In this bulletin:

• NATO chief denies allies 'not active' in Afghanistan
• NATO chief asks for patience on Afghanistan
• Mines from Iran seized in Afghanistan - TV
• Iran expells 221 Afghan refugees by force
• Pakistan Warns US Not to Enter Northwest
• Japan Parliament Passes Anti-Terror Bill
• Norway to increase assistance to Afghanistan
• Poland to expand role in Afghanistan
• Moves to beef up forces reflect growing concern over Afghanistan: analysts
• Taleban say increase in foreign forces will not affect resistance
• Afghan paper says Taleban commander's sacking "difficult" to explain
• Suicide attack wounds one in Afghan south, bomber dies
• Would-be suicide bomber begs for pardon
• Pak hand in Afghanistan
• US wants Pakistan to bite the bullet
• Musharraf's Blame-Game Raises Pashtun Hackles
• 600-strong tribal Lashkar to ‘protect peace’
• Former Afghan leader says international forces trying to convert Muslims
• Canadians unable to convince Afghan intelligence to stop shackling prisoners
• We have to decide if we will stay in Afghanistan
• Charlie Wilson's Zen lesson
• Casualties of Charlie Wilson's war

NATO chief denies allies 'not active' in Afghanistan

8 hours ago

BRUSSELS (AFP) — NATO Secretary General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer has rejected suggestions that not enough allies are pulling their weight in Afghanistan, as he welcomed US plans to send more troops there.

"You cannot say the allies are not active enough, because they are active," he said in Brussels at a New Year media reception Thursday.

"If you look at the recent past, you see a number of allies stepping up to the plate. Even yesterday, we heard that Poland has made a very substantial and considerable offer, including eight helicopters -- which is a lot -- and ground forces for Afghanistan."

"Nations like Slovakia, Hungary, Georgia, France, the Czech Republic, Australia, Norway, Singapore, Azerbaijan -- all according to their capabilities ... -- have recently contributed or are contributing forces," he said.

The Pentagon announced Wednesday that US Defense Secretary Robert Gates is considering sending some 3,000 additional marines ahead of an expected offensive by Taliban-led insurgents in the spring.

"I am very happy and glad that the US government is in the process of taking this decision. I say again, the Polish offer was extremely substantial yesterday," Scheffer said.

NATO is engaged in its most ambitious mission ever trying to spread the rule of President Hamid Karzai's weak central government into more lawless parts of Afghanistan.

But the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) which the alliance leads has struggled to defeat the insurgency, particularly in the south and east near the mountainous border with Pakistan.

According to NATO figures, the number of troops in ISAF -- now provided by 39 nations -- rose from around 33,000 in January 2007, to almost 42,000 by December.

ISAF's military requirements are revised at least once every six months and, while they can move up or down based on current goals, the trend over the last year has clearly been upward.

Despite this, the United States has repeatedly led calls -- backed by commanders on the ground in Afghanistan -- for more troops and equipment, particularly helicopters.

With around 140 suicide attacks, 2007 was the bloodiest year in Afghanistan since the Taliban were ousted from power in late 2001, according to a United Nations survey.

NATO chief asks for patience on Afghanistan

People .com.cn 11 January 2008

NATO Secretary General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer on Thursday asked for patience from the international community on Afghanistan, arguing that instant success is not possible.

"Patience, with a capital P, is the word we need," he told reporters at a New Year reception at the NATO headquarters.

"The problem is that we, the international community, have no patience. We do not realize sufficiently that when you want to assist and bring this country on a process of development and reconstruction, it takes time," said de Hoop Scheffer.

Assisting Afghanistan is a long-term commitment, not necessarily militarily, he said. "The answer to Afghanistan is not military, but is civilian ... Reconstruction and development is something for the long haul."

The NATO chief said he was delighted that the Pentagon is considering sending 3,000 U.S. Marines to Afghanistan. But at the same time he defended the efforts of other allies in the Asian country.

"You cannot say the allies are not active enough -- they are active," he said.

Poland has just offered to deploy eight helicopters plus ground forces in Afghanistan, a contribution which is characterized by de Hoop Scheffer as substantial.

Slovakia, Hungary, France, the Czech Republic, Norway, as well as non-NATO countries Georgia, Australia, Singapore and Azerbaijan have recently contributed or are contributing forces, he said.

But he emphasized that the allies can do more. "I am not fully satisfied because I think we can do better and I still have ambitions."

The U.S. move is apparently a result of Washington's failure to secure more troops and equipment from other NATO allies. The United States has about 27,000 troops in Afghanistan at present, including 14,000 under NATO command. Source:Xinhua

Mines from Iran seized in Afghanistan - TV

Text of report by privately-owned Afghan Aina TV on 10 January

[Presenter] Kabul National Security Department officials have reported the seizure of three anti-vehicle mines.

According to the press release of the directorate, the mines were made in Iran. They bore the M-19 mark and were made in 1357 [1978]. Opponents of the Afghan government planted these mines along the highway in the Tangi Abreshom area to disrupt public order. Officials from the National Security Directorate seized them.

Iran expells 221 Afghan refugees by force

Text of report by private Pakistan-based Afghan Islamic Press news agency

Herat, 9 January: Iran has expelled more than 200 Afghan refugees by force. The head of Refugee Affairs Department in Herat, Shamsoddin Hamed, reported this evening that Iran expelled 221 refugees by force through the Islam Qala route to Afghanistan today.

He said: "It is extremely cold here and it is raining and snowing. However, Iran brought Afghan refugees to the Islam Qala port and forced them to cross the border in such a difficult satiation." Mr Hamed added that the Refugee Affairs Department settled them at some camps in such a difficult situation. However, the department is not capable of providing necessary facilities to them. Therefore, there is fear that the may die. On the other hand, the spokesman for the Foreign Affairs Ministry of Afghanistan, Soltan Ahmad Bahin, said this act by Iran was against all humanitarian and international norms and told AIP: "This act by Iran is against all humanitarian and international norms. We recently held talks ! with Iran about it. And we were told that Afghan refugees would not be expelled from Iran until Hamal [20 April 2008]."

A senior Iranian official has recently said that they would soon take steps against 1.5 million illegal Afghan refugees and would jail them as criminals. Foreign Minister Dr Rangin Dadfar Spanta lost his vote of confidence in Lower House because of the issue of expulsion of refugees from Iran last year and Lower House gave him vote of no confidence. This issue also removed from position the then refugee affairs minister, Mohammad Akbar.

It is worth pointing out that it has been raining and snowing in western provinces of Afghanistan for the past one week. Therefore, it is extremely cold there which has killed at least 30 people.

Pakistan Warns US Not to Enter Northwest

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan (AP) — President Pervez Musharraf warned that U.S. troops would be regarded as invaders if they crossed into Pakistan's border region with Afghanistan in the hunt for al-Qaida or Taliban militants, according to an interview published Friday.

Musharraf, whose popularity has plummeted amid a surge in extremist attacks in recent months, also told Singapore's The Straits Times that he would resign if opposition parties tried to impeach him following next month's parliamentary elections.

Pakistan is under growing U.S. pressure to crack down on militants in its tribal regions close to the Afghan border.

The rugged area has long been considered a likely hiding place for al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden and his top deputy Ayman al-Zawahri, as well as an operating ground for Taliban militants planning attacks on coalition forces in Afghanistan.

The New York Times reported last week that Washington was considering expanding the authority of the Central Intelligence Agency and the military to peruse aggressive covert operations within the tribal regions.

Musharraf told the Straits Times that U.S. troops would "certainly" be considered invaders if they set foot in the tribal regions.

"If they come without our permission, that's against the sovereignty of Pakistan. I challenge anybody coming into our mountains," he said in the interview in the garrison city of Rawalpindi. "They would regret that day."

Musharraf, who seized power in a military coup eight years ago, is also under growing domestic pressure.

The party of slain opposition leader Benazir Bhutto and the other main opposition grouping are predicted to make gains in the Feb. 18 polls. They have vowed to oust Musharraf if they emerge as winners. Musharraf is seen as vulnerable to impeachment over his decision to fire Supreme Court judges and suspend the constitution last year.

"If that (impeachment) happens, let me assure that I'd be leaving office before they would do anything. If they won with this kind of majority and they formed a government that had the intention of doing this, I wouldn't like to stick around," he said. "I would like to quit the scene."

Japan Parliament Passes Anti-Terror Bill

By HIROKO TABUCHI – TOKYO (AP) — Japan's parliament cleared the way Friday for its navy to return the Indian Ocean on a U.S.-backed anti-terror mission, after stiff lobbying from Washington in support of the measure.

Prime Minister Yasuo Fukuda said the new mission would be dispatched by the end of the month, launching a limited version of a six-year refueling operation that had been suspended in November.

Japan had refueled ships since 2001 in support of U.S.-led forces in Afghanistan, but was forced to abandon the mission last fall when the resurgent opposition blocked an extension.

The measure enacted Friday will limit Japanese ships to refueling boats not directly involved in hostilities in Afghanistan, a restriction aimed at winning over a public wary of violating the spirit of the pacifist constitution.

The United States had lobbied hard for the mission, and U.S. Ambassador Thomas Schieffer made a rare public foray into domestic politics on the issue by meeting with lawmakers to urge their support.

Fukuda's government was deeply embarrassed by having to withdraw the mission in November, a step that cast doubt on how far Tokyo can back Washington in its global war on terrorist groups.

To get the mission approved, Fukuda's ruling coalition used a rare legislative procedure to overrule an earlier rejection of the bill in the opposition-controlled upper house by a two-thirds vote in the lower house.

"The refueling mission is Japan's effort to do as much as it can, utilizing our ability," Fukuda said in a statement after the measure passed. "It is truly significant that Japan can rejoin the fight against terrorism."

Following the vote, Defense Minister Shigeru Ishiba promptly ordered ships to prepare for dispatch. The fleet should leave port in two to three weeks and resume operations in five to six weeks, the ministry said.

Fukuda and other ruling party lawmakers argued the mission was needed to fulfill Japan's obligations in the global war against terrorism and give the country a world role commensurate with its economic clout.

"Japan must join the world in the fight against terrorism," ruling party lawmaker Akio Sato told parliament ahead of the vote. "We must make a quick return." Schieffer cheered the passage on Friday.

"Terrorism is the bane of our time," he said in a statement. "By passing this legislation, Japan has demonstrated its willingness to stand with those who are trying to create a safer, more tolerant world."

The lower house vote, which approved the measure 340 versus 133, followed the upper house's rejection of the bill earlier in the day. Under a Japanese law last used in 1951, the upper house can only be overruled by a two-thirds vote in the lower chamber. The opposition accused the ruling camp of forcing its will on the people.

"This is a clear abuse of power," said Yoshito Sengoku, a lawmaker of the main opposition Democratic Party of Japan. "The government will now surely lose the trust of the people."

Japan's naval mission in the region the past six years provided logistical support to forces involved in the war in Afghanistan. It mainly supplied some 132 million gallons of fuel to coalition warships, including from the U.S., Britain and Pakistan, according to the Japanese government.

Public opinion polls show Japanese are gradually coming to accept a greater role for their troops abroad — as long as it does not involve combat.

The DPJ, the party that took control of the upper chamber in elections last year, opposes the mission because it says military operations in Afghanistan do not have the explicit support from the United Nations. The party also says the mission violates Japan's pacifist constitution.

Norway to increase assistance to Afghanistan

Source: Government of Norway, Date: 09 Jan 2008

Foreign Minister Jonas Gahr Støre has announced that the Government intends to increase Norwegian assistance to Afghanistan to nearly NOK 750 million in 2008. This is an increase of 50% on 2007 (ca 140 mill USD).

"Our aim is that the Afghans themselves should be able to take charge of their security and steer their social and economic development. A great deal of effort will be required before this is achieved. Norway therefore wants to promote stability, development and good governance," said Foreign Minister Jonas Gahr Støre.

"We are now developing an overall plan for Norway's civilian efforts in Afghanistan, and my trip to Afghanistan next week is part of this work. After my return, I will address the Storting on the Government's priorities," said Mr Støre.

Today the Foreign Minister had a meeting with Norwegian NGOs and researchers to present Norway's approach to Afghanistan in the coming year and to hear their views ahead of his visit.

Norway is also providing substantial military forces in Meymaneh and Mazar-e-Sharif in northern Afghanistan. The Norwegian forces are part of the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force (ISAF). ISAF is in the country at the invitation of the Afghan Government and is operating under a UN Security Council mandate, which was last renewed on 19 September 2007.

Poland to expand role in Afghanistan

people.com.cn 11 January 2008

Poland's Defense Minister Bogdan Klich said on Thursday his country will boost its role in Afghanistan after it reaches an accord with NATO partners.

"We have just finished the first round of negotiations on this with NATO. My talks with U.S. Defense Secretary Gates later this month would actually only aim to seal the proposal we have been made (by NATO in response to Polish requests)," Polish news agency PAP quoted Klich as saying.

"The Americans know we would like to boost our mission's visibility in Afghanistan by taking responsibility for a province under ISAF's jurisdiction," Klich said in an interview.

Having about 1,200 troops in Afghanistan as a part of the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force (ISAF), Poland has agreed to send 400 more soldiers.

Poland would also like a Polish commander to receive a senior overall role in the 41,700-strong ISAF force, which includes representatives from 39 countries, Klich said.

"If Poles take responsibility for a certain territory in Afghanistan and can fly a Polish flag there, a Polish general should become a deputy operational commander in ISAF," he concluded. Source:Xinhua

Moves to beef up forces reflect growing concern over Afghanistan: analysts

WASHINGTON (AFP) — A move to beef up US forces in Afghanistan with some 3,000 marines reflects growing concerns about rising insurgent violence and turmoil in neighboring Pakistan, analysts said Thursday.

But the proposed deployment is seen as a stop-gap measure at a time when some experts say a revamped, unified strategy is needed to halt a worrying two-year slide in public confidence in the government of President Hamid Karzai.

"It's not a radical change in strategy, it's a selective application of power," Michael O'Hanlon, a military expert at the Brookings Institution, said of the proposal to send more troops.

US Defense Secretary Robert Gates is slated to review the military's request for the deployment of a marine air-ground task force on Friday.

No final decision is expected immediately, but the proposal calls for sending the 3,000-man force to Afghanistan's Helmand province by April, in time to confront a "spring offensive" by Taliban insurgents.

Gates told reporters Thursday that he would weigh the impact on US forces, as well the implications of taking pressure off US allies to fulfill their commitments.

But he said, "I also am very concerned that we continue to be successful in Afghanistan and that we continue to keep the Taliban on their back foot and that we defeat their efforts to try and come back."

Pentagon officials stressed that the deployment would be a one-time only, seven month mission to help fill a shortfall in combat forces that had been promised by NATO but never materialized.

Analysts and some military officials believe that Islamic extremists are shifting their focus from Iraq to south Asia, and will do so increasingly as the war in Iraq winds down.

Currently, there are about 26,000 US troops in Afghanistan, most of them under a 40,000-strong NATO-led force that has assumed responsibility for security throughout the country over the past two years from US forces.

But the expanded NATO mission, which has more than doubled the number of foreign troops in Afghanistan, has coincided with the rise of a Taliban insurgency that has sent violence soaring.

"If you look at the last year, the increase of violence, particularly in the south, has been to the tune of 60 percent," said Ali Jalali, a former Afghan interior minister.

"At the same time, the situation across the border in Pakistan is deteriorating," he said. Jalali said more US troops were welcome but the problems are deeper.

The United States and NATO lack an overarching strategic vision for Afghanistan and the region, he said. Poor coordination among the collection of foreign military forces in Afghanistan and with the Afghan government and its forces have resulted, according to Jalali.

"They can win any battle, but there is no strategy," he said. "Since last year, NATO has won many battles but the strategic situation is worse than last year."

Jalali and others say a strategy for Afghanistan is incomplete unless it also encompasses nuclear armed Pakistan, whose tribal border areas have become safe havens for Taliban and al-Qaeda.

"What we need to do is look at the situation regionally," said retired Colonel David Lamm, a former chief of staff of the US military command in Afghanistan in 2004 and 2005.

"One of the things we really need to reassess is, particularly hedging our own strategic bets on what may be happening inside of Pakistan, what sort of military structure inside Afghanistan would give you the best advantage, and the best head start if something bad happened inside Afghanistan," Lamm said.

And yet, the commander of the NATO-led force in Afghanistan, General Dan McNeill, has no authority for military planning beyond Afghanistan.

Pakistani military leaders, meanwhile, bristle at any suggestion of US military operations inside Pakistan.

But Sam Brannen, a fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Affairs, said the assassination of former Pakistani prime minister Benazir Bhutto has pointed up "a clear need in the view of US policy makers to plan for a growing instability from Pakistan."

"Internally in Pakistan, turmoil has further distracted and distanced Musharraf from the problem of extremists fighting against external elements. It has given them a safer haven than ever before," he said.

Taleban say increase in foreign forces will not affect resistance

Text of report by private Pakistan-based Afghan Islamic Press news agency

Kandahar, 10 January: The Taleban say any increase in the number of foreign troops will have no negative effect on their resistance.

Referring to reports that America is considering dispatching an additional 3,000 troops to suppress the Taleban, the spokesman for the Taleban, Zabiollah Mojahed told Afghan Islamic Press [AIP]: "The Americans want to instil fear in Afghans but Afghans are not scared of an increase in troops. The Russians had 120,000 soldiers in Afghanistan. However, they failed to invade this country. The increase in number of foreign troops cannot negatively affect the Taleban's resistance." He claimed the killing of many foreign soldiers in Afghanistan last year and said: "Some 2,160 soldiers were killed in Taleban's suicide attacks, face to face fighting, mine blasts and different other attacks in 2007. And therefore, now foreigners want to fill this vacuum by sending fresh troops."

The Taleban spokesman said: "If fresh troops are sent to Afghanistan and the number of foreign troops is increased in Afghanistan, the Taleban will easily attack them. They will attack them on roads, bazaars and their bases." Asked whether the Taleban had any plans to carry out operations in forthcoming spring, the Taleban's spokesman who was speaking to AIP from an undisclosed location by telephone on Thursday morning said: "We will not remain motionless in forthcoming spring, but will increase our attacks on the enemy. We want to use any kind of tactics against the enemy, including suicide attacks and different other attacks."

The Taleban spokesman's figure for casualties caused by foreign troops seems to be exaggerated and foreign forces admit the killing of only dozens of their troops in Afghanistan. However, without a doubt, foreign forces are facing numerous problems in Afghanistan. Therefore, many military and political leaders believe that political efforts are also necessary for solving the issue.

On the other hand, it does not seem that the Taleban are prepared to ente r into political talks. The Taleban say they will not hold any talks with the government as long as foreign forces are present in Afghanistan. It is worth pointing out that reports coming from Washington say Pentagon is considering sending an additional 3,000 troops to Afghanistan to prevent Taleban attacks in spring.

Afghan paper says Taleban commander's sacking "difficult" to explain

Text of article in English by Wazhma Raeeq entitled: "Taleban not split", published by independent Afghan newspaper Kabul Weekly on 9 January

The dismissal of Mullah Mansur "Dadollah" by Taleban leader Mullah Omar was the biggest decision taken against Taleban commanders in the past six years.

Mansur was appointed as the Taleban's leading commander early last year after the death of his brother Mullah Dadollah. Until two weeks ago he had been responsible for conducting the Taleban's military operations in the southern provinces. On 30 December, news agencies reported the news of his dismissal.

The so-called spokesperson for the Taleban, Zabiollah Mojahed, told the media that Mansur had been removed following a personal order of Mullah Omar.

The removal of Mansur came after two foreign diplomats -EU representative Michael Semple and UNAMA employee Mervyn Patterson -had been asked by the government to leave Afghanistan. The reason cited for their deportation was interfering in areas other than their mandate and thus endangering Afghanistan's security.

The coincidence of the diplomats' departure and the dismissal of Mansur raised questions on whether there were negotiations taking place between them.

Although the Taleban reject any such connection, the governor of Helmand Asadollah Wafa told the media: "Michael Semple and Patterson provided Mullah Mansur with money and equipment such as satellite phones, computers and GPS devices during their trip to Helmand."

In a phone conversation with Kabul Weekly, Taleban spokesperson Zabiollah also denied any deals with the diplomats. "Mansur was against negotiations with foreigners more than anyone else," he said. According to Zabiollah, Mansur was dismissed because he had sometimes failed to obey Mullah Omar's orders. "He was taking action which were against the policies of the Islamic Emirate," he explained, but did not provide Kabul Weekly with details of Mansur's actions.

According to Zabiollah, change of personnel within the Taleban is not unusual and soon the Taleban leadership will appoi! nt Mansur's replacement. The question now, however, is whether Mansur' s dismissal means that the Taleban are divided into two or more.

"The Taleban movement is not a political party and as such does not have a common policy for all its members. It is a movement that has only one common goal - all foreigners must leave Afghanistan. At the same time members have different opinions and views on different issues," says a political analyst, Wahed Mushda, who was a former top official at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs during Taleban rule.

According to him, members of most jihadi parties like Jamiat, Hezb-e Eslami, and even Khalqi fought alongside the Taleban.

"The secret of the Taleban is choosing and obeying Mullah Omar as their leader. Therefore Mansur's dismissal does not mean that a split has occurred in the Taleban movement," says Mushda.

According to Mushda, [reports of] a contact between the two foreign diplomats and Mansur can be seen as an attempt to break the Taleban ranks. "It was conducted by western intelligence! services and Pakistani circles, but with the dismissal of Mansur their plans have failed," he adds.

Meanwhile Mushda believes that it is misleading to think that the Pakistani intelligence service is currently collaborating with the Taleban.

"Other secret services have their own agenda in Afghanistan. I do not know if the CIA is counting on the continuation of the war, but the UK wants to end this war through negotiations. This means that so far the USA and the UK has not pursued a common policy on Afghanistan. Their intelligence services are playing a part [in the Afghan operation] but only in their own interest," says Mushda.

Journalist and political expert Dad Nurani looks at Mansur's dismissal from a different angle: "Appointing Mansur as replacement for his killed brother revealed the attitude of the Taleban leadership towards their personnel. Originally from Helmand, he proved unable to recruit new people."

According to Nurani, the Alizai and Nurzai tribes play a leading role in Helmand Province. This means Mans ur's dismissal will not have a large impact.

"The link between the western diplomats and the Taleban clearly reveals disagreements between the USA and the UK. This becomes particularly obvious with things that happened in Musa Qala last year," he says.

In the 1990s, the western media portrayed the Taleban as one of Islamic political parties, but over the last six years this view has changed. At the moment most western news agencies believe that the Taleban are linked to the ISI and Al-Qa'idah, and that the Taleban have recently established connections with European intelligence services.

"The killing of Abdul Ahaq for supporting the UK's policy in the last days of the Taleban's rule, and the fact that Karzai embraced US policy when he took over, raised many questions and makes the Afghan issue difficult to explain.

In a recent interview, one of the top Taleban leaders clearly stated: "European and Asian countries help the Taleban." We do not know if he meant Russia as a European country or whether there are other Europeans who help the Taleban," says Mushda.

At the moment it is difficult to give a clear explanation for Mansur's dismissal, but with time the truth will surface.

Suicide attack wounds one in Afghan south, bomber dies

Text of report by Afghan independent Tolo TV, on 10 January

[Presenter] A suicide attack has wounded a man in Qalat, capital of Zabol Province. The suicide bomber was killed.

Spokesman for the governor of Zabol says it is not clear who the suicide bomber was targeting. The attack occurred at 1200 [local time, 0730 gmt] on 10 January.

Would-be suicide bomber begs for pardon

January 09, 2008 - A TEENAGE would-be suicide bomber begged for a presidential pardon in Afghanistan as he was paraded in front of media cameras with his deadly vests displayed behind him.

The 18-year-old, named as Hameedullah, said he had worked as a labourer in Pakistan and had been influenced by a villager loyal to the Pakistani Taliban to carry out deadly attacks against foreign troops and "infidel" Afghan forces.

"I came to Afghanistan, to Helmand province," he said at a press conference held by Afghan counter-terrorism police.

"I was handed over to other Taliban. They were preaching jihad all day long. They said Afghanistan is invaded by foreign troops and Afghan police are the army are infidels as well.

"After days of preaching one day they said 'who is ready to carry out a suicide attack?' I said I am. I apologise to the Afghan people and President (Hamid) Karzai. I beg them to forgive me."

The teenager was arrested together with another suicide attacker, Alaam Gul who is also from Quetta, Pakistan, 10 days ago in Helmand province. They were plotting suicide attacks against Helmand's governor and foreign troops, and were arrested along with two Afghan associates, he said.

Their suicide vests were wired to remote-controlled detonators and featured a button they could press near the target. "The explosives in these suicide vests are new to us," counter-terrorism police chief Abdul Manaan Farahi said.

"They are very strong, dangerous and powerful and not of the kind available in Afghanistan. It is either provided by a foreign country or they have got it from the black market," he said.

Mr Karzai has previously pardoned a 14-year-old Pakistani who was arrested just before carrying out a suicide attack.

Pak hand in Afghanistan

The Statesman 01.11.08 - While it may be quite a while before the perpetrators of the assassination of Benazir Bhutto on 27 December are indisputably identified, the tragic incident serves to highlight, among other things, one dangerous fallout of Pakistan’s relentless pursuit of geopolitical ambitions at the cost of stable and beneficial statecraft.

It is not yet known if Al-Qaida or the Taliban were behind the assassination but the continuing presence of members of these two Islamist groups in Pakistan territory is officially identified as a major contributor to the turmoil within the country. Besides, it is a situation which continues to cause concern not only to Afghanistan and India but also to the major players in the war on terror.

However, the present rulers of Pakistan have been ignoring protestations being made by the concerned countries and, consequently, Islamist forces continue their activities which, apart from Pakistan, also directly impinge on the security of Afghanistan and India.

In the wake of the assassination, it is doubly important to examine the reasons behind Pakistan’s covert encouragement of Islamist forces. The core reason for Pakistan’s behaviour is the resurrection of its traditional goal of creating a space for strategic depth in Afghanistan in order to permanently harm India. Not surprisingly, this has been facilitated by changing perceptions in the United States and its Western allies.

Several recent developments indicate that six years since 9/11 the Washington-led alliance is tired of camouflaging its repeated failures to make a significant headway in normalising and developing Afghanistan and is in its desperation seeking a short-cut to sneak out of its commitment to the fledgling republic.

Such a tendency on the part of the alliance would work fine for Pakistan’s interests, as happened when the United States unceremoniously abandoned Afghanistan after the end of the Soviet occupation in the post-1989 period, and effectively allowed Islamabad to set up the fundamentalist Taliban to act as its surrogate in Kabul. For six years since 26 September, 1996 when the Taliban captured Kabul, this Pakistan-led arrangement was firmly in place until the Twin Towers came down in New York City and the war on terror was born.

Roughly for about two years since December 2001 when the Taliban regime was thrown out and the international community gathered around Afghanistan to repair its wounds and restore it to democratic and developmental health, the Taliban and Al-Qaida lay disjointed in safe havens in the North-West Frontier Province. All through this period, Pakistan’s carefully manufactured model of strategic depth in Afghanistan lay in tatters, and diplomats and analysts felt that Islamabad had at last given up on the concept.

But Islamabad apparently bade its time and was quick to sense its opportunity in playing its designated role of an ally in the war on terror. An enraged Bush administration is now broadcasting to the world that it has been continuously hoodwinked by Pakistan as far as the anti-Taliban campaign is concerned.

Firstly, despite the years and billions of dollars spent in the war on terror, the Taliban has not only grown from strength to strength but has also succeeded in enlarging its presence inside Afghanistan and to some extent in neutralising peace and security and political and economic development in the country. Thus, while Pakistan has ensured that the Taliban become a stronger threat to the democratic Afghan government, it has also succeeded in diverting anti-terror US funds and weapons to gear up for a potential military conflict with India.

Several trends in Afghanistan are now clearly discernible. The most important of these is the success of Pakistan in making a mockery of fulfilling its obligations in the so-called war on terror. It has not merely waged a largely sham military campaign against the Taliban in its south-western border and taken every care to ensure that the Taliban and Al-Qaida can operate with complete freedom and facility in the North-West Frontier Province. To the infinite chagrin of Bush administration officials, Pakistan has been plainly cheating on both military exercises and expense reimbursements.

It is significant that Islamabad has not cared to change its course during the last two years or so when Washington first admitted that President Pervez Musharraf had been consistently hoodwinking it by not sincerely going after the Taliban in particular; there were of course spectacular eliminations and arrests of a few senior Al-Qaida and Taliban operatives within Pakistan, but Islamabad was patently more sincere about weakening indigenous Islamists (who were political opponents to the Musharraf regime) rather than Afghan Taliban and non-Afghan Al-Qaida. 

Even in these cases, Islamabad often acted only after repeated prodding by Washington which first detected the presence of these elements in Pakistani territory and passed on the intelligence to Pakistan.

An increasingly unhappy US administration seems to be especially piqued over the recent realisation that Islamabad has also short-changed it in reimbursements of claimed inflated campaign expenditure. The administration has since come up with a new disbursement plan earmarking funds for specific jobs, even identifying military equipment and training regimes which should now get the apportioned dollars.

The importance of US funds for Pakistan is evident in the fact that these account for roughly one quarter of its $4 billion military budget. However, the Musharraf regime need not feel despondent just because Washington has only lately got wise to its doctoring of accounts and shifting of military hardware from the war on terror to future sub-continental conflict. The British government has just been caught holding secret parleys with Taliban leaders, and by no means surprisingly, it is now also known that London and Washington are together in this backdoor game of smuggling in the Taliban for a larger role in Afghanistan.

While all this suits Pakistan well, Afghanistan is understandably perturbed as the fallout of such a policy would be a more powerful Taliban to tackle in future. Kabul is so concerned that it has taken a very unusual step of declaring two Westerners, one a political adviser to the European Union and the other a political adviser to the United Nations mission, persona non grata for “threatening national security.”

(Apratim Mukarji is the author of “Afghanistan: From Terror to Freedom”)

US wants Pakistan to bite the bullet

Asia Times, 01/10/2008 By Syed Saleem Shahzad
KARACHI - After more than six years, Pakistan finds itself in probably the most difficult position it has been in since signing on as a partner in the US-led "war on terror".

The political turmoil created by the recent assassination of former premier Benazir Bhutto and the consolidation of the Taliban and al-Qaeda in the country just months ahead of another Taliban spring offensive in Afghanistan have made Washington decidedly anxious that Islamabad do something decisive about the situation. But while Pakistan wants to remain on side with the US, and the West, by taking appropriate action against militancy, this carries with it the grave danger of exacerbating the situation, and opening up the country to further terror.

A senior Pakistani security official elaborated for Asia Times Online, "We have actually been thrown into a deep quagmire where we are not left with many options. The CIA's presence in Pakistan has made it impossible for Pakistan to handle the Taliban problem independently and through dialogue. On the other hand, there is no military solution on the horizon against the Taliban and another [Pakistani army] operation against militants would cause more than serious repercussions."

The official, speaking on condition of anonymity as his job does not allow him to speak on the record, continued, "Now we are at a crossroad and we feel threatened that if this problem escalates it may give Western powers and their regional allies a chance to justify an attack on Pakistan's nuclear arsenal. Therefore, we are walking a tightrope where, on the one hand our strategic ties with the West are at risk if we don't adhere to their demands, but on the other hand our own internal security is at risk.

"Nevertheless," he added, "nations do take steps on a priority basis for their internal security."

Reports from the US at the weekend indicate that the George W Bush administration wants to expand the authority of the CIA and the military to conduct more aggressive covert operations in Pakistan.

While a Pakistani Foreign Ministry spokesman has officially dismissed the notion as fanciful, this does not rule out the likelihood of heavy CIA involvement on targets identified through intelligence on both sides of the border.

The overriding goal will be to cut the supply lines of the Taliban and al-Qaeda between Pakistan and Afghanistan by squeezing them between coalition forces in Afghanistan and Pakistan forces across the border.

The boundaries of the operation have been set on the basis of two facts. These are al-Qaeda's bases and the Taliban's supply lines from Pakistan into the three southeastern Afghan provinces of Paktia, Paktika and Khost and Helmand in the southwest. Al-Qaeda bases have been located in Bajaur Agency and North Waziristan while the Taliban's supply lines have primarily been traced from South Waziristan.

Pakistan's strategic quarters, though, are extremely concerned over the possible consequences of such a pincer operation, planned at a time when general elections have already been pushed back from this month to next and could be delayed even further.

Compounding the problem is the fact that the Pakistani military is fast losing all of its gains in the Swat Valley in North-West Frontier Province (NWFP). In response to rising militancy in the valley, fueled by Mullah Fazlullah, over the past few months the army has cracked down, forcing the militants to retreat into the tribal areas.

Al-Qaeda responded by activating its network through Maulana Faqir Muhammad, the local strongman of Osama bin Laden's deputy, Ayman al-Zawahiri. Faqir, from Bajaur Agency, sent men and arms into the valley, while Punjabi and Uzbek fighters from the South Waziristan and North Waziristan tribal areas joined hands with the militants. As a result, the militants have fought back strongly against the Pakistani army, which could pull back in the coming days.

The Bush administration is raising the military stakes at a time when Pakistan is under fire from Washington for not making adequate efforts in the "war on terror". This disenchantment was captured by Chester Bowles, a "liberal lion" of the Democratic Party, who wrote in the New York Times recently, "American military assistance to Pakistan in the last 15 years will, I believe, be listed by historians as among our most costly blunders."

The Washington Post also recently quoted Democratic Senator Robert Menendez, chairman of the foreign assistance sub-committee of the Senate, as saying, "What is amazing to me about our policy is that Pakistan is brimming with a smart, educated, moderate center. As long as we are pumping our money into security assistance and putting all our eggs in the basket with [President Pervez] Musharraf, we are making a critical mistake."

There are recurrent calls in Washington that Pakistan's multi-billion dollar military aid package be reviewed or even stopped if its performance is not found satisfactory.

Pakistani intelligence, however, is acutely aware that militants are likely to unleash attacks in the softer underbelly of the nation should the Pakistani army (or the US Army) launch new, vigorous attacks in the tribal areas. Cities such as the port hub of Karachi, the capital Islamabad and Peshawar in NWFP would be prime targets.

The best that Pakistan can do is attempt to walk a middle path, as it has done so often in the past, even though both the militants and Washington are demanding that Islamabad complies 100% with their demands.

The difficulties of this position are well illustrated by an incident on Sunday in which al-Qaeda-backed militants shot dead eight tribal leaders involved in efforts to broker a ceasefire between security forces and Pakistani Taliban commanders in the northwest. The men, who were scheduled to meet each other on Monday, were killed in separate attacks in South Waziristan.

Part of Musharraf's problem is that while he is Washington's ally in Pakistan, he is also the representative of the military oligarchy. Further, his political survival has become heavily dependent on slain Bhutto's Pakistan People's Party (PPP). New PPP head, Bhutto's widower Asif Zardari, is in contact with US officials and is in tune with the "war on terror" and supports Musharraf in this respect. But this PPP support could be withdrawn at any time should it be perceived that Musharraf is straying from the US agenda.

Syed Saleem Shahzad is Asia Times Online's Pakistan Bureau Chief.

Musharraf's Blame-Game Raises Pashtun Hackles

Inter Press Service News Agency, By Ashfaq Yusufzai 10 Jan 2008 PESHAWAR

Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf’s initial assertion that the pro-Taliban, Baitullah Mahsud, a Pashtun tribal leader, was behind the assassination of former prime minister Benazir Bhutto has not gone down well in the restless North West Frontier Province (NWFP).

The Awami National Party (ANP), the largest Pashtun (or Pakhtun) political grouping, has expressed annoyance at the allegation.

"The government’s statement holding Waziristan’s tribesmen responsible for the death of Benazir Bhutto is a plot to pitch different nationalities of the country against each other," ANP’s provincial president Afrasiab Khattak told IPS.

"It is extremely unfortunate that the government has put responsibility at the door of the Pakhtun at this delicate moment in the country’s history," he deplored.

Since the United States-led ‘war on terror’ in Afghanistan, and the infiltration of the border areas by pro-Taliban groups, Pakistan’s ethnic Pashtuns have been at the receiving end. Violence has ratcheted up in the NWFP and Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) where the Pakistan military has tried to seal the porous border.

Pashtuns -- Afghanistan's most dominant ethnic group and the second-largest ethnic group in Pakistan -- played a lead role in fighting and expelling the Soviet army from Afghanistan during the 1980s. They also formed the backbone of the Taliban which ruled Afghanistan until ousted in late 2001 by U.S.-led coalition forces prosecuting the post 9/11 war on terror.

Pakistan, an ally in the war, faced an unprecedented number of suicide bombings last year. When Bhutto was killed in a gunfire attack-cum-suicide blast in Rawalpindi on Dec 27, the headquarters of the Pakistan military, suspicions naturally fell on the Pashtuns and the Taliban which is said to have close links with al-Qaeda.

However, Bhutto’s Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) has pointed fingers at the shadowy Inter Services Intelligence (ISI), the military intelligence. The government has denied the charge, and handed over investigation to Britain’s Scotland Yard.

The ANP’s Khattak has accused President Musharraf of deliberately pitching Pakistan’s different ethnic groups against one another in a "divide and rule" policy resorted to by all unpopular leaders of the world.

He accused the government of trying to make scapegoats of the Pashtuns even though Bhutto had visited the NWFP three times since she returned to Pakistan after nearly nine years in exile in October 2007.

At an election rally in Peshawar, a day before she was murdered, she said: "Pakhtuns are brave. They never break a promise. We have time-tested friends here."

"She (Bhutto) visited the marketplace and mingled with people and spoke with a fruit-seller in Nowshera bazaar despite the life threats," Abdul Wajeeh, a student said her last visit was proof that the assassinated leader did not feel threatened by ordinary Pashtuns.

The Musharraf government had attempted to pin the blame of the previous assassination attempt, the day Bhutto had returned triumphantly to Karachi from exile in Dubai and London, on Mahsud, leader of a pro-Taliban group active in FATA and NWFP.

But Bhutto, the very next day at a press conference, had pointed to the involvement of Pakistan's intelligence agencies in the attacks by mentioning three anonymous men whom she said she had named in a letter to Musharraf on Oct. 16. "I said that if something happens to me, I will hold them responsible rather than militant groups like the Taliban, al-Qaeda or the Pakistani Taliban."

The PPP also demanded the removal of Intelligence Bureau chief, Ijaz Shah, hinting at its links with militancy. Bhutto's later claim that the Oct. 18 blasts were remote-controlled further implied the involvement of forces other than the "religious militants" who are traditionally held responsible for such acts.

"Pakhtuns are the most peace-loving and non-violent and hospitable nation. They like resolution of their intra-family disputes through dialogue. They avoid a collision course," ANP central president Senator Asfandyar Wali Khan told IPS in an interview.

But the damage had been done by Musharraf’s statement. Hundreds of trucks and trailers belonging to the Waziristan Transport Service were set ablaze in the aftermath of the assassination. Also, five petrol pumps were damaged.

"Angry protesters in Sindh (Bhutto’s home province) and Punjab provinces attacked vehicles and petrol pumps owned by Pakhtuns from South Waziristan," Mir Nawaz Khan, president of Waziristan Transport Service, told IPS.

"In Sindh alone, 62 trailers, trucks, oil-tankers and one petrol pump were torched. The Mehran Waziristan Petrol Pump was burnt in Ranipur Sindh, whereas in Sukkur, Ranipur, Karachi, Hyderabad, Thatta, Shikarpur and Badin, 62 vehicles loaded with cement, sugar, fertilisers and other things owned by Pakhtuns were reduced to ashes," said Mohammad Rafiq of Bangash Waziristan Goods Transport from Hyderabad, Sindh.

Amin Wazir, president of the Waziristan Transport Owners’ Association at a news conference demanded compensation for 500 trailers and trucks burnt by rioters. "The government is pitching Pakhtun, Punjabi and Sindhi against each other. The Pakhtun has suffered a great deal in view of the so-called ‘war against terrorism’," he said.

However, the ploy may not be working. Results of a new survey funded by a U.S peace research institute revealed that a strong majority of Pakistanis consider the U.S. military presence in Afghanistan a much more critical threat to their country than al-Qaeda or the Taliban in the border regions.

600-strong tribal Lashkar to ‘protect peace’
Daily Times 11 January 2008

WANA: Members of the Pashtun Ahmedzai Wazir tribe on Thursday raised a 600- strong Lashkar (tribal militia) to “protect peace in the area”, elders and eyewitnesses said.

“It is in our common interest to work for peace,” Amir of local Taliban Maulvi Nazir told an Ahmedzai Wazir jirga in Wana, three days after two simultaneous attacks on his offices left 10 of his men dead.

The jirga would mandate the Lashkar in a meeting on Friday, tribal elders told Daily Times. According to tribal traditions, Lashkars are raised to take a unified position against a common threat.

Threat to peace: Taliban commander Matta Khan said the threat was from “the commanders who fought for Uzbek militants when Maulvi Nazir led a popular uprising against them in April last year”. He blamed “people like Ghulam Jan” of “plotting against peace in our area” and for the attacks on two offices of Maulvi Nazir in Wana and Shakai Valley last week.

“Wazir tribesmen sheltering the foreigners must now give them up,” Reuters quoted tribal elder Meetha Khan as saying.

“The lashkar will give two options to those sheltering the foreigners, either to stop sheltering them and return to their tribe, or face the eviction of their families from the area,” Khan said.

The Zalikhel tribe that makes up half of Ahmedzai Wazirs was under fire from the jirga participants being asked to clarify its position on militant commanders who oppose Maulvi Nazir, a witness said.

Witnesses told Daily Times no speaker at the jirga named Baitullah Mehsud as the prime suspect.

Pakistan has blamed the leader from the Mehsud tribe, based in South Waziristan, for a recent wave of suicide attacks, many on security forces. The government has said Baitullah Mehsud was also responsible for assassinating Pakistan People’s Party chairwoman Benazir Bhutto on December 27.

The Wazir militia, Reuters said, is expected to operate only in the Wazir tribal area, and would thus have little or no impact on Mehsud and the Al Qaeda allies in his area.

Thousands of foreign militants, including Arabs, Chechens and Uzbeks, fled to Pakistan’s semi-autonomous tribal lands after US-led forces ousted the Taliban in Afghanistan in 2001, a Reuters report said. It says the militants were given refuge by the Pashtun tribes who live on both sides of the porous border.

“But relations between some of the tribesmen and their foreign guests began to break down last year when tribesmen, with the backing of the Pakistani military, turned against foreign militants after they had tried to kill a tribal elder,” it said.

“About 300 foreign militants and up to 40 Pakistani tribal fighters were killed in days of clashes that followed.”

Former Afghan leader says international forces trying to convert Muslims

Excerpt from report by privately-owned Afghan Aina TV on 10 January

[Presenter] The Council of Islamic Ukhowat [Brotherhood] of Afghanistan has held a gathering at Idga Mosque in Kabul. It gave instructions to the followers of Islam, and said a number of Western countries were carrying out secret activities with the aim of inviting people to convert to Christianity.

Borhanoddin Rabbani, former Afghan president, leader of the [opposition] National Front and a member of the Ukhowat Council, said these activities were mysterious moves launched on behalf of international terrorism.

[Passage omitted: Ayatollah Mohseni, a Shi'i religious scholar: poor reception]

[Borhanoddin Rabbani] Today, they want to damage our unity and spread unrest in our country.

[Correspondent] Religious scholars from the Sunni and Shi'i sects attended the gathering, which was held to announce the instructions of the Council of Islamic Ukhowat for the Ashura celebrations during the days of Muharram [the month in the lunar year when Ashura ! is marked]. They stressed the unity among the religious groups in Afghanistan. They said that any kind of activity carried out by world politicians aimed at creating disunity and discord among Muslims was against the national interests of Afghans and in conflict with Islam.

In a part of his speech, Borhanoddin Rabbani, the former Afghan president and the leader of the National Front, who is a member of the Ukhowat Council, said that there were some specific hands and circles in Afghanistan which want to intensify the crisis and prepare the ground for international terrorists to recruit more fighters by inviting Muslims to convert to Christianity.

[Borhanoddin Rabbani] There are some individuals in Afghanistan who have been intentionally carrying out activities to invite people to Christianity, in order to recruit fighters to the terrorists. They set up clubs to strengthen terrorism. [Audio poor]

Canadians unable to convince Afghan intelligence to stop shackling prisoners

OTTAWA - Corrections Canada officers in Kandahar have been unable to persuade Afghanistan's notorious intelligence agency to stop clapping prisoners in irons for months at time, but insist they are making progress, court records show.

Human-rights groups argue that keeping prisoners in restraints over the long-term is tantamount to torture.

The Afghan National Directorate of Security says the use of hand and leg irons is a safety and security issue, David Connor, a senior Corrections Canada official, recently testified in a lawsuit brought by Amnesty International and the B.C. Civil Liberties Association.

"They explain their use of shackles as being an issue of institutional security," said Connor, an Ottawa-based official in charge of Canadian prison guards deployed in Kandahar.

"They seem to feel that it's necessary to use shackles. We are working actively with them on that matter."

A transcript of the Jan. 3, 2008, cross-examination of Connor and other senior federal officials by human-rights lawyers was obtained by The Canadian Press.

Afghanistan has a patchwork of prisons run by different ministries, including the intelligence service, which is a legal entity unto itself reporting only to President Hamid Karzai. Depending upon the alleged offence, prisoners can end up in secretive NDS facilities - or in regular jails operated by the Ministry of Justice.

The United Nations has a prohibition on the long-term use of restraints that was partly born out of condemnation of the Germans during the Second World, who kept prisoners of war, including Canadians captured in the Dieppe raid, in irons for up to two years.

Public Safety Minister Stockwell Day, under questioning in the House of Commons last spring, said the shackling of prisoners bothered Canadian officials, who inspected the Afghan Ministry of Justice's Sarpoza prison in Kandahar last April.

"We are concerned about those people," he said, answering a question by Liberal House Leader Ralph Goodale.

"Two of the individuals talked to our officials and our officers raised the issue of their being in leg irons. We do not think they should be in leg irons."

Connor said since Canadians started working with Afghan guards at Sarpoza, the use of shackles has declined. But shackles continue to be used at the main security prison.

"We are working actively with them on that matter, as we have done so with success at Sarpoza. However, that engagement is relatively recent and not as advanced at Sarpoza where there has been a good deal of success, actually, in reducing the use of restraints," he said.

Human-rights groups, who are fighting to stop the transfer of Canadian-captured Taliban fighters to Afghan authorities, say the correctional officers are witnessing abuse daily in the form of shackles.

"It's my understanding that these prisoners are wearing shackles 24 hours a day and have been since their capture," said lawyer Paul Champ, who works on behalf of Amnesty International and the B.C. Civil Liberties Association.

"It's cruel and inhumane treatment by any measure. Courts have found that in other countries. I will be arguing in court that that constitutes torture. You can't chain someone 24 hours a day. It's totally degrading."

Foreign Affairs officials have not said whether Canada has applied any diplomatic pressure to halt the practice. The department did not respond to interview requests or questions Thursday.

The cross-examination of Connor also revealed that a maximum security prison for drug dealers, paid for by Canada and at least two other NATO countries, is under construction in Afghanistan.

Champ questioned why the military alliance cannot build and operate a similar facility for captured Taliban fighters, as human-rights groups have been demanding.

The prison for drug offenders is slated to open this fall.

The Canadian contribution toward the building project is coming from the federal government's international development agency, said O'Connor.

Concern about the treatment of captured insurgents arose last year after reports surfaced that as many as 30 had been abused by Afghan guards following their handover by Canadians.

The Conservative government termed the reports "baseless allegations," but tightened its procedures by signing a new agreement with the Afghan government - one that allowed for followup visits with prisoners.

Since then there have been at least six allegations of mistreatment heard by Canadian officials.

Foreign Affairs has dispatched an official to the provincial reconstruction base in Kandahar specifically to monitor for signs of torture.

But human-rights groups questioned how well prepared Nicholas Goselin is for the role after his cross-examination revealed his background is human resources and his human-rights torture detection training amounted to reading a series of manuals and two hours of classroom instruction.

We have to decide if we will stay in Afghanistan

Published: January 10 2008 02:00 | Last updated: January 10 2008 - From Baroness Falkner of Margravine.

Sir, US General Dan McNeill ( report, January 3) is right to be concerned about the UK government's attempts in Afghanistan to arm tribal militia in support of operations against Taliban and al-Qaeda forces. I raised similar reservations about this in the Lords on December 12 2007 when Gordon Brown set out his review of strategy.

The problem with “community defence initiatives” is that they are counter to our professed objective of democratic governance and the rule of law in Afghanistan. The idea that we arm fundamentalist tribal militia, emulating a system of warlordism that goes back several hundred years, supposedly in support of a centralised democratic government that is committed to norms of good governance and human rights, is risible. Your report is of a piece with what seems to be Mr Brown’s strategy, which is that he appears to be preparing the ground to exit Afghanistan.

The news the previous week of secret negotiations with Taliban leaders, we are told in justification, is part of a proven record of making peace with one’s enemies. This is equally wrong-headed. While many of us from Muslim societies wish for a better understanding on the part of our government of how these societies work, and would seek negotiations to end conflict, the route mapped here will not deliver results, not least as we do not speak the same language, metaphorically, as our opponents.

Neo-fundamentalists are dangerous enough at the best of times. In Afghanistan, where they combine medieval norms, Wahhabi fervour, and open arms for jihadist networks, they cannot be seen as “partners”. Our work in Afghanistan has to be for the long term in support of building modern institutional structures and bringing economic development to the majority in this feudal society. Emulating traditional structures through the mujahideen is what got us here in the first place. It will not secure our exit for the good.

The UK has to decide if it is going to stay in Afghanistan, a far more significant theatre in terms of our own security than Iraq ever was, and to be honest in its funding for the armed services in that case. If we are to leave soon, however, we will have to be ready to pick up the pieces at some later time not of our own choosing. I fear that the government is preparing the ground for the latter, and this will mean that the lives lost in Afghanistan will have been in vain.

Kishwer Falkner, House of Lords

Charlie Wilson's Zen lesson

January 4, 2008 - GLOBE EDITORIAL

TWO MESSAGES are appended to the end of "Charlie Wilson's War," the artful Hollywood flick about a hedonistic Texas congressman who in the 1980s raised covert funding for the Afghan mujahideen from $5 million to $1 billion, thereby helping to drive the Red Army out of Afghanistan and precipitate the implosion of the Soviet Union. An explicit moral of the movie comes from the real-life Wilson, who lamented that America did the right thing in Afghanistan but messed up "the endgame." Today there can be little doubt that Washington's brusque loss of interest in the fate of Afghanistan after the Soviets' withdrawal was a calamitous error.

But it is the second, more philosophical message that ought to be at the center of current debate about America's role in the world. This lesson, which the Bush administration has learned all too slowly, teaches the need for humility in those who make America's moves on a global chessboard - a virtue that seems almost totally absent from the patriotic posturing of the presidential candidates.

Toward the end of "Charlie Wilson's War," a CIA officer played by the pitch-perfect Philip Seymour Hoffman cautions the Wilson character (played by Tom Hanks) not to be too sure they have done something glorious. To make the point, he tells the story of a Zen master who observes the people of his village celebrating a young boy's new horse as a wonderful gift. "We'll see," the Zen master says. When the boy falls off the horse and breaks a leg, everyone says the horse is a curse. "We'll see," says the master. Then war breaks out, the boy cannot be conscripted because of his injury, and everyone now says the horse was a fortunate gift. "We'll see," the master says again.

This is screenwriter Aaron Sorkin's way of warning against triumphalism. Yes, Afghan suffering at the hands of the Soviet invaders was atrocious, and the Soviets' defeat by Afghan mujahideen armed with US Stinger missiles ought to have been a humanitarian liberation. But the fighting among Afghan warlords that ensued opened the way for the fanatical Taliban to take power, for Al Qaeda to set up terrorist training camps in Afghanistan, for the Sept. 11 attacks in 2001, and then for to the Bush administration's global war on terror, whose destabilizing effects are likely to extend far into the future.

In a similar vein, Bush should have foreseen that the invasion and occupation of Iraq could become a strategic gift to Iran; that his pledge to foster democracy in the Muslim world while backing Pervez Musharraf in Pakistan would make America look hypocritical; or that his reluctance to seek a United Nations Security Council resolution to halt Israel's bombing of Lebanon in the summer of 2006 would inflame anti-American feelings in the Arab world. These are the sorts of unintended consequences a Zen master would expect - and a president must try to anticipate. 

Casualties of Charlie Wilson's war

January 11, 2008 - RE: "CHARLIE Wilson's Zen lesson" (Editorial, Jan. 4): As the first journalists to enter Kabul in 1981 for CBS News following the expulsion of the Western media the previous year, we continue to be amazed at how the American disinformation campaign built around the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan lives on.

Fact: Covert funding for the mujahideen began long before the Soviet invasion, not after. Fact: This covert aid was intended to lure the Soviets into the Afghan trap and hold them there, not drive them out, as claimed by Wilson.

It is well documented that Wilson's war prolonged Afghanistan's agony for another six years, provided a secure multibillion-dollar technological training base for Islamic terrorism, and set the stage for a privatized heroin industry of historic proportions. It's bad enough that a Hollywood film continues to project the propaganda campaign that kept Americans in the dark about America's role in helping terrorism grow in Afghanistan. At this late date, it is unconscionable for a newspaper to perpetuate the lie that America wanted the Soviets out of Afghanistan.

America's mistake in Afghanistan was not "the endgame" problem depicted by "Charlie Wilson's War." The problem was in the conceptual framework created by America's Cold War policy makers in the first place that made Afghanistan the bleeding ground it remains to this day.

PAUL FITZGERALD, ELIZABETH GOULD

[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.]