promise: get our people out of harm's way without dithering, quit NATO and leave the Afghans to the tender mercies of the Taliban.

Say what you want about the NDP, they are at least ramrod-straight-up about their total lack of spine.

Kandahar needs more Canadian combat and reconstruction: Afghan leader

2.16.08 - KANDAHAR, Afghanistan - More combat operations from Canadians, not less, is what's needed to squelch the insurgency in Kandahar, says one of the province's most powerful politicians.

But Ahmed Wali Karzai, who represents Kandahar at the national assembly, says the fighting has to be quickly followed up with aggressive reconstruction projects.

He made the comments in an interview as Canada debates whether its soldiers should have a combat role at all in Afghanistan. Karzai said there is no question the Canadians are needed on the ground.

But their focus should mimic that of the Americans in the province - targeted raids, often at night, that aim to kill or capture specific insurgents, instead of largescale military operations, he said.

"The night-time raids are the most successful thing since the war on terror started," Karzai said. "More of those raids would be an excellent idea."

Karzai, whose brother is Afghan President Hamid Karzai, said the targeted raids cut down on the number of civilian casualties caused by the kind of combat operations often carried out by Canadians and Afghan national security forces.

They also discourage people from harbouring the Taliban in their homes. Conducting big operations is like cutting off a hand when only the fingers are diseased, he said.

"Before, you go to a village and be involved there would lots of civilian casualties, there would be houses destroyed," he said. "Now the civilian casualties are very, very limited and the bad guys will be punished."

The night raids are most often conducted by U.S. troops operating in Kandahar as part of Operation Enduring Freedom, the U.S.-led military operation in Afghanistan that focuses directly on suspected terrorists.

They have targeted areas like Maywand, a district that has no significant Canadian presence right now, but also in areas where Canadians do operate.

But these raids are not always successful. In one raid in Maywand, it was reported that three civilians were killed and a fourth injured, though a spokesman for the U.S. forces could not confirm the number.

Locals also said that the suspects ran away. There is no hard statistic on the number of civilians killed or wounded during Canadian military operations in the last two years.

It's believed 31 civilians were killed by air strikes during Canada's largest military offensive, Operation Medusa, in 2006. The winter is a slower time for combat in Afghanistan but many believe the fighting will resume in the spring.

Canadian soldiers are mostly focusing their efforts on four of the province's 17 districts - Zhari, Panjwaii, Spin Boldak and Sha Wali Kot. Their aim is to bolster Afghan national security forces rather than hunt the Taliban.

They've chosen to work in those regions because most people in Kandahar live there.

"You can only do so much with the troops that you have," said Lt-Gen. Michel Gauthier, the commander of the Canadian Expeditionary Force Command, during a recent visit to Kandahar.

"You've got to make those tough decisions, you've got to take Kandahar and bite if off one bite at a time and that's effectively what we've done here."

Karzai said that in his opinion, he hasn't seen one mistake made by Canadians in the two years they have been operating in Kandahar.

But he said it would be a mistake if Canada leaves, or if reconstruction efforts aren't stepped up immediately.

The last four months haven't seen enough largescale projects that will give young men financial incentives to stay away from the Taliban, he said.

"It's not any more a religious war, it has nothing to do with religion any more," he said. "You pay him and he is fighting."

The Canadian military recently launched a $4.5 million road paving project in Panjwaii district that aims to hire more than 400 Afghans.

It's taken Canada two years to build up its goodwill in Kandahar, Karzai said.

Before then, no one even knew the Canadian military existed, he said, adding there is a perception that only the Americans can get things done.

"The Americans came first, they were the ones in the war against the Taliban and they were the first force here," he said.

Canada has about 2,500 soldiers involved in the Afghanistan mission, with the largest segment in battle group operations.

They'll get additional support in a few weeks' time when 3,200 U.S. marines are expected to arrive, though likely not all of them will be in Kandahar. Canada's current commitment to the NATO-led mission in Afghanistan expires in 2009.

There are duelling motions in Parliament from the Conservatives and Liberals on extending Canada's presence through 2011. A major difference centres around the extent to which Canadians should play a role in combat operations.

Both parties say that an additional 1,000 troops from other NATO countries would be required in Kandahar for Canada to remain involved.

The military has stayed away from commenting on the impact the additional troops could have on Canada's work in Kandahar. But in a technical briefing in Ottawa on Thursday, Gauthier suggested any help would be welcome.

"We're moving in the direction of the finish line. With more troops we could get closer to that finish line more quickly and we are going to get more troops over the course of the next year," he said.

"So there's the potential for 2008 to be a year of progress for the international community in Afghanistan."

Afghan soldier, several militants killed in clash in eastern Afghanistan

Associated Press, February 17, 2008 - KABUL, Afghanistan - Militants ambushed an Afghan army convoy in eastern Afghanistan, and several militants and a soldier were killed in the ensuing battle, the Defense Ministry said Sunday.

The clash happened Saturday while the soldiers were on patrol in a mountainous area near a military camp in Kunar province's Kandagal area, a statement from the ministry said. A number of militants were also wounded during the clash, the statement said.

AFGHANISTAN: Mass deportation from Iran may cause crisis, official warns

KABUL, 17 February 2008 (IRIN) - The Afghan government has once again called upon the Iranian government to suspend its deportation of thousands of Afghans living in Iran illegally until after winter to avoid a humanitarian crisis.

"We do not have the capacity to receive a large number of deportees from Iran," Shir Mohammad Etibari, minister for refugees and returnees, told IRIN in the Afghan capital, Kabul, on 17 February. "We will face a humanitarian crisis if Iran resumes a mass deportation of Afghans."

Iran deported over 360,000 undocumented Afghans in 2007, which caused an unanticipated humanitarian emergency in some parts of Afghanistan, aid agencies said.

With the onset of cold winter months, which are already responsible for the deaths of hundreds of local Afghan residents, the country's capacity to absorb returnees is limited, Etibari said.

In 2008, more than 17,000 Afghans have been deported from Iran, according to Afghanistan's Ministry of Refugees and Returnees Affairs (MoRRA). At least 7,000 of them, mostly single males, were deported since 16 January, according to MoRRA and the UN Refugee Agency (UNHCR), despite Iranian assurances on that day to suspend expulsions until spring.

Afghan officials have requested an urgent meeting with their Iranian counterparts to discuss this issue, Sultan Ahmad Baheen, a spokesman at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, told reporters on 14 February.

"We are still looking forward to the Iranians giving us a date for the meeting," Baheen said on 17 February. No one at the Iranian Embassy in Kabul was available for comment.

About 900,000 Afghans are registered refugees in Iran and are therefore allowed to stay an unspecified period, UNHCR said.

In addition, there are an estimated one million Afghans living in Iran who lack refugee status, according to Iranian media. Iranian authorities consider these Afghans to be illegal migrants who should be deported.

The Afghan government and the UN have acknowledged that "Iran is within its right" to deport illegal Afghan migrants, but have also called for the deportation to be "gradual".

Fewer Afghan refugees are expected to voluntarily repatriate from Iran in 2008 than the 7,000 that returned to Afghanistan from that country in 2007, UNHCR estimates.

"The low scale of voluntary return from Iran can imply that Afghan refugees receive good hospitality there and are not forced to leave," said Ahmad Nader Farhad, a UNCHR spokesman in Kabul.

A worsening security situation in Afghanistan, lack of employment opportunities and poor access to services such as health, education, drinking water and electricity are some of the major reasons which have contributed to a shrinking rate of Afghan refugee repatriation from Iran and Pakistan, found a report by Afghanistan's Independent Human Rights Commission in August 2007.

Iranian firm sign $2mn contract for dam construction in Afghanistan

Kabul, Feb 17, IRNA - Afghanistan's Energy and Water Ministry signed a two million US dollar contract with an Iranian firm Saturday for pilot studies over construction of 'Gol Bahar Dam' over Panj Shir River in north of Afghanistan.

According to IRNA corespondent in Kabul, the amount of contract would be spent for ecological and terrestrial studies, as well as assessing the technical necessities for constructing the dam.

Afghanistan Energy and Water Minister, Mohammad Esmaeil Khan told the reporters after signing the contract, "Construction of Gol Bahar Dam would lead to providing sufficient water to irrigate 60 hectares of agriculture lands in Kapsia and Parvan provinces, both in northeast Afghanistan."

Esmaeil Khan said that the dam would also produce 120 mega watts of hydroelectricity, but he refrained from offering more details about the time, exact spot, or predicted budget for its construction.

He then informed about the reconstruction of Sultan Dam in Gaznay province by a private firm company based on a contract worth over 72 million US dollars. That dam was broken a few years ago inflicting heavy human and material losses.

During three decades of civil war most of Afghanistan's water and electricity infrastructure facilities have been destroyed and President Hamid Karzai's Central Government has launched a campaign to reconstruct them as of a couple of years ago.

According to the Afghan Water and Energy Minister it is possible to generate as much as 3,000 mega watts of electricity in that country, but the obstacles in the way include hard currency and fuel shortage, worn out networks' facilities, electricity transfer and its distribution throughout the country.

Esmaeil Khan believes Afghanistan's electricity shortage can be eliminated within a six year time span and there is no short term solution for the problem.

Afghanistan intends to construct thirty dams to produce part of the needed hydroelectricity using them.

The country generates 400 mega watts of electricity currently and buys 500 more mega watts from Iran, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan and Tajikistan. It is possible, according to experts, to generate 12,000 mega watts of electricity in mountainous Afghanistan.

Afghan President Hamid Karzai had short ago announced that his country would be an exporter of electricity in the region within a ten year period.

Military probe into alleged Canadian abuse hits brick wall

Hamid Karzai's Leadership

Monday, February 18, 2008 Letter to editor

Ann Marlowe ["Two Myths About Afghanistan," op-ed, Feb. 11] was right when she concluded that "[c]onsidering where it started, Afghanistan isn't doing too badly" and stated, "Today, most Afghans are living in the best conditions they have ever known, slowly growing their economy out of poverty."

Indeed, important progress has been achieved in a short period: the most progressive constitution in the region; an elected president and parliament; 5 million children, more than 40 percent of them girls, back to school; 5.8 million refugees returned; and 80 percent of the population with access to basic health care now saving the lives of 85,000 children a year.

Both Afghans and the international community deserve credit for this.

However, when Ms. Marlowe opined that this progress somehow occurred without President Hamid Karzai's leadership, she strayed into the realm of myth and illusion.

In fact, the very progress that she commends is a direct result of the courage and determination of Afghanistan's first democratically elected president. Working in concert with the United States, Europe, NATO and regional neighbors, Mr. Karzai has been at the forefront of the struggle against the dual enemies of extremism and poverty.

Serious challenges remain. Afghanistan still represents the front line in the global fight against extremism. This is a joint effort. Success will depend on our common resolve and shared vision for a safe and brighter future.

MASOOD AZIZ, Political Counselor, Embassy of Afghanistan, Washington

Investigation into mistreatment of detainees in our custody deliberately stalled, critics say

PAUL KORING - From Monday's Globe and Mail February 18, 2008 at 5:00 AM EST

After more than a year, the criminal probe into whether Canadian soldiers beat and abused Afghan detainees while military police turned a blind eye remains incomplete and critics say it is being deliberately dragged out.

No charges have been laid, there's no hint when the investigation might end and one person is dead: An Afghan intermediary sent by investigators to try to make contact with the alleged victims was killed by the Taliban.

The Canadian Forces National Investigation Service, the special military police unit conducting the investigation, rejects accusations that it is running out the clock. "It's absolutely a top priority," said Captain Cindy Tessier, referring to Operation Camel Spider, as the probe has been dubbed. Capt. Tessier said five investigators have been working on the case full-time for a year; more than 70 people have been questioned in three countries and huge piles of documents have been sifted and read. But she could offer no estimate as to when the investigation might wrap up.

Amir Attaran, the University of Ottawa law professor who uncovered the suspicious and unexplained pattern of injuries among detainees, is not convinced the military is serious in its belated and long-running efforts to investigate.

"When the military is investigating the military, which is inconvenient for the military, is it any wonder that the military rags the puck?" he said.

Meanwhile, the military medical records for detainees from the spring of 2006 - when the detainees were allegedly abused and beaten and then treated by Canadian doctors at the main base on Kandahar Air Field - have mysteriously gone missing. "No one at KAF has an explanation for the missing Roto 1 files other than to speculate that it was poor organization," says one report by a CFNIS investigator marked "secret," which was released heavily censored.

The CFNIS is a special unit, independent of usual military police reporting, that was created in 1997 with a mandate to investigate serious and sensitive matters related to Department of National Defence and the Canadian Forces. Its independence permits it "to conduct thorough investigations without fear of influence" from the military chain of command, according to the CFNIS.

Few details of its probe have emerged. Another CFNIS report, from June of 2007, admits that efforts to track down, win the confidence of, and then interview the three detainees allegedly abused while in Canadian custody have failed. "It would be highly unlikely that investigators will be able to interview the detainees" after the grim news that an interlocutor sent by investigators "had been targeted by the Taliban and assassinated."

Sources familiar with the general thrust of the investigation, who discussed its progress on condition that they not be identified, suggest that its focus has shifted from whether one or more detainees was beaten by soldiers or military police to why no military police investigation was launched at the time.

In fact, military police failed to investigate the beatings between April of 2006, when they occurred, and 10 months later when The Globe and Mail reported that Prof. Attaran had furnished the documents to the Military Police Complaints Commission. Once the story broke, multiple investigations were launched.

In its official account of the beating, the military admitted the detainees had been hit but concluded that military police had "used appropriate physical control techniques" to restrain the prisoners, even though their hands were already bound behind their backs.

But the government flatly insisted there was no cause for public concern as its policies regarding detainees guaranteed they were safe both in Canadian custody and after transfer to Afghan prisons. Since then, reports have shown that Afghan detainees have been tortured in Afghan custody, and the government twice changed its policy on handing over prisoners before stopping handovers altogether.

In additional to the CFNIS criminal probe, Canada's top soldier, Chief of the Defence Staff General Rick Hillier, ordered a board of inquiry to investigate all of the policies, procedures and training regarding the capture, treatment and transfer of enemy prisoners that he once disparaged as "detestable murderers and scumbags."

"We'll peel back the layers of the onion and we'll determine what, if anything, occurred, did that meet our policies and processes for handling detainees, do we have to improve anything," Gen. Hillier said. That board is still peeling and hasn't reported. In his last public comment, in December, Lieutenant-Commander Philip Anido said it was awaiting witnesses still not released by the CFNIS and that any report was months from completion. No interim reports or recommendations have been issued.

It has already confirmed it lacks the mandate to examine what happened to detainees after they were given to Afghan security forces - either under the new or old transfer agreements. Now that those transfers have been suspended, it is not clear what value any recommendations will have about a mostly changed system now no longer in use.

The board did not respond to written questions from The Globe and Mail seeking when it might conclude, what it was currently doing and how much it has cost during its first year of existence.

Meanwhile, the Military Police Complaints Commission, an independent, civilian body, also launched an investigation on receipt of the documents found by Prof. Attaran. Both that probe and a second MPCC investigation based on a complaint made by Amnesty International and the British Columbia Civil Liberties Association remain unfinished.

Prof. Attaran said he has been told "the MPCC is being obstructed by the Canadian Forces, who refused to give the MPCC evidence."

Stanley Blythe, chief of staff at the MPCC, said "good progress" has been made, although he confirmed that MPCC investigators are waiting - and have been for months - to interview witnesses not yet released by the CFNIS probe. Mr. Blythe said he could provide no estimate when either MPCC investigation might conclude.

Given the delays, which he believes the military is deliberately creating, Prof. Attaran said, "it is totally baffling to me why the MPCC has not invoked its power to hold a public hearing as it is entitled to do."

Politicians need to back soldiers

By Salim Mansur – Edmunton Sun 2.16.08

The debate over Canada's role in Afghanistan is the type in which democracies engage, and Canadian soldiers on a mission in harm's way need to know they have the government, Parliament and the people of Canada behind them.

This debate, however, will be heard beyond Canada and it will indicate, despite spin doctoring, that a parliamentary majority is lacking for Ottawa to meet its obligation to the UN-mandated and NATO-led mission to support the Afghan people and the elected government in Kabul.

It will send a message that Canadians are unwilling to see their soldiers engaged in combat missions, and that among the NATO members there is insufficient commitment to sending the minimum number of troops requested for deployment alongside Canadian soldiers in the Kandahar region, where the Taliban insurgency remains robust.

And the message will be unmistakable. It will tell the enemies of the Afghan people -- Taliban insurgents and al Qaida terrorists -- that while the West is not about to cut and run from fighting, it does not have the stomach to stay in the fight for the length of time needed to eliminate them.

This is what Osama bin Laden and Mullah Omar have been telling al Qaida and Taliban fighters from their hideouts in the mountainous caves of the Hindu Kush on the Afghanistan-Pakistan border.

This is also what the Afghan people fear, given their past experience of being abandoned by the West after the former Soviet Union withdrew its communist army of occupation in 1989. At stake are the hard-won gains made since 2002 by a society liberated from the cruel grips of savage fighters and foreign terrorists.

But there will be others -- Iranian clerics, Hezbollah and Hamas leaders, Syrian and North Korean dictators, Chinese leaders and African tyrants who have made wastelands of their countries -- hearing the message that the West, except for the United States, is reluctant militarily to secure interests beyond its immediate frontier.

The debate in Ottawa and in the European capitals is revealing about where the world's richest democracies stand in confronting Islamists -- the contemporary enemies of freedom and democracy -- and those who might well be the future enemies in a century that is barely a decade old.

Canada is a member of the original G-7 and a founding member of NATO together with Britain, France, Germany and Italy. The economy of these allies taken together exceeds $12 trillion. Their combined population is close to 300 million.

Yet the message over the Afghan mission is that these rich democracies are reluctant to send soldiers into combat against an enemy possessing neither an economy nor holding territory -- an enemy that is more or less a pack of medieval-minded brigands. Also an enemy that can well be eliminated with the required resolve, as the American soldiers have succeeded in doing in Iraq.

If Canada and its NATO allies are unwilling to engage in combat missions in Afghanistan, why then should anyone have any faith that the West will defend itself in its own backyard, or intervene militarily elsewhere to prevent Rwanda-type genocide?

[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.]