In this bulletin:

• NATO force chief vows more pressure on Taliban in 2008
• NATO Needs More Intel on Afghanistan
• Women in Taliban stronghold protest kidnap of US aid worker
• UK's Ashdown too 'super' for Kabul
• US regrets Ashdown's refusal to be UN Afghanistan envoy
• US envoy accused of sabotaging Ashdown
• Kabul diplomats' concerns grow regarding Karzai
• Sharp Drop in Afghan Private Investment
• Top Agents in Secret Trip to Pakistan
• Canada Presses NATO for Afghan Help
• Afghan advocate urges Canada not to pull troops
• Harper accepts main Manley recommendations
• Canada Presses NATO for Afghan Help
• Canada volunteered for tougher Afghan duty
• Sifting out the Afghan 'bad guys'
• Pakistanis seek refuge from violence in Afghanistan
• Amritsar sweets flavoured with Afghan dry fruits
• Don’t open a Third Front in Pakistan
• As Karzai Loses His Grip, A Familiar Face Looms

NATO force chief vows more pressure on Taliban in 2008

KABUL (AFP) — NATO troops will more aggressively pursue Taliban militants in 2008 with Afghan forces playing a larger role in fighting the insurgents, the head of the force in Afghanistan, General Dan McNeill said.

In a weekend interview with AFP, the US general also said he was pleased with Washington's "generous" dispatch in April of 3,200 Marines to reinforce the nearly 40,000 NATO and 20,000 US-led coalition force soldiers already here.

The International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) commander emphasised the need for more international troops to be sent to Afghanistan, recalling that "NATO has not filled its number of forces required here."

The multinational force was estimated a few months ago to be short of 7,500 soldiers. The deficit is being discussed and would also feature at a NATO summit in Bucharest in April, McNeill said.

The shortfall could be met if "you look at all members to do a little more", he added, noting that some nations had already stepped up such as France which will this year send military trainers to the southern province of Uruzgan.

In 2008, there was not likely to be any change in military strategy but there would be more pressure on Taliban insurgents, said McNeill, whose roughly 18-month term is due to expire in the coming months.

"We are going to be aggressively pursuing the insurgents and continue to push our reconstruction projects," he said. ISAF is also tasked with helping to rebuild Afghanistan, which has been ruined by nearly three decades of war.

"More important, what you will see different this year is the increased Afghan National Security Force capacity.

"So we expect to be not out front as we were last year, we expect the Afghans to be out front and we are going to support their operations," he said.

Another of ISAF's missions is to help rebuild the Afghan army, which was destroyed in the civil war of the early 1990s. It is projected to grow to number 70,000 soldiers by the end of this year.

Citing Afghan authorities, the general said the Afghan army was not expected to be capable of independent operations until late 2011 or 2012.

McNeill acknowledged that unrest had grown in 2007. Last year was the deadliest in an insurgency that was launched soon after the Taliban were driven from government in late 2001 for harbouring Al-Qaeda.

The increase in fighting was a reaction to having more troops on the ground and that soldiers moved out of their bases more to "pursue the enemy," he said.

"It was a superb year. The insurgents won nothing on the battlefield."

ISAF records showed that 70 percent of Taliban attacks, such as suicide and roadside bombings, took place in only 10 percent of the country, said the general, who first served in Afghanistan in 2002.

The general said military force "is not the only way" to end the insurgency and advances in development, education and health were key to winning public support for the government and away from the rebels.

But this veteran of conflict, including in Vietnam and the Gulf, was cautious about reconciliation with the insurgents, a tactic that is being pushed by President Hamid Karzai.

"You have to be sure that you know with who you are having dialogue," said McNeill, adding that Afghanistan's complex insurgency is being fought by various groups with different interests.

US President George W. Bush has nominated US Army General David McKiernan to replace McNeill when his term expires.

NATO Needs More Intel on Afghanistan

By LOLITA C. BALDOR and ROBERT BURNS

WASHINGTON (AP) — Military commanders are looking for more surveillance and other intelligence-gathering systems to help aid the fight in Afghanistan, the top NATO commander said Monday.

Gen. John Craddock, who also is chief of U.S. European Command, said that while the U.S. currently provides much of the eye-in-the-sky capabilities — which include unmanned aircraft — other allied nations could also contribute needed sensors and other technologies.

"There is an increased requirement for intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance capabilities," Craddock said during an interview with The Associated Press. "I think we're seeing now the value to cross check and reference different sensors and make sure we've got a better perspective."

Craddock's comments come as commanders begin to put together their list of troop and equipment needs from the allies in advance of a NATO meeting next month. Last year Craddock presented NATO ministers with a plan that called for several thousand additional troops, as well as helicopters and other equipment needs.

This year, he said the updated request likely would include surveillance capabilities, as well as some troop shifts on the battlefield, which he did not detail.

The problem, Craddock said, is the ongoing competition for what he called the "unblinking eye" — often provided by unmanned aircraft such as Global Hawks and Predators, which are in heavy use for the war in Iraq. The Predators provide live video links to commanders and can be armed with missiles.

"The problem with ISR (intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance) with all the nations is there is never enough to go around," said Craddock, sitting in his cramped office in the Pentagon. "The U.S. has a lot of ISR, but there are demands and there has to be a prioritization."

As an example, Craddock pointed to efforts by insurgents last year to move more into areas where there were civilians — leading to several incidents in which U.S. and allied troops were criticized for killing innocents as they fought suspected terrorists.

To deal with that, he said, the military had to use more drones to get a clear picture of what was going on.

The Pentagon is increasingly turning its attention to Afghanistan, as fears grow of a resurgence of al-Qaida in the ungoverned tribal region along the Pakistan border. The rugged mountains there have provided insurgents with safe havens, including — many believe — the Taliban and al-Qaida's elusive leader, Osama bin Laden.

As the U.S. looks to other NATO allies to meet some of the ongoing military needs in Afghanistan, Craddock said a new document being drafted by allies which lays out long-term goals for Afghanistan could encourage greater allied participation.

Noting that the need for more forces has yet to be filled by the allies, Craddock said, "one could deduce (that) in many of the countries they have not come to the understanding of how important this is."

Recently the Pentagon announced it would send about 3,200 Marines to Afghanistan, to fill part of the need for more combat troops and trainers. But Defense Secretary Robert Gates in insisting that NATO countries will have to come up with the troops to replace the Marines when the leave in the fall.

The allies, Craddock said, must understand that it is in their interest to contribute more as part of an effort to stop the spread of terrorism.

"Will this (NATO) document be a catalyst, I don't know," he said. "Will it be a reinforcement to the faithful and maybe a convincer of the unconvinced? I hope."

The long-term goals document is expected to include things that need to be accomplished before security can be turned over to the Afghans, how long it might take and what the risks will be. It also will talk about the need to reduce corruption, improve governance and boost development. Gates wants it to be ready for consideration by NATO leaders at a summit meeting in Romania in early April.

Craddock also emphasized the importance of NATO and U.S. forces being nimble and able to react quickly as the Taliban and other extremist fighters adjust to changing conditions on the Pakistan side of the border.

"This is going to be, over the next 12 months, very important to watch what happens with the Pakistani forces there," he said. "We are encouraged with what we've seen and what we've been told" about Pakistan putting more conventional military forces into the border area that serves as a sanctuary for the extremists.

The Pakistanis have told U.S. and NATO officials that more regular army troops will supplement the work of a Pakistani paramilitary force known as the Frontier Corps, which Craddock said "are not really the capability needed" to deal with the extremist fighters.

In other comments, Craddock said he believes it is important to have a person, operating under U.N. auspices, coordinate the international aid effort in Afghanistan. And he said it was "unfortunate" that the attempt to get British diplomat Paddy Ashdown to take the job did not work out.

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said Monday that the United States was sorry Ashdown had withdrawn himself from consideration for the job.

Ashdown said he would not take the envoy post after Afghan President Hamid Karzai suddenly revoked his support. Ashdown, the top international administrator in Bosnia from 2002 to 2005, was considered the leading candidate to serve as overall coordinator of international aid, government and political efforts in Afghanistan.

Women in Taliban stronghold protest kidnap of US aid worker

The Associated Press, 01/29/2008 - KANDAHAR - About 500 Afghan women gathered in a rare mass protest Tuesday against the kidnapping of an American aid worker. The women, many wearing burqas, called on officials to find the captive American and urged the kidnappers to release her.

Officials said they still had not identified any suspects in the kidnapping of Cyd Mizell and her Afghan driver, Abdul Hadi. Gunmen abducted the two Saturday in a residential neighborhood of the southern city of Kandahar.

The demonstration by so many Afghan women in the conservative southern province of Kandahar was a rare display of women's wishes. The 90-minute meeting was filled with prayers and speeches calling on government leaders to act.

Rona Tareen, director of the Kandahar Women's Association, urged Mizell's captives to free her immediately, saying she had helped Kandahar's women with small business projects.

"She was here helping the woman in Kandahar. She was trying to get their embroidery outside of the country," Tareen told the 500 to 600 women _ many wearing the all-encompassing burqa _ who gathered in a Kandahar wedding hall. The crowd estimate came from participants in the rally and an Associated Press journalist.

"Her kidnapping is against our culture and tradition," Tareen said. "We demand that the kidnappers free her immediately."

Another woman, Bibi Nanai, said she received permission from her husband to join the protest. "I came from my home to show my support," Nanai said. "We are very upset."

Kandahar Gov. Asadullah Khalid said Tuesday there were still no suspects in the case and authorities were searching for clues.

No one has claimed responsibility for the kidnapping. Taliban spokesman Zabiullah Mujahid reiterated Tuesday that he could neither confirm nor deny that Taliban militants had taken the American woman and her driver.

Mizell, who was wearing a burqa when she was taken, works on aid projects for the Asian Rural Life Development Foundation. The director of her organization, Jeff Palmer, said the kidnappers still had not contacted any officials.

"That's part of the frustration that we're dealing with right now," Palmer said Monday. "We are hoping they will contact us. We want to hear about the safety of Cyd and the driver." "Nobody really knows" who the kidnappers are, Palmer said.

The Asian Rural Life Development Foundation has taken precautionary measures for other staff members in Kandahar, he said, but declined to elaborate.

Mizell, who taught English at Kandahar University and gave embroidery lessons at a girls' school, speaks the local Pashtu language well, colleagues said. She has worked for the foundation in Kandahar for the last three years, Palmer said.

Several foreigners _ including 23 South Koreans, two German construction workers and two Italian journalists _ have been kidnapped in Afghanistan in the last year, but kidnappings of Americans are rare. An American civilian was briefly abducted in Kabul in April 2005 but escaped by throwing himself from a moving car.

Kidnappings of Afghans for ransom have been on the rise in the last year, and rumors persist of foreign governments paying large ransoms to win the freedom of their citizens. Two of the 23 South Koreans kidnapped in July were killed while the rest were freed.

Meanwhile, visiting German Defense Minister Franz Josef Jung told President Hamid Karzai that German troops are ready to "participate in operations against terrorists and cooperate with other international forces in any other part of the country," said a statement from Karzai's office.

Jung, who also held talks with his Afghan counterpart Gen. Abdul Rahim Wardak in Kabul, praised the role German troops play in training the fledgling Afghan National Army. Jung also planned to visit some of the 3,000 German troops serving in the relatively peaceful north.

Last year was Afghanistan's most violent since the ouster of the Taliban in the U.S.-led invasion in 2001. More than 6,500 people _ mostly militants _ died as a result, according to an Associated Press count of figures provided by local and international officials.

Most of the fighting occurs in the country's south and east. Germany has been criticized for not joining the frontline of the fight against Taliban and other militants in these areas.

UK's Ashdown too 'super' for Kabul

By Alastair Leithead and Charles Haviland - BBC

The deal was done, or so it seemed. The UK's Paddy Ashdown had agreed to take on what he'd suggested was an impossible task as "super-envoy" to Afghanistan, but, at the last minute, it all fell apart.

It was the Afghan President Hamid Karzai and his government who blocked the appointment when all appeared settled.

Now the process to find a new head for the United Nations Assistance Mission to Afghanistan has to begin again and the international efforts here will be without strong direction for the foreseeable future.

The feeling among the international community in Kabul is that it's a missed opportunity - a powerful character with a proven track-record who could unite the aid effort in a way most say is crucial.

But perhaps Lord Ashdown was just too strong a character in a place where the international influence is being perceived as strengthening with time, rather than giving way to the new Afghan institutions.

President Karzai would not admit to feeling threatened by Paddy Ashdown - the two men met in Kuwait at the end of last year and the president was satisfied they could do business together.

But there was a sudden and unexpected change of heart - ministers had been worried he could come here as a 'Viceroy' with too much power, but that seemed to have been resolved.

The two issues surrounding his appointment were his personality and the terms of reference for his job. Simply being headlined as a "super-envoy" was enough to suggest greater powers than his predecessor.

He would have had the same title, the UN Secretary-General's Special Representative, and would not have "worn two hats - the other being Nato's International Security Assistance Force civilian representative, a job which remains vacant.

But there was an understanding he would have more sway with Nato and in European capitals, and that was perhaps too much for the Afghan decision makers to handle. The fact he was seen as an Anglo-American appointee may also have played against him.

There are more than 37 nations signed up to backing Afghanistan, but not all supported his candidacy. The critical voices inside the government swung from rejecting a colonial-style leader, to opposing a non-Muslim with too much association with the West.

The fact he is British, at a time when relations between the UK and the Afghan government are going through one of their periodic rough patches, could also have had an impact.

And the media seems to have played an important role, and may well have sparked doubts in President Karzai's mind.

The Reuters agency leaked, by a source in Brussels, news that Ban Ki-Moon had approved his position, something that without proper consultation may have offended the Afghan government.

Then a leader article in the Times newspaper suggested the Afghan president would now just have to accept the decision.

President Karzai reads a lot of newspapers and is known to react strongly, sometimes angrily, to the way he and his country are reported. This may have been the key that let doubting advisers get his ear and persuade the president that Paddy Ashdown would command too much power.

The Afghan foreign minister, Rangin Dadfar Spanta, told a press conference that Lord Ashdown was known to be "very controversial" and even "authoritarian", according to other unspecified foreign ministers.

But Mr Spanta revealed a lot about the Afghan government's fears over a threat to its sovereignty when he stressed the importance of "standing on our own two feet".

Government-controlled Afghan media did feature articles critical of the proposed new envoy, but the question is whether they were the true voice of the people, or whether they were reacting to government views. So where from here?

The name General John McColl has been mentioned by the Afghan government, perhaps as a foil to suggestions they were opposed to a British appointee.

He has served here before and got on well with the president, but as a military four-star general - already working for Nato - it's unlikely the UN would accept his candidacy to take the civilian lead.

There are other names in the hat, but it's likely the international community may want to approach other people to do the job with the strength of character, proven track record and who would be broadly accepted by all sides: all qualifications Lord Ashdown was said to have had.

US regrets Ashdown's refusal to be UN Afghanistan envoy

WASHINGTON (AFP) — US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice regretted that British politician Paddy Ashdown had withdrawn his bid to be UN envoy for Afghanistan, saying a "stable figure" was badly needed there.

"There needs to be a stable figure who can bring together and coordinate the multiple, multiple efforts of the international communities to support Afghanistan's reconstruction," Rice told reporters Monday at a press conference with Australian Foreign Minister Stephen Smith.

Ashdown, the international community's former envoy to Bosnia, said Sunday he had withdrawn from the running because of insufficient support from Afghan President Hamid Karzai.

The international effort involves clearing areas of Afghanistan from "terrorists," then delivering goods and services to Afghans to prevent those areas from "falling back" into the hands of militants, she said.

"I think it is fair to say that the international community has not yet found a way to coordinate its effort in a way that is effective and efficient and can fully support the Afghan government in reconstruction," Rice said.

Having a strong track record in public service, Ashdown "would have done a superb job, I think, in this activity. He has decided to withdraw. He has given his own reasons for that.

"And I have to say that the United States is sorry this couldn't be worked out because we need strong leadership in the international community," Rice said.

She pledged that with US allies and UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, as well as NATO Secretary General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer, the US would continue to seek ways to coordinate international efforts in Afghanistan.

Rice's spokesman Sean McCormack also praised Ashdown.

"It's important that there be somebody to fill that role. Certainly Lord Ashdown would have been a highly experienced, extremely capable person to fill that role," McCormack said. "The work will continue in finding somebody to fill those shoes."

Afghan Foreign Minister Rangeen Dadfar Spanta said Kabul's objections were not down to Ashdown or his nationality but to a "negative atmosphere" created around the envoy role.

"It's better if our friends let us learn more and more by walking on our own feet, with our own experience," he said.

US envoy accused of sabotaging Ashdown

Patrick Wintour, political editor, Tuesday January 29, 2008 The Guardian

Senior Foreign Office officials believe the Afghan-born US ambassador to the UN, Zalmay Khalilzad, is planning to stand for the presidency of Afghanistan and played a complex role in advising the current president, Hamid Karzai, to block the appointment of Lord Ashdown as the UN envoy to the country.

Ashdown, the former Liberal Democrat leader who became the international community's high representative in Bosnia, withdrew his application for the role on Sunday in the face of Afghan objections, leaving western policy in chaos.

America and Britain had been lining Ashdown up for a senior role since October, and believed they had the support of the UN secretary general, Ban Ki-Moon, and Karzai.

High-level British sources believe that Karzai changed his position as he faced mounting objections from Pashto-speaking warlords and after advice given to him by Khalilzad, a former US ambassador to both Iraq and Afghanistan. Khalilzad is himself a Pashtun. British sources suggested that contrary to the official US position, Khalilzad had been warning Karzai that Ashdown was an interventionist figure and would weaken his authority still further.

Khalilzad's office at the UN last night denied he had any interest in standing for the Afghan presidency and rejected the suggestion he had undermined Lord Ashdown as a candidate for the UN special envoy's job. "Quite the opposite - he thought it was a good idea and worked hard to get it done," Richard Grenell, the ambassador's spokesman, said. He added that Khalilzad had publicly ruled out running for president in Afghanistan, describing it as "an old rumour that has been proved erroneous".

Ashdown had spoken to Karzai about the appointment and agreed his job description, which would have been to coordinate the roles of Nato, the UN and the EU. But in the past week Karzai started to turn against the British, accusing their forces of losing their grip in the south of the country in the fight against the Taliban, and then making it clear to Gordon Brown and Condoleezza Rice, the US secretary of state, that he would not support Ashdown's appointment.

The state-influenced press in Kabul ran stories likening Ashdown to former British generals in the first Afghan war, and even demanding to know who would be willing to assassinate him.

Some British officials said Karzai's decision to withstand the clear US demand for Ashdown will strengthen him with some Pashtun tribes in the short term. No one in British circles is accusing Karzai of corruption, but with the loss of support of the former Northern Alliance, the Afghan president is increasingly dependent on drug traffickers and warlords to maintain his political base.

British sources say they have no idea at this stage how they will repair the damage caused by the Afghan president's sudden change of heart, but without a clear alternative authority figure to Karzai, the west will have to soldier on with the current president for at least another year.

Asked by the Washington Post last week whether he planned to stand again, Karzai was enigmatic, saying: "Well, I have things to accomplish. Who was it who wrote - Robert Frost? - 'The woods are lovely, dark and deep, but I have promises to keep, and miles to go before I sleep. And miles to go before I sleep.'"

Kabul diplomats' concerns grow regarding Karzai

By Jon Boone in Kabul - January 29 2008 02:00 | January 29 2008 02:00

President Hamid Karzai's last-minute derailment of carefully laid plans to appoint Lord Ashdown as the United Nations' top international envoy in Afghanistan has heightened concerns in Kabul's diplomatic community about the Afghan leader.

International officials reacted with consternation at what was, in effect, Mr Karzai's vetoing of the British statesman as the new UN's senior representative in Afghanistan at the World Economic Forum in Davos at the weekend.

The president said he had reservations about Lord Ashdown, who later announced that without Afghan support he was no longer prepared to do the job.

International officials have long worried about Mr Karzai, described by one diplomat as "a brilliant communicator but a less than able as a public administrator".

Recently there have also been concerns about Mr Karzai's health with many believing he is politically isolated and overworked, particularly in the wake of two other big run-ins with the international community.

Mr Karzai created havoc on Christmas day when his government announced that it was expelling two diplomats from the UN and the European Union, who were accused of talking to the Taliban. Also at Davos he upset the British, criticising the UK military effort in troubled Helmand province.

One senior European diplomat described the president as "rather chaotic", lacking a "coherent management style".

"In a way he is a bit like a king - he spends so much time listening to other people that he then does not know what to do. He is completely overwhelmed in work and has not taken a proper break since 2001. He has had no time for mental -reflection."

Afghan officials said the president had been alarmed by opposition from the Afghan media and worried about uncertainties surrounding the extent of the proposed mandate for Lord Ashdown, who enjoyed full executive powers while serving as the high representative to Bosnia.

But a US official denied that Lord Ashdown had been pushing for a wider mandate.

Other diplomats have pointed out that most of the press opposition to the appointment had come from government-controlled outlets - something Lord Ashdown himself noted in his letter to Ban Ki-Moon, the UN secretary-general.

Sharp Drop in Afghan Private Investment

By FISNIK ABRASHI – KABUL, Afghanistan (AP) — Private investment in Afghanistan dropped last year to $500 million — about half the amount invested in 2006 — due to the worsening security situation in the country, a business group said Monday.

The Afghanistan Investment Support Agency said investment last year compared unfavorably to the $1 billion invested in 2006 and the $570 million invested in 2005.

Security concerns, the targeting of businessmen by criminal gangs and "burdensome bureaucracy" were among the key factors that caused the sharp drop, AISA said.

"The targeting of businesses and businesspeople by criminal gangs for ransom has had the most profound impact on the morale of private entrepreneurs and, therefore, on private business and investment," the statement said.

Despite the sharp drop last year, AISA believes investments will rise in 2008 to more than $1 billion, in anticipation of a planned investment by a Chinese company, China Metallurgical Group, in a copper mine south of Kabul.

Last year was Afghanistan's most violent since the ouster of the Taliban in the U.S.-led invasion in 2001. More than 6,500 people — mostly militants — died as a result, according to an Associated Press count of figures provided by local and international officials.

Over the weekend, a clash between police and the Taliban in the Dihrawud district of southern Uruzgan province left eight militants dead and three officers wounded, the provincial police chief said Monday.

The authorities recovered the bodies of the dead militants alongside their weapons after a battle that began Saturday and carried over into Sunday, Juma Gul Himat said.

The country has also been affected by record-breaking opium production, which has had a corrupting influence on local officials and provides funds for the Taliban insurgency.

Kidnappings for ransom — mostly of Afghans — are on the rise in the country. An American aid worker was kidnapped in the southern city of Kandahar on Saturday; no group has claimed responsibility.

The Afghanistan Investment Support Agency was established by the Afghan government in 2003 as an independent outlet for local and international investors. Since its creation, AISA has registered and supported over 11,300 private companies, including more than 1,200 foreign investments.

Top Agents in Secret Trip to Pakistan

By PAMELA HESS – WASHINGTON (AP) — The top two U.S. intelligence officials made a secret visit to Pakistan in early January to seek permission from President Pervez Musharraf for greater involvement of American forces in trying to ferret out al-Qaida and other militant groups active in the tribal regions along the Afghanistan border, a senior U.S. official said.

The official, speaking on condition of anonymity given the secret nature of the talks, declined to disclose what was said, but Musharraf was quoted two days after the Jan. 9 meeting as saying U.S. troops would be regarded as invaders if they crossed into Pakistan to hunt al-Qaida militants.

The New York Times — which first reported on the secret visit by CIA Director Michael Hayden and Mike McConnell, director of national intelligence — said Musharraf rebuffed an expansion of an American presence in Pakistan at the meeting, either through overt CIA. missions or by joint operations with Pakistani security forces.

Pakistan has been under growing U.S. pressure to crack down on militants in its tribal regions close to the Afghan border, a rugged area long 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.

Several U.S. presidential candidates have hinted they would support unilateral action in the area.

In a Jan. 11 interview, Musharraf told The Straits Times of Singapore 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," he said. "I challenge anybody coming into our mountains. They would regret that day."

South Waziristan is a semiautonomous region where the central government has never had much control. It is home to scores of al-Qaida and Taliban fighters, many of whom fled there from neighboring Afghanistan after the U.S-led invasion in 2001.

The border region emerged as a front line in the war on extremist groups after Musharraf allied Pakistan with the U.S. following the Sept. 11 terror attacks. Washington has given Pakistan billions of dollars in aid to help government forces battle militants.

Musharraf, who toured Europe last week seeking support for his embattled government, rejected claims that the violence was a sign of a resurgent Taliban. More than 150 rebels and soldiers are reported to have been killed in the region this month alone.

Musharraf in the past has credited cooperation between Pakistani intelligence services and the CIA, both of whom believe that Pakistani militant leader Baitullah Mehsud was the mastermind of the Dec. 27 gun and suicide bomb attack that killed former prime minister Benazir Bhutto.

But the State Department's counterterrorism chief, Dell Dailey, said Tuesday that the Bush administration was displeased with "gaps in intelligence" received from Pakistan about the activities of extremist groups in the tribal regions.

"We don't have enough information about what's going on there. Not on al-Qaida. Not on foreign fighters. Not on the Taliban," he said.

Dailey, a retired Army lieutenant general with extensive background in special operations, said Pakistan needs to fix the problem. However, said the U.S. wasn't likely to conduct military strikes inside Pakistan on its own, saying that would anger many Pakistanis.

Rather than allow an increased U.S. presence, the Times reported that Pakistan and the United States are discussing other joint efforts, such as increased use of armed Predator surveillance aircraft over the tribal areas, and identifying ways the U.S. can speed intelligence information to Pakistani security forces.

The paper said the Jan. 9 trip by McConnell and Hayden came five days after senior administration officials debated new strategies for dealing with Pakistan. It had reported previously that no decisions were made at that meeting of the National Security Council, which included top administration officials, but not President Bush.

The times quoted a senior officials as saying "the purpose of the mission (by McConnell and Hayden) was to convince Musharraf that time is ticking away" and that the increased attacks on Pakistan would ultimately undermine his effort to stay in office.

Canada Presses NATO for Afghan Help

By ROB GILLIES – TORONTO (AP) — Canada will extend its military mission in Afghanistan only if another NATO country puts more soldiers in the dangerous south, the prime minister said Monday, echoing the recommendation of an independent panel to withdraw without additional forces.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper's Conservative government is under pressure to withdraw its 2,500 troops from Kandahar province, the former Taliban stronghold, after the deaths of 78 soldiers and a diplomat. The mission is set to expire in 2009 without an extension by Canadian lawmakers.

The panel, led by John Manley, a former Liberal deputy prime minister and foreign minister, recommended last week that Canada continue its mission only if another NATO country musters 1,000 troops for Kandahar.

European allies' refusal to deploy to Afghanistan's dangerous south and east has opened a rift with Britain, Canada, the Netherlands and others which, along with the United States, have borne the brunt of Taliban violence.

The U.S. contributes one-third of NATO's 42,000-strong International Security Assistance Force mission, making it the largest participant, on top of the 12,000 to 13,000 American troops operating independently.

NATO spokesman James Appathurai said the alliance had no immediate reaction to the comments from Harper, who said he would begin negotiating with allies prior to the next meeting of NATO leaders in early April.

"NATO's reputation is on the line here," Harper said. "NATO's efforts in Afghanistan as a whole are not adequate, but particularly in Kandahar province . . . It is the focal point of the insurgency and of the Taliban's longer term plans to return to power."

Harper said Canada has done more than its fair share and needs help. "If NATO can't come through with that help than I think frankly that NATO's own reputation and future will be in grave jeopardy," Harper said.

Harper said he also agreed with the panel's recommendation that the defense department speed the purchase of helicopters and surveillance aircraft.

"Both of those recommendations will have to be fulfilled or Canada will not proceed with the mission in Afghanistan," he said.

Opposition parties have threatened to bring down Harper's minority government if he does not end the increasingly unpopular combat mission.

Afghan advocate urges Canada not to pull troops

Offers thanks for military and financial support, but 'the job is not complete'
The Edmonton Journal Monday, January 28, 2008

The head of Afghanistan's human rights commission is urging Canada not to pull troops out of Kandahar, even if NATO allies won't bolster Canadian forces with 1,000 more soldiers.

"On behalf of the Afghan people and especially on behalf of the Afghan women, I would like to thank Canada for its military support and financial support," Sima Samar said in an interview Sunday in Edmonton, where she will be a keynote speaker tonight for the University of Alberta's International Week.

"And I insist the job is not complete, so please, complete the job and then leave us."

Samar is chairwoman of the Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission, the first such commission in the country's history. From December 2001 to June 2002, she was one of two women in Afghanistan's cabinet, serving as President Hamid Karzai's deputy in his interim government. She was also minister of women's affairs for that government.

A panel headed by former Liberal cabinet minister John Manley recently recommended that Canadian troops remain in Afghanistan beyond the mission's current expiration date in February 2009, provided allies contribute 1,000 more troops and the Canadian military receives helicopters and surveillance drones.

Samar said Sunday she recognizes that recommendation was intended to prod European partners and to save the lives of Canadian soldiers.

"I know that Kandahar is a difficult place, so I think they (Manley's panel) know more about how they should protect their own soldiers and their own people," said Samar.

"I hope they get what they need, either from other NATO countries or from Canada. Certainly, I don't think it's a good solution just to leave the difficult area and go to an easier area to be present in the country.

"I hope the situation will get better in a year's time."

Manley has said if the troops cannot be mustered by 2009 to join Canada's force of 2,500 in the volatile south, Canada should signal its intent to transfer responsibility for security in Kandahar.

Samar said she believes there is not enough communication and co-ordination among NATO countries in Afghanistan. The international community should sit with the Afghan government and hammer out a clear strategy to bring peace. Rebuilding the country must go beyond curbing violence, she said.

"They cannot really achieve everything -- peace, security and respect for human rights in the country -- only by military means," said Samar.

"The people really had a high expectation after 25 years of war in Afghanistan for the international community involvement. "There's no doubt we achieved a lot. We have a constitution, we have had elections, we have some women in the parliament.

"These are a lot of positive steps, but the security is really deteriorating in the country."

Poverty, government corruption, distrust of the justice system, lack of access to basic services and lack of public confidence in the country's authorities all contribute to the ongoing instability, Samar said.

"Afghanistan was abandoned by the international community after the fall of the pro-Russian government, and we saw the result -- the production of opium, it was a safe haven for terrorism and it caused, unfortunately, a lot of insecurity all over the world."

Afghanistan needs international help to boost development, safeguard human rights, stamp out opium production, weed out nepotism and corruption, create jobs, and reform, train and monitor the national army and police, she said.

Canada can have an impact in all these areas, Samar said.

Samar will speak about the situation in Afghanistan tonight from 7:30 p.m. to 9 p.m. in the Myer Horowitz Theatre at the Students' Union Building. Afghanistan Six Years After the Taliban, will be webcast to the university's Augustana Campus in Camrose.

On Tuesday, Samar will join a panel in the Dinwoodie Lounge at the SUB from noon to 1:20 p.m. to discuss the crisis in Darfur. In 2005, Samar was the United Nations' special rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Sudan.

On Wednesday, Samar will deliver a talk with Maj.-Gen. Timothy Grant, called Afghanistan: Daring to Transform, from noon to 1:30 p.m. in the Enterprise Square Foyer at 10230 Jasper Ave.

Harper accepts main Manley recommendations

Canwest News Service Monday, January 28, 2008

OTTAWA - Prime Minister Stephen Harper says his government accepts the main recommendations in the Manley report, including the demand that NATO provide more assistance in the Afghan south as a pre-condition for extending Canada's mission there.

"I have spoken with Mr. Manley and advised him that our government broadly accepts the recommendations put forward by the panel on Canada's future in Afghanistan," Harper said at a news conference in Ottawa.

The prime minister said he also agrees with the specific conditions set out by the five-member independent panel that should be met in order to extend the mission beyond February 2009.

The report, produced by a panel headed by former Liberal deputy prime minister John Manley, said  Canada should only extend its mission if it can convince its allies to commit at least 1,000 more troops and if the Canadian military receives helicopters and surveillance drones.

"In other words, while the case for the Afghan mission is clearly compelling, the decision to allow our young men and women in uniform to continue to be in harm's way demands the responsibility to give them a strong chance of success," Harper said.

"Both of the recommendations will have to be fulfilled or Canada will not proceed with the mission in Afghanistan."

The prime minister said the military equipment has been on order for some time, but that securing it and getting it in the field has been delayed because it is some of the most sought after equipment "on the planet."

Harper said that over the last two years his government has begun introducing other measures along the lines of what was suggested in the report.

Until Monday, Harper had said little about what he thinks about the report. He briefly referred to it on Friday during a speech to Tory supporters in Ottawa, calling it "strong, balanced and realistic," but had not yet said what he thought about its recommendations.

Harper said the government will introduce a motion in the House of Commons this spring "seeking support for Canada's way forward."

He spoke to Liberal Leader Stephane Dion on Sunday about having a debate on the motion, Harper said, and he plans to speak further with Dion later this week.

Harper said his government has reached a "tentative"_decision about whether to hold a vote in the House of Commons before he attends a major NATO meeting in Bucharest in April, or after, but that he wants to discuss that with Dion first. The Bloc Quebecois and NDP both want Canada out of Afghanistan so the Conservatives have to work with the Liberals in order to get the mission extended.

He said in the coming weeks his government will more fully respond and react to the other recommendations in the report.

The report was critical of the government's management of the mission and urged Harper to personally take on a more active diplomatic role. It also said the government needs to improve its communications strategy so that Canadians are better informed about the war in Afghanistan.

Harper said he accepts the criticisms in the report and takes them seriously. "This is an extremely difficult mission, we don't believe it's perfect, we never have," he said, adding that no other issue has caused him more headaches and heartaches than the war in Afghanistan.

"We accept the judgment that there are several things that could be done better," he said. Harper said he will personally be speaking with the leaders of other NATO allies and will share the recommendations of the Manley report with NATO when he attends the April summit.

Harper said the alliance's efforts in southern Afghanistan, where the Canadian troops are stationed, have not been adequate. The alliance's reputation and future credibility hinges on success in Afghanistan, Harper said, and he added that he is "optimistic" that NATO will come through on delivering the help Canada is seeking.

Canada Presses NATO for Afghan Help

By ROB GILLIES – TORONTO (AP) — Canada will extend its military mission in Afghanistan only if another NATO country puts more soldiers in the dangerous south, the prime minister said Monday, echoing the recommendation of an independent panel to withdraw without additional forces.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper's Conservative government is under pressure to withdraw its 2,500 troops from Kandahar province, the former Taliban stronghold, after the deaths of 78 soldiers and a diplomat. The mission is set to expire in 2009 without an extension by Canadian lawmakers.

The panel, led by John Manley, a former Liberal deputy prime minister and foreign minister, recommended last week that Canada continue its mission only if another NATO country musters 1,000 troops for Kandahar.

European allies' refusal to deploy to Afghanistan's dangerous south and east has opened a rift with Britain, Canada, the Netherlands and others which, along with the United States, have borne the brunt of Taliban violence.

The U.S. contributes one-third of NATO's 42,000-strong International Security Assistance Force mission, making it the largest participant, on top of the 12,000 to 13,000 American troops operating independently.

NATO spokesman James Appathurai said the alliance had no immediate reaction to the comments from Harper, who said he would begin negotiating with allies prior to the next meeting of NATO leaders in early April.

"NATO's reputation is on the line here," Harper said. "NATO's efforts in Afghanistan as a whole are not adequate, but particularly in Kandahar province . . . It is the focal point of the insurgency and of the Taliban's longer term plans to return to power."

Harper said Canada has done more than its fair share and needs help. "If NATO can't come through with that help than I think frankly that NATO's own reputation and future will be in grave jeopardy," Harper said.

Harper said he also agreed with the panel's recommendation that the defense department speed the purchase of helicopters and surveillance aircraft.

"Both of those recommendations will have to be fulfilled or Canada will not proceed with the mission in Afghanistan," he said.

Opposition parties have threatened to bring down Harper's minority government if he does not end the increasingly unpopular combat mission.

Canada volunteered for tougher Afghan duty

(CP) MONTREAL -- Canada volunteered to lead NATO in the dangerous Afghan province of Kandahar, according to members of a panel that weighed in on the mission's future.

Panel leader John Manley told Montreal newspaper Le Devoir that British soldiers were originally set to deploy in the provinces of Kandahar and neighbouring Helmand.

But the former Liberal foreign affairs minister says Canada insisted on taking the reins in the volatile province and NATO accepted. The report says the former Liberal government elected to transfer Canadian troops from the capital of Kabul to Kandahar in 2005.

Fellow panel member Paul Tellier told the newspaper that NATO allies suggested Canada take on a security role in a safer province.

The high-profile panel delivered a 90-page report on Canada's future in Afghanistan to Prime Minister Stephen Harper this week.

It concluded Canada should extend its mission past February 2009, but only if other countries provide more military troop support.

Sifting out the Afghan 'bad guys'

Taliban not sole danger to leader -Brian Hutchinson,  National Post  Published: Monday, January 28, 2008

ARGHANDAB DISTRICT, Afghanistan - They come at him from all directions. Agents of the Taliban, who would not hesitate to kill him, if they could get close enough. Tribal rivals who openly defy his authority, or pretend to curry favour while undermining his authority. Villagers begging for his assistance, an indulgence or a command.

Today, inside a walled compound protected by rifle-toting guards, Kalimullah Naqibi, 26, is besieged by angry elders. They are visibly upset that 50 of their local men were arrested last week on suspicion of insurgent activity and hauled off to a police station for interrogation.

The new leader of Arghandab district, which lies just to the north of Kandahar city, Mr. Naqibi fiddles with a string of yellow worry beads and listens politely before gently shooing away the elders.

"It is sad a thing," he said after they have left. "But one of our police commanders said it would be a good idea to round up these 50 suspects. So I agreed. We are trying to find the bad guys. We are being cautious."

With good reason. Mr. Naqibi is still stinging from deadly attacks by Taliban insurgents, launched soon after his famous predecessor -- his father, Mullah Naqib -- died of a heart attack in October.

Seeking to exploit Mullah Naqib's passing and seize an important route from the fertile Arghandab valley south to Kandahar city, 300 Taliban fighters with 300 reinforcements poured into the district. There was little resistance. The Arghandab was theirs.

The insurgents danced atop the roof of Mr. Naqibi's evacuated house, he recalls with bitterness.

But the Taliban's victory was brief; a three-day counterattack by Canadian, U.S. and Afghan forces later in October made short work of the insurgents, leaving 50 of them dead and forcing the rest to flee north to more remote areas.

But three weeks later, they struck again, this time with a much smaller, more subtle operation. A Taliban mole infiltrated an Afghan National Police substation in the Arghandab valley.

Posing as a junior officer, the mole directed a sneak attack on the police post early on Nov. 23, as seven officers slept. The other Taliban arrived on motorbikes. All seven policemen were slaughtered.

The perpetrators, including the mole, ran off and have evaded capture. Another humiliation, admits Mr. Naqibi. Worse, he says, he had prior knowledge of the mole's presence inside the substation. He even knew his name: Abdul Aziz.

"I told the [substation] commander that this person was not good, that he was linked to Taliban," Mr. Naqibi revealed for the first time. "I told him to kick him out. But the commander refused. He said there was no problem."

Even without Mr. Naqibi's warning, the commander should have realized that something was amiss. Aziz did not look or behave like a police officer. He arrived with no credentials, he didn't wear a uniform and he "behaved strangely," said Abdul Hakim Jan, a police commander from a neighbouring substation in the Arghandab.

Could it be that other, senior officers were involved in the planning of the sneak attack? If that grim prospect has crossed his mind, Mr. Naqibi isn't saying.

The two assaults came just after Afghanistan President Hamid Karzai formally crowned Mr. Naqibi as leader of the Arghandab. The appointment was predetermined; Arghandab's elders had already agreed that the mullah's son would be their chief and top decision-maker.

On one hand, it made sense. Mr. Naqibi is an Alokozai, the ethnic tribe that dominates the fertile Arghandab valley.

His late father was the tribal leader for decades. Mullaf Naqib was practically revered by the Alokozai for fighting back the invading Soviet army in the 1980s, and later, for maintaining a semblance of peace and prosperity during Taliban rule.

Mullah Naqib's high station is still evident three months after his death. His portrait is ubiquitous here in the Arghandab, appearing even on mud walls that line the roadways. He was buried next to a highway, on a prominent rise that overlooks the valley.

Yesterday afternoon, an elderly man was stooped in prayer beside the impressive gravesite. "I fought with Naqib," said Ghulam Sakhi, who hails from the nearby village of Khishky. "We fought together. We killed a lot of Russians. I salute him."

And his son, the new leader? "He's young, but I think he's intelligent. Maybe even brilliant." High praise indeed for a man who has not shown any sign of having mastered a demanding, dangerous job made more complex by internecine battles.

Mr. Naqibi has little leadership experience. Schooled mostly in Pakistan, he was a building contractor before his appointment as district head and tribal leader. "It has been difficult," he admits.

He does have his famous father's example to follow. The mullah's words of advice still ring in his ears.

"My father was directly involved with his people, and he told me I must work with them, too. Find work for them," he said. "And you will lead them down an easy path," remembers Mr. Naqibi.

He doesn't want people in the Arghandab to ignore their agrarian roots. The district is renowned for its pomegranates, among other crops. He worries that if too much international aid reaches his people, they might lose their self-reliance. Projects that make the Arghandab more secure are welcome, he says.

A forward operating base that Canadian army engineers are now building in the northern reaches of the district will help keep the Taliban away, he hopes.

But Mr. Naqibi dismisses other forms of assistance. "The Canadians wanted to give food to the people here," he explained. "I thought that would be trouble. So after discussing it with the elders, I refused it. I don't want the people here to become couch potatoes." But that might be the least of his worries, agrees the harried young potentate.

Pakistanis seek refuge from violence in Afghanistan

Mon Jan 28, 2008 9:15am EST By Jon Hemming

JAJI, Afghanistan, Jan 28 (Reuters) - On an icy clearing surrounded by forested peaks, Afghan officials struggled to keep order as they handed out food and blankets to dozens of tribesmen who fled Pakistan to escape sectarian violence.

Nearly 7,000 people have abandoned their homes in Pakistan's Kurram tribal region as fighting erupted between Sunni and Shi'ite Muslims during the Muslim mourning month of Moharram, an annual flashpoint for violence between the two sects.

"We feel safe here, but the situation in Pakistan is bad and getting worse everyday," said Nadir Khan, a Sunni Muslim, who was among the throng jostling outside a stone warehouse near Jaji, a border town in Afghanistan's southern Paktia province.

Bearded men with dark, leathery faces and teenaged boys with ear-mufflers shivered and rubbed their hands, trying not to slip on the ice or trip over the razor wire outside the storehouse as they waited for handouts of oil and flour wrapped in blankets.

Khan said he lost two of his family in the bloodshed, and their cars and homes were burnt, while there was no food available because all the shops in Parachinar, Kurram's main town, were closed.

"I won't take my family back until it's safe there," Khan said, adding that he was staying with relatives on the Afghan side of the border.

The exodus from Kurram is a sign of the growing insecurity in Pakistan's tribal areas.

According to Afghan government figures, collated by the U.S. military, 6,725 people had crossed into Afghanistan from Pakistan to escape the violence.

Around 75 percent of them were Afghans who had been living in Pakistan for some time. Most of those waiting for aid in the town of Jaji said they were Pakistani nationals.

In the past, refugees crossed the border going the other way, to escape from violence in Afghanistan.

Some four million Afghans escaped civil war in the 1980s and '90s to seek refuge in neighbouring Pakistan, though at least half have gone back.

"I am happy that we can help the Pakistanis," said Azad Khan, the district chief of Jaji, himself a former refugee in Pakistan.

"The people of Afghanistan are showing their hospitality. If they have two rooms, they will give up one for the people from Pakistan."

Zaheer-ul-Islam, a senior government administrator in Kurram, said families had fled places where clashes had been intense, but denied any had gone to Afghanistan.

Kurram has a history of sectarian rivalry. It is the only one of Pakistan's seven tribal regions where Shi'ites form a majority.

Jaji has also seen its share of violence with Taliban fighters slipping across from Pakistan to attack U.S. soldiers manning a small outpost there several times last year.

Since October it has been quiet, due in part to the heavy winter snowfall that makes movement difficult.

U.S. military officials expect Taliban fighters to become active again once the snows melt, and couldn't say whether the rising levels of Taliban-related violence in Pakistan would lead to less or more trouble on the Afghan side of the frontier. (Additional reporting by Zeeshan Haidar in Islamabad; Editing by Simon Cameron-Moore and Jerry Norton)

Amritsar sweets flavoured with Afghan dry fruits

Amritsar, Jan 28 (ANI): Dry fruits imported from Afghanistan add flavour to sweets made in Amritsar.

Sweet-makers in Amritsar prefer almond kernels, raisins, apricots and pistas from Afghanistan. Amritsar has traditionally been a transit hub for a wide variety of dry fruits from Afghanistan and Pakistan.

An importer of various items from across the border, the city is the market for fresh and quality dry fruits coming from Afghanistan. Avinash Singh, a sweetshop owner in Amritsar, said: “Since Afghanistan is ravaged by war, the supply of dry fruits has come down. But, if trade via road is allowed bilateral trade will get a boost. It not only benefits us, but Amritsar as a whole will become a business hub.”

For decades now, Amritsar have been the center of trade from Afghanistan and accounts for 15 per cent of India’s total dry fruit imports. India’s import of goods from Afghanistan via Pakistan has picked up after trucks were allowed to roll into India through Wagah border.

Since 2007, nearly 3,000 tones of dry fruits has been imported each month from Afghanistan. Experts feel India and Pakistan - the two important pillars of South Asia Free Trade Area — can play a crucial role in rebuilding Afghanistan.
Confederation of Indian Industries (Amritsar Zone) Chairman Gurveer Singh said:

“Fortunately, today the situation is changing. But, the situation is still not good. Trade at the moment is to the tune of about Rs 300 crore annually, which, we are getting one way into India. Import and export both can increase, but this is entirely dependent on free passage from Pakistan. At present, only imports are allowed through Pakistan from Afghanistan. There is tremendous need for Indian goods in Afghanistan.”

In view to increasing trade between India and Afghanistan, New Delhi is seeking passage from Pakistan to export goods via Wagah border. In 2004, Afghanistan’s 43.3 percent of exports were to India, and 32.8 percent of imports were from India and Pakistan. Since 2001, Afghanistan’s imports and exports have increased around 2.7 times.

Don’t o pen a Third Front in Pakistan

William M. Arkin on National and Homeland Security – Washington Post opinion

U .S. intelligence and national security officials now readily admit that al Qaeda is back, and that it together with a growing fundamental Taliban movement is flourishing in parts of Pakistan and neighboring Afghanistan. The simple explanation is that the growth is the result of the Iraq war and its drain on our resources, military and intellectual. The solution most favored inside and outside government in Washington is a shift in resources back to the original post 9/11 battlefield, and indeed we are already witnessing new deals being made with the government in Islamabad to bolster the counter-terror effort.

If conventional wisdom takes hold that the Pakistan resurgence is purely the product of an ill-conceived Iraq war, we will not only set ourselves on a faulty course for fighting in the future, but we will fail to understand the actual mistakes we have made in Iraq and Afghanistan, mistakes we could now repeat in Pakistan.

Here is the crisis as it stands in South Asia: We have a central Afghan government facing deepening domestic instability and a Pakistan that threatens to descend into disorder. The al Qaeda organization is retooled and resurgent.

Before the conclusion is drawn then that all that is needed is a Pakistani surge and a shift in resources back to the beginning, let's be honest about what happened in both Afghanistan and Iraq.

First Afghanistan: In late 2001, with the Taliban government in Afghanistan surprisingly and easily defeated, and with al Qaeda on the run, Rumsfeld and company, and the U.S. military particularly in the form of Gen. Tommy Franks, came to the conclusion that the "military" mission was over. So delighted were they with dodging a Soviet-style quagmire and so impressed were they with their lightning military success, they truly believed that the mop up was both minor and easy. No one at the top of the military food chain then believed that there was a long war ahead, and if anyone thought that that "war" was going to need the full participation of the non-military side of American power, no one was clearly articulating it. These were the days when Donald Rumsfeld's description of American fighting a new kind of war focused on Special Forces riding on horseback using laptops to call in air strikes not democracy and other slogans that would later emerge.

The bottom line was a poor assessment of the enemy and an error in understanding our own military achievement. The Iraq war loomed, the original 2003 war that is, imbued with the arrogance of the easy win in Afghanistan, hampered by the Rumsfeld leadership assumption of another quick in and out, and influenced by a continuing misunderstanding of the Iraqi mind.

We might go on today that the Bush administration lied, that there were too few troops or that there was no plan for the peace, but the failure was that we didn't understand what happened in Afghanistan, and we continued to ignore that the "enemy" wasn't going to be vanquished at the barrel of a gun. In fact, quite the opposite: The more conventional military might we threw at Iraq and Afghanistan and the Horn of Africa and elsewhere -- the more forces we stuffed into the region in the Gulf states and the Caucasus - the more we activated latent forces of discontent and hatred. U.S. military forces now "occupy" a half dozen Muslim countries in the region, and I can't help but think what many see are uniforms of subjugation and killing.

Influenced by our subsequent experience in Iraq, we see al Qaeda as some specific organized force to be found, fixed and defeated. Al Qaeda, of course, is not one thing, and its manifestation in Iraq is quite different than Pakistan, just as it is different in London or Madrid. This misunderstanding originally influenced our turning our back on Afghanistan to fight in Iraq, and in deferring to Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf to police his own country, even though we knew that those tribal border areas (and not Iraq) were the true wellspring of Islamic extremism.

The danger of the U.S. military becoming more engaged in Pakistan now is not only that once again we are walking into a new country and a new culture that we don't understand, but also that we are leading with our military, thus connoting, no matter how modulated and sensitive that force will be, that we are on the path to yet another occupation, yet the other irony of our back to the future strategy to focus on Pakistan is also that militarily we will hardly commit the number of forces needed to make any short-term difference.

The administration's increasingly public expressions of concern about Pakistan reflect intelligence reports of a gathering storm. Ultimately though, our best military strategy is getting out of the way and assisting Pakistan to deal with the problem. If Washington wants to put more resources into the fight, than bolster the U.S. presence at the border in Afghanistan. Al Qaeda is not waiting in some trench line to fight us; they are waiting for us to blunder into yet another country so that they can once again scatter, while proving America's military crusade.

As Karzai Loses His Grip, A Familiar Face Looms

 By John Barry and Michael Hirsh – NEWSWEEK Feb 4, 2008 Issue

 It wasn't long ago that Afghan president Hamid Karzai was seen as a
 dependable U.S. ally on par with Pakistani leader Pervez Musharraf. But as
 Afghanistan has fallen into violent chaos—along with Pakistan—tensions have
 erupted between Karzai and the United States and Britain. One of the most worried U.S.

 officials is Zalmay Khalilzad, the Afghan-born ambassador to the United
 Nations, who is seriously considering running for Karzai's seat himself when the  next elections are held in 2009, according to several U.N. and U.S. government  officials. Last Friday, Karzai blocked the appointment of British politician  Paddy Ashdown, the former U.N. High Representative for Bosnia, as envoy to  Afghanistan. During a meeting with U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, Karzai said that he and many
 Afghan parliamentarians did not want Ashdown in the post, according to a Western official briefed on the discussions who would only speak about them
 anonymously. Ashdown's formal role would have been to coordinate international
 relief programs. But American and British officials were hoping that Ashdown might also act as a kind of viceroy, bringing order to an Afghan government that finds itself besieged by a resurgent Taliban. Karzai's opposition grew as Ashdown sought to establish what his powers as "superenvoy" might be, one official said. "Karzai has been under a lot of pressure and criticism, and he might feel that he was being marginalized," says Jim Dobbins, the former U.S.
 ambassador to Afghanistan.

 U.S. and British officials have grown increasingly disenchanted with Karzai,
 who is now viewed as isolated in Kabul and surrounded by corrupt or
 incompetent ministers. Things are not much better next door in Pakistan, where
 militant Islamist groups have grown bolder and the embattled Musharraf is under pressure to step down. Like Karzai, Musharraf has begun lashing out publicly against what he sees as Western interference.

 Khalilzad had a successful stint as U.S. ambassador to Kabul after the
 Taliban fell, helping to form the Karzai government and working with then Maj.
 Gen. David Barno, commander of U.S. forces, to pacify the country. He also
 served as U.S. ambassador to Iraq and was one of the principal drafters of a 1992 "grand strategy" for U.S. global dominance that became known as the "Pentagon paper." Even so, in a 2005 interview with NEWSWEEK, Khalilzad said that one thing he had learned during his term in Afghanistan was that its people "don't want to be ruled by a foreigner."

 Khalilzad has not directly denied that he is considering a run. His
 spokeswoman, Carolyn Vadino, told NEWSWEEK that "he intends to serve out his post as long as [President Bush] wants him in office. And then after that, he hopes to find a job here in the private sector in the U.S." But a senior Bush
 administration official who knows Khalilzad (and who asked for anonymity because he was not authorized to discuss Khalilzad's plans) said the U.N. ambassador was actively exploring a run. Kenneth Katzman, Afghanistan expert at
 Washington's Congressional Research Service, said that "most observers think he would stand only if Karzai decides not to run." During an interview this week with NEWSWEEK's Lally Weymouth (page 47), though, Karzai seemed to leave the door open for a re-election bid.

[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.]