In this bulletin:

• NATO chief disputes US intelligence assessment on Afghanistan
• Thriving Taliban Drugs Show Afghan Woes
• Governor of Afghanistan's volatile Helmand says 'transferred'
• Government in Kabul disconnected and isolated: Kerry
• US will have to strike a new deal with Gen. Kiyani to win Afghan war
• US experts expect Pakistan army push in tribal area
• ISI's new triumvirate
• Canadians see progress in Kandahar
• Envoy to Afghanistan says Elbaradei's report proved Iran's righteousness
• Prince Harry to get Afghanistan medal
• Afghanistan: Extreme cold hits farmers
• Afghanistan: ‘A Tale Of Two Students’ Tells Nation’s Fate
• Clinton Talks About Stepping Up Effort in Afghanistan
• It is worth fighting in Afghanistan
• McCain, Clinton criticize Obama for threatening to order attacks
• Obama says Europe must do more in Afghanistan
• Letter from the past and the future

NATO chief disputes US intelligence assessment on Afghanistan

International Herald Tribune, France, The Associated Press
Published: February 29, 2008 WASHINGTON

NATO Secretary-General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer took issue Friday with the U.S. intelligence chief's recent estimate that the Afghan government controlled only about 30 percent of the country.

In a speech, de Hoop Scheffer also chided U.S. officials for publicly criticizing the contribution of other NATO members to the alliance's mission in Afghanistan.

Earlier, speaking after a White House meeting with President George W. Bush, de Hoop Scheffer stressed the importance of the Afghan mission. He said that besides supporting Afghan President Hamid Karzai and the Afghan people, "We're also there because we are fighting terrorism, and we cannot afford to lose. We are not losing; we are prevailing."

Bush said the United States is "committed to a comprehensive strategy that helps folks in Afghanistan realize security, at the same time, economic prosperity and political progress."

The comments come as the alliance is grappling with a resurgent Taliban and is looking to strengthen its fighting force. In just over a month, NATO is holding a summit in Bucharest, where Afghanistan is likely to dominate the discussions.

On Wednesday, U.S. National Intelligence Director Michael McConnell gave a bleak assessment of the security situation in Afghanistan telling the Senate Armed Services Committee that the Taliban controls 10 percent to 11 percent of the country, while the government controls 30 percent to 31 percent.

"That is not the analysis that our military commanders make," de Hoop Scheffer said in his talk organized by The Brookings Institution. "I must admit that I was surprised by the analysis that I heard."

De Hoop Scheffer also pleaded to the United States to cool its public hectoring of some European allies for greater contributions in Afghanistan.

U.S. officials, including Defense Secretary Robert Gates have repeatedly vented frustration that appeals for more troops — and to allow commanders to use them with fewer restrictions — haven fallen flat. Gates has even warned of a fissure within the alliance over the issue.

"Clearly there is a perception on the part of some NATO allies that others are not pulling their weight. Notably here in the United States there is a palpable feeling that some European allies are underperforming in Afghanistan, that they are either unable or unwilling to make a greater effort," he said. "In my view we simply cannot afford to play the blame game and can even less afford to play it publicly."

But de Hoop Scheffer also made clear that he believes the alliance must show more solidarity by eliminating the many restrictions — or caveats as they are known within NATO — that some members have imposed on how and where their troops can be used in Afghanistan.

"We cannot afford the notion that certain allies have only limited responsibilities and are confined to specific areas," he said. "I will not be happy and I will not be satisfied until we see a fundamental limitation of the caveats."

NATO's International Security Assistance Forces is 50,000-strong in Afghanistan, but commanders have asked for more combat troops, particularly for the country's south, where the insurgency is the most active.

Countries like Canada, which has 2,500 troops in Kandahar, have threatened to end their combat role in Afghanistan unless other NATO countries provide an additional 1,000 troops to help the anti-Taliban drive there.

The United States, which already has some 28,000 forces in the country — both in the NATO-led mission and as part of a separate U.S.-led counterterrorism coalition — is sending in April an additional 3,200 Marines, most of whom are expected to be stationed in Kandahar during their seven-month tour.

De Hoop Scheffer and Bush said they also discussed the bids by Croatia, Macedonia and Albania to join NATO, a decision that will be made at the summit.

"Our hope is that nations that have applied to join NATO will continue to meet their ... obligations," Bush said after meeting for about 45 minutes at the White House with Scheffer.

Scheffer promised nothing more than that NATO enlargement would be on the agenda in Romania. "The nations concerned should go on with their reforms," he said. "No tickets are punched yet."

Thriving Taliban Drugs Show Afghan Woes

The Associated Press, By ANNE GEARAN, 01/03/2008, WASHINGTON

The Taliban have built a huge and profitable drug operation in Afghanistan while provincial governors look the other way, the latest grim sign of backsliding in a country the U.S. has spent six years and billions of dollars trying to salvage.

A report Friday on drugs — it said Afghanistan now produces 93 percent of the world's opium poppy — comes hand in hand with the resurgence of Taliban militants despite U.S. anti-insurgent efforts. Also on the rise: terrorist violence such as roadside bombs, suicide bombings, and attacks on police.

The problems have worsened rather than diminished under the watch of the U.S.-backed government in Kabul and the relatively small number of American forces stationed in the nation while larger numbers are deployed to Iraq.

More than 6,500 people — mostly insurgents — died in violence in 2007, according to an Associated Press count of figures provided by local and international officials. It was the bloodiest year since the U.S.-led toppling of the Taliban in 2001.

Afghanistan risks becoming a failed state because of deteriorating international support and the growing insurgency, warned a recent independent study co-chaired by retired Marine Corps Gen. James Jones and former U.N. Ambassador Thomas Pickering.

Just this week, the top U.S. intelligence official told Congress that President Hamid Karzai's government controls only 30 percent of the country.

The resurgent Taliban control some 10 or 11 percent, while local tribes control the rest, National Intelligence Director Michael McConnell said.

That's despite the $140 billion Congress has appropriated for Afghanistan since the Sept. 11 attacks that were the original reason given for U.S. involvement. Al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden is still at large, thought to have fled through Afghanistan's tribal lands to a hideout across the Pakistan border. The U.S. money has gone for military operations, base security, reconstruction, foreign aid, embassy costs and veterans' health care.

Afghanistan's Defense Ministry has rejected McConnell's discouraging assessment, insisting the government controls the vast majority of the country. However, the State Department's account of the drug problem on Friday was in line with McConnell's view.

Afghan farmers grew more poppies for opium in 2007 than ever before, the report said, the second straight year of record production in the nation the United States invaded. Afghanistan is by far the world's largest heroin producing and trafficking country.

The drug trade deters progress toward a stable, economically independent democracy, concluded the annual survey of global drug production and trafficking.

The report describes an Afghan twist on the old organized crime protection racket: Drug barons supply the Taliban with money and weapons, and the hardline militants protect the growing regions and help get the drugs to market.

The drug problem is worst in the parts of the country where the Taliban have made their strongest comeback since being chased into the mountains by U.S. forces. The drugs are grown with near impunity in the same stripe of rugged tribal land along the Pakistan border where the U.S.-backed Afghan president has almost no authority and where American and NATO troops are battling the Taliban in the fiercest sustained fighting the Cold War alliance has ever seen.

NATO Secretary General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer said Friday the alliance is committed to Afghanistan "for the long haul."

"We are there to support President Karzai and the Afghan people," de Hoop Scheffer said during an Oval Office visit with President Bush. "But we're also there because we're fighting terrorism, and we cannot afford to lose. We will not lose. We are not losing; we are prevailing."

The United States, which has some 28,000 forces in the country — both in the NATO-led mission and as part of a separate U.S.-led counterterrorism coalition — is sending an additional 3,200 Marines in April. Most of them are expected to be stationed in Kandahar during their seven-month tour. Defense Secretary Robert Gates says NATO countries will have to come up with the troops to replace the Marines in the fall.

NATO claims that more than six years since the Taliban were ousted from power in Afghanistan, the militant movement is being "contained," with some 70 percent of violence last year occurring in just 10 percent of the country.

All 26 NATO nations have troops in Afghanistan. They have expanded the force from 5,000 to 43,000 since 2003, but many allies — including Germany, France, Spain, Turkey and Italy — have refused to send significant numbers of combat troops to the violent southern part of the country.

That refusal has opened a rift with the United States, Canada, Britain, the Netherlands, Denmark and Romania whose troops in the southern provinces have borne the brunt of Taliban violence over the past year. Canada has threatened to pull its 1,700 troops out of Kandahar next year unless allies provide 1,000 reinforcements. Bush did not mention the strain Friday.

"The United States is committed to the NATO mission in Afghanistan," Bush said. "We're committed to a comprehensive strategy that helps folks in Afghanistan realize security, at the same time, economic prosperity and political progress."

A senior administration official said Friday that while there should be no expectation of a surge in NATO troops after Bush and other NATO leaders meet this spring, there are likely to be "announcements that will be helpful." The official spoke on condition of anonymity to more candidly describe White House thinking. There are increasing signs that France, under the new leadership of President Nicolas Sarkozy, is ready to answer the repeated calls from the U.S. and other allies to step up in Afghanistan.

Governor of Afghanistan's volatile Helmand says 'transferred'

(AFP) Fri Feb 29 KABUL - The governor of Afghanistan's volatile Helmand province, where Taliban hold some districts and opium cultivation is flourishing, has been transferred out of the job, he said Friday.

Asadullah Wafa, appointed provincial governor in December 2006, told AFP his "transfer" came after he had made repeated requests to President Hamid Karzai to be moved out of the tough post.

Wafa said he has been appointed as director of a complaints committee in the national security section of Karzai's office.

Karzai's office would not comment on the move, seen as significant with Helmand a key nexus of a Taliban-led insurgency and producer of most of Afghanistan's illegal opium. No replacement has been announced.

A leading member of the Helmand provincial council said on condition of anonymity that Wafa was "dismissed" for weak administration and failing to crackdown on drugs mafia networks, and because of international pressure.

Wafa was involved in the expulsion last month of a leading European Union official and a top British diplomat working with the United Nations following allegations they had contacted Taliban in Helmand without Karzai's knowledge.

Most of the 7,500 British troops in Afghanistan are based in Helmand, including Britain's Prince Harry. The province experiences some of the worst violence of an insurgency led by the Taliban, who are trying to regain power after being ousted in late 2001.

On January 31, a Taliban suicide bombing in the provincial capital Lashkar Gah killed Wafa's deputy governor and five other people.

Government in Kabul disconnected and isolated: Kerry

Pajhwak News Agency 02/29/2008 – PAN - NEW YORK

Influential US Senator, John Kerry, who was in Afghanistan last week, said Tuesday the Afghan Government has become disconnected and isolated.

The government in Kabul has become somewhat disconnected, isolated, however you want to call it, from some of the provinces. And it's critical that that connection become robust, Kerry told reporters in Washington during a press conference on his trip to Afghanistan.

The strong remarks by Kerry, who was the Democratic Party presidential candidate in 2004, comes a day after his party colleague and travel companion to Afghanistan, Senator Joe Biden expressed his displeasure over Karzai rejecting the proposal to send British politician Paddy Ashdown as UN Envoy.

In fact Kerry reiterated Bidens view as part of his proposed action plan on Afghanistan. As we have been saying for some time, we clearly need one person in charge of coordinating the many operations in Afghanistan, he said.

Kerry argued for sending more troops, developing a comprehensive counter-narcotics policy, and more resources for reconstruction and development effort.

There are really two areas of responsibility here. One is for us to provide the tools and capacity to the government of Afghanistan, but the second is for the government of Afghanistan to use those tools and exercise that capacity, he said.

At the moment, there's a mixture of neither sufficiently meeting the task, Kerry observed at the press conference, which was also addressed by Biden, Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

Biden reiterated: There are a number of agencies, there are a number of countries involved with relatively small amounts of commitment, but in non-military in Afghanistan there is no coordination, there is no single coordinator. We finally got around to the point saying that we needed somebody who could bring all these elements together so that they were not working at odds with another or duplicating efforts here.

He went on to say: Paddy Ashdown, an incredibly competent person, was the person put forward by the EU and the United States. Karzai and others, for whatever their reasons, said no.

Biden said: I think we have to make it clear, if they expect us to foot the bill, we get to pick who the coordinator is. But we need an overall coordinator for the entire country of Afghanistan, coordinating all the economic aid and assistance coming in from around the world, and it has to increase significantly.

US will have to strike a new deal with Gen. Kiyani to win Afghan war

Thaindian.com, Thailand February 29th, 2008 Washington

In the current scenario when Pervez Musharrafs power has weakened after February 18 polls, the US will have to strike a new deal with Pakistan Army Chief General Ashfaq Kiyani to win the Afghanistan war.

But Kiyani must tread carefully lest he be seen as another American puppet. He has agreed to closer intelligence sharing among Pakistani, Afghan and US agents on the mythical Pakistan-Afghan border and quick responses by US-trained Pakistan Special Forces, United Press International has said in its report.

The US will continue remote-controlled (from Nevada-based cockpit by satellite) Predator drone airstrikes on targets generated by agents on the ground in North and South Waziristan and Bajaur. Yet this is where a WMD attack on the United States is being planned.

The three strongest parties to emerge from Pakistan’s relatively free elections are now haggling over what kind of coalition to put together among ideological opponents.

Together, they can impeach Musharraf and force the election of a powerless civilian President. But the Bush Administration wants Musharraf to stay in the job even with much reduced authority.

More worrisome for US and NATO objectives in Afghanistan, the two victorious partiees — the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz and the Pakistan People’s Party’s — want to talk and negotiate with Taliban, not fight.

Taliban reacted with a “unilateral cease-fire,” a decision Islamabad’s cognoscenti say was the work of the still all-powerful Inter-Services Intelligence agency, the original sponsoring entity that mid-wifed Taliban and shepherded its conquest of Afghanistan in the early 1990s.

Replacing US influence in Pakistan — or still competing for it — is Saudi Arabia and its protege Nawaz Sharif, the man who was deposed by Musharraf in 1999 and exiled to the Saudi kingdom for 10 years.

The new triumvirate that is gradually superseding President Bush’s “most trusted non-NATO ally” is made up of ISI, Saudi Arabia and Sharif. This does not bode well for the future of NATO in Afghanistan.

President Hamid Karzai’s government in Kabul controls only a third of the country while a resurgent Taliban is now solidly entrenched in 10 percent of the narco-state, according to US Director of National Intelligence Michael McConnell. And tribal leaders call the shots in the rest of a barren, medieval country. (ANI)

US experts expect Pakistan army push in tribal area

Reuters ,By David Morgan Feb 29, 2008 WASHINGTON

Pakistan's military appears to be preparing for a new tribal-area offensive against the Taliban leader blamed for the assassination of former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto, U.S. officials and experts say.

Baitullah Mehsud, a South Waziristan militant with al Qaeda connections, has been seen as a growing threat on both sides of the Pakistan-Afghanistan border since December when he became leader of the umbrella group, Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan, or Taliban Movement of Pakistan, U.S. officials say.

They expect military action to curb Mehsud's rising influence in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas, or FATA, possibly in the coming weeks as Pakistan's newly elected civilian leaders try to form a coalition government.

"Baitullah has gone and got himself so visible. He wants to kind of consolidate all of the FATA underneath his control, and because he's sticking out so far, the Pakistanis are going to hammer him down," said one U.S. defense official who spoke on condition of anonymity.

Pakistan officials, who along with U.S. intelligence have accused Mehsud of ordering Bhutto's Dec. 27 murder, believe him responsible for a wave of other suicide attacks across the country since July.

A top NATO commander in Afghanistan also said this week that Mehsud's organization was helping Taliban insurgents and other militants in the eastern provinces of Afghanistan.

A Pakistani official in Washington said Islamabad had continuous military operations in the tribal area where 100,000 regular army and paramilitary forces have been deployed. But he declined to comment on plans for any specific offensive.

It was not clear whether Pakistan would attempt to capture or kill Mehsud, U.S. experts said. But the military is constrained from launching an all-out offensive that could risk a backlash from tribes in the region.

"The Pakistani national security establishment is looking more to push back his network, not necessarily capture-kill him," said a U.S. analyst familiar with the Pakistan army's preparations who spoke on condition of anonymity.

"They want to decrease his willingness to stand up publicly to the Pakistanis, essentially to marginalize him as a player," he said.

Some U.S. experts view Mehsud as a skilled and wily warrior who has alternately sought peace and dealt humiliating blows to the military. A peace deal he signed in 2005 proved short-term and his resurgent threat has added to misgivings about a government strategy of alternating pressure and appeasement.

But western military officials say Mehsud has been credited with more influence than he deserves. According to the U.S. defense official, his main ambition appears to be restricted to consolidating power within his tribe in the FATA.

U.S. officials view the Pakistan tribal region as a growing threat because the area provides a safe haven to al Qaeda, which is believed to be deepening its ties to the Taliban and other militant groups including Mehsud's. Top defense officials have publicly offered Pakistan U.S. help against militants.

The Pakistani army last conducted an operation against Mehsud in early January. But the action ended after a few days amid talk of an unofficial truce, possibly because of deteriorating weather and outbreaks of militant activity elsewhere, according to a Western military official in Islamabad.

But the official, familiar with the counter-insurgency campaign, was encouraged that the army had taken the initiative. The stand-off appeared to be aimed at bottling up Mehsud and making people in the area resent the hardship he had brought to the rest of the Mehsud tribe, he said.

"I can't point to anything in the past that equates to that," the official said, adding that General Ashfaq Kayani appeared to have brought greater focus to operations since taking over as army chief in November from President Pervez Musharraf. (Additional reporting by Simon Cameron Moore in Islamabad, editing by David Storey)

ISI's new triumvirate

United Press International - By Arnaud de Borchgrave, 02/29/2008

"Karzai used to be called the mayor of Kabul. No more, said my informant. He doesn't even control the capital..."

WASHINGTON - Afghanistan, the main battleground in the war on terror, has been shortchanged by the Iraq war and its manpower and equipment priorities.

Al-Qaida got trounced by U.S. forces in Iraq -- but Iraq was never the problem. Under Saddam Hussein, al-Qaida was not welcome in Iraq. After the U.S. invasion, Iraq became a force multiplier for would-be unholy warriors from Middle Eastern countries -- primarily Saudi Arabia -- and Europe's Muslim ghettos. Several hundred al-Qaida volunteers have been killed -- or gone home. But home base for al-Qaida and Taliban was and still is the weird-sounding acronym for Pakistan's Federally Administered Tribal Area -- FATA -- some seven fiercely independent tribal "agencies" under nominal Pakistani sovereignty that form, along with Baluchistan (one of Pakistan's four provinces), the 1,400-mile border with Afghanistan.

Inhabited by fiercely independent Pashtun tribes whose women are so backward only 2 percent can read and write and their men only marginally better at 20 percent, the landscape is among the world's most inhospitable. Mountains that soar to 15,000 feet interspersed by deep gorges and ravines and deserts provide safe havens for al-Qaida and Taliban's training camps as well the world's most wanted terrorists. For Pashtun tribesmen, hospitality is sacrosanct. Rewards for information leading to the capture of Osama bin Laden and his top lieutenants have soared from $20 million to $50 million -- but no one talks.

Under President-Gen. Pervez Musharraf, the U.S. military was told to butt out of FATA. Bombing of FATA targets by the United States or raids by Special Forces would have led to bloody clashes countrywide. Bin Laden is certainly more popular than President Bush for millions of Pakistanis. Instead, the United States made its $1 billion-a-year military aid to Pakistan contingent on Musharraf ordering the Pak army to chase Taliban and al-Qaida up and down FATA's snow-covered peaks.

The Pakistan army began entering FATA in mid-December 2001 for the first time since independence with 37,000 troops. Assigned to blocking positions while U.S. bombers dropped 15,000-pound "Daisy Cutters" on the Tora Bora mountain range, they deployed too late to intercept the terrorist chieftains. Since then, Musharraf has increased the military assigned to FATA to 110,000 troops. Most of them hate the assignment with a mix of revulsion against killing fellow Pakistanis, unease over the hostility of the local population, and the conviction they are acting under U.S. orders transmitted by Musharraf.

Beginning last summer, the Pak army in FATA, mostly Punjabis, in effect stood down. Heavy casualties and sympathy for Taliban fighters led to ambushes and surrenders without a fight. This makes the Afghan war unwinnable, unless the United States can strike a new deal with new Pakistan military chief Gen. Ashfaq Pervez Kiyani now that Musharraf is a much-weakened civilian president subject to impeachment by political parties victorious in the Feb. 18 elections. But Kiyani must tread carefully lest he be seen as another American puppet. He has agreed to closer intelligence sharing among Pakistani, Afghan and U.S. agents on the mythical Pakistan-Afghan border and quick responses by U.S.-trained Pakistan Special Forces. The United States will continue remote-controlled (from Nevada-based cockpit by satellite) Predator drone airstrikes on targets generated by agents on the ground in North and South Waziristan and Bajaur -- which 99.9 percent of Americans could not locate on a world map. Yet this is where a WMD attack on the United States is being planned.

The three strongest parties to emerge from Pakistan's relatively free elections are now haggling over what kind of coalition to put together among ideological opponents. Together, they can impeach Musharraf and force the election of a powerless civilian president. But the Bush administration wants Musharraf to stay in the job even with much reduced authority. More worrisome for U.S. and NATO objectives in Afghanistan, the two victorious pols -- the Pakistan Muslim League's Nawaz Sharif and the Pakistan People's Party's Asif Zardari (Benazir Bhutto's widower) -- want to talk and negotiate with Taliban, not fight. Taliban reacted with a "unilateral cease-fire," a decision Islamabad's cognoscenti say was the work of the still all-powerful Inter-Services Intelligence agency, the original sponsoring entity that midwifed Taliban and shepherded its conquest of Afghanistan in the early 1990s.

Trouble is, this was tried Sept. 5, 2006, when Musharraf signed a peace accord with FATA's tribal leaders, which was violated within 48 hours. One of the signatories was Baitullah Mehsud, the "Emir of Taliban in Pakistan," second in command after Mullah Mohammed Omar, and the terrorist who ordered the assassination of Mrs. Bhutto last Dec. 27.

Replacing U.S. influence topside in Pakistan -- or still competing for it -- is Saudi Arabia and its protege Nawaz Sharif, the man who was deposed by Musharraf in 1999 and exiled to the Saudi kingdom for 10 years. He flew home last fall after Mrs. Bhutto's return, this time generously bankrolled by his Saudi friends. Saudi Arabia was one of only three countries (with Pakistan and the United Arab Emirates) to recognize the Taliban regime in Afghanistan.

The new triumvirate that is gradually superseding President Bush's "most trusted non-NATO ally" is made up of ISI, Saudi Arabia and Sharif. This does not bode well for the future of NATO in Afghanistan.

President Hamid Karzai's government in Kabul controls only a third of the country while a resurgent Taliban is now solidly entrenched in 10 percent of the narco-state, according to U.S. Director of National Intelligence Michael McConnell. And tribal leaders call the shots in the rest of a barren, medieval country whose opium poppy production generates more than two-thirds of its gross domestic product and funds Taliban's insurgency. The most optimistic estimate calls for the United States and NATO to remain engaged, with increased military and economic assets, for another three to five years. Ten years would be more realistic.

Speaking not for attribution, a Darwi-speaking U.S. official, back from a wide-ranging inspection trip to Afghanistan, said, "The corruption defies imagination. It has to rank as the worst in the world." Karzai, he said, used to be called the mayor of Kabul. No more, said my informant. He doesn't even control the capital. Most of his ministers have U.S. visas up to date -- just in case. More important is that NATO could fracture and founder over the Afghan commitment. Violence and terrorism could then quickly escalate across the world.

Canadians see progress in Kandahar

Canada.com, Canada, Matthew Fisher, Canwest News Service
Published: Friday, February 29, 2008 - KANDAHAR AIRFIELD, Afghanistan

Fighting between the Taliban and Canadians has dropped off to zero in the province of Kandahar this year, according to the outgoing commander of the Canadian battle group here.

"In the past two months, the enemy has not had any direct contact with the coalition and I have no trouble with that," Lt.-Col. Alain Gauthier said Friday while discussing what he described as an improved security situation in Panjwaii and Zahri districts, where most of the fighting with the Taliban has been concentrated since Canadian forces returned to a combat role in Kandahar two years ago.

However, there continues to be a high number of casualties caused by improvised explosive devices (IEDs) and suicide attacks. Asked about this, Gauthier said: "That announces the end of the reign of the Taliban."

The colonel commanded a battle group that had been built around the 3rd battalion, the Royal 22nd Regiment, popularly known as the Van Doo. A large number of the battle group boarded aircraft for Quebec late Friday after handing over responsibility for defending Kandahar to a Manitoba-based battle group.

"We maintained the initiative," Gauthier, who also served with the Van Doo in Timor, said in explaining his unit's strategy. "We didn't allow the repositioning of the supplies and weapons of enemy combatants."

At the handover ceremony, the Van Doo were praised by Brig-Gen. Guy Laroche, the Canadian task force commander, and by the incoming battle group commander, Lt. Col. Dave Corbould, of the Princess Patricias Canadian Light Infantry, for their ability to adapt to changing circumstances. It resulted in what Gauthier described as an enlarged "zone of security" to the west of Kandahar City.

Furthermore, the Van Doos "put in place circumstances so that Afghans could rejuvenate their lives," Gauthier said, citing the construction of a causeway, the paving of an important road and the establishment of a ring of police substations in two districts where Canadian troops worked closely with Afghan authorities.

"You can see tangible signs of recovery. People are on the roads, people are returning to their homes and the economy is slowly improving," Gauthier said.

The Van Doo paid a high price for its successes. The battle group lost 10 soldiers during its six months in Afghanistan. Only one death came as a result of direct combat with the Taliban. Seven soldiers died when their vehicles struck IEDs. Two others died when their vehicle rolled over. The last Van Doo to have died was killed by an IED strike on Jan. 23.

Corbould commands the fifth rotation of Canadian combat forces to be deployed to Kandahar since March, 2006. It is largely made up of soldiers from the 2nd battalion of the PPCLI, which is based at Shilo, Manitoba.

Corbould exchanged salutes and compliments with Gauthier at a formal ceremony presided over by Laroche, commander of all Canadian forces in Afghanistan.

"The first challenge is that we left -40 C," Corbould said of the recent weather in western Canada. Temperatures during the summer will climb into the high 50s (Celsius) and were already in the high twenties on Friday. To prepare for the mission the Patricias had conducted exercises at Wainwright, Alta., last fall.

"Every rotation is benefiting from the previous rotation," Corbould said. "We have been entirely supervised by trainers from rotos one, two and three and have received daily help from the rotation that has been here."

An additional positive factor was that about one soldier in five in the battle group already had served in Afghanistan, he said, creating a culture of "experience that cannot be replicated."

The first wave of a U.S. Marine force that soon will number more than 3,000 troops has begun to arrive in southern Afghanistan. Persistent reports from Washington suggest the Marines may conduct joint operations with the Canadians in Kandahar and with the British in neighbouring Helmand, the two provinces where the insurgency is strongest.

The incoming Canadian battle group had not yet been briefed about whether it would be operating with the Marines, Corbould said.

"We know they are coming and I have worked with them before as individuals and with U.S. forces as a group," he said. As the Marines were part of the NATO alliance, the colonel said he expected that should the Marines and Canadians work together, there would be few problems aside from some surmountable technical glitches.

Envoy to Afghanistan says Elbaradei's report proved Iran's righteousness

IRNA, Feb 29, Kabul - Iran's Ambassador to Afghanistan here Friday considered IAEA Secretary General's recent report on Iran as strong proof for the country's righteousness.

According to IRNA correspondent in Kabul, Fada-Hossein Maleki added in his press conference with the Afghan TV networks and news agencies, "Mr. ElBaradei meanwhile confirmed Iran's close cooperation with the IAEA, and that Iran has not breached any of the international laws, or IAEA and NPT rules and regulations in the course of his past and present day peaceful nuclear activities."

Maleki who was meeting the Afghan media at Iran's Embassy said, "That report was definitely a great victory for the Iranian nation." He added, "That victory was achieved after the report issued by 16 US intelligence agencies on peaceful nature of our country's nuclear program."

The Iranian Ambassador stressed, "Placing those two reports side by side of one another would lead us to draw conclusion that the world has begun to grasp the reality of Iran's righteousness in its often repeated claim that our nuclear activities are entirely aimed at peaceful purposes."

Maleki reiterated, "Iran would pursue its nuclear activities resolutely, disregarding the accusations, propagation, and threats of a few countries."

Referring to those few countries' accusations against Iran, our country's ambassador said, "We need to say nothing in response to them, since Mr. ElBaradei's report proved how null and void their claims have always been."

He noted, "The main objective of those countries is depriving Iran of modern sciences and technologies, and that sick intention is obviously revealed for most of the world nations today."

Maleki then posed the logical question, "How come taking advantage of the nuclear technology is not a taboo for those countries, but should be regarded a red line for Iran today?" adding, "The nuclear technology has over 450 usages in our world today, only one of which is not peaceful."

Iran's Ambassador to Kabul pointed out that taking advantage of nuclear technology for peaceful purposes is the natural right of the entire world nations, including the Afghans and expressed hope that the talented Afghan youth would also master that science and technology.

He reiterated, "Some countries are opposed to the Iranian nation's advancement and cannot see that the talented Iranians are standing side by side of them in that field."

Maleki said, "Following the publication of IAEA Secretary General's report many countries have become convinced that Iran has been mistreated in that respect, and that our country in entitled to the right to take advantage of this technology free from bullying of the arrogant powers."

Prince Harry to get Afghanistan medal

Telegraph.co.uk, United Kingdom Last Updated: 01/03/2008

Prince Harry is in line for a medal after being deployed to Afghanistan.

An MoD spokesman has said the Operational Service Medal is expected to be given to the Prince along with the rest of his regiment for duties on the front line.

The silver medal shows the crowned effigy of the Queen, the Prince's grandmother, with the Union flag on the reverse, surrounded by the inscription For Operational Service.

It also has the four major points of the compass, with four Coronets - Royal, Naval, Mural-Army and Astral-Royal Air Force.

The ribbon has a broad central red stripe, flanked by a stripe of royal blue and one of light blue, to represent the three services. An outer stripe of light brown reflects the landscape of Afghanistan.

Qualifying criteria for the medal, which has an "Afghanistan" clasp, are described by the Ministry of Defence (MoD) as complex. Lengths of service required are varied, depending on the operation and location.

The Prince will be able to wear the medal alongside his Golden Jubilee Medal, which he was given as a gift from the Queen marking her 50-year reign in 2002 and has worn on parade at Sandhurst.

Afghanistan: Extreme cold hits farmers

(AKI) 29 February Rome

The harshest winter in nearly 30 years has devastated Afghanistan's livestock sector, killing over 300,000 animals since late December and seriously affecting people's livelihoods, the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) said on Friday.

High fuel, vegetable oil and cereals are compounding the vulnerability of poor households, reducing their access to food.

The extreme cold has killed over 800 people, and many others, especially shepherds and their families, have suffered severe frostbite, requiring disabling amputation, according to a recent FAO report.

Food and medical supplies have been running short as roads in remote areas remain blocked by heavy snowfall. Winter crops in the hardest-hit areas have been severely damaged, in particular vegetables, which are the main source of nutrition during the lean winter months.

“The situation is very worrying,” said Samuel Kugbei, acting FAO representative in Afghanistan. "Livestock are a lifeline for many of the affected households, whose food situation is already precarious. Without assistance, they risk even greater food insecurity.”

FAO has distributed 20 tonnes of feed in Herat, one of the hardest-hit provinces. FAO is also providing 60 tonnes of feed concentrate to the worst-affected farmers in Bamyan Province.

The European Commission’s humanitarian aid department has pledged over 500 000 dollars to provide 500 tonnes of feed concentrate.

High world wheat prices, and the low purchasing power of the bulk of the population, mean that the country’s commercial import requirement this year of 550,000 tonnes of wheat, the main staple, is unlikely to be met and the figure may need to be revised upwards.

The UN agency is seeking over 2 million dollars to provide an additional 1 500 tonnes of feed, as well as vaccines, multi-vitamins and anti-parasitic treatment for the livestock of 50,000 vulnerable farming families.

The food aid requirement had been estimated at 100 000 tonnes of wheat. Early prospects for the 2008 wheat crop, currently in its dormancy period, are favourable, however.

With temperatures beginning to rise, snow is melting rapidly in the mountains and flooding of major rivers is expected in the spring. FAO is currently working with the national disaster management authorities and its UN and humanitarian partners on measures to prepare for and respond to flooding.

Afghanistan: ‘A Tale Of Two Students’ Tells Nation’s Fate

Radio Free Europe - Radio Liberty By Farangis Najibullah  February 28, 2008

Marjan and Malalai have a lot in common. Both are Afghan. Both are girls. Both are 17-years-old. But for all the rest, the teens might as well inhabit different planets.

Marjan’s biggest worry is deciding about her future career. The high-school student from the northern city of Mazar e-Sharif is having a hard time choosing whether to become a lawyer or teacher. Marjan attends Hashem-e Barat girls’ school in the relatively prosperous and peaceful northern province of Balkh.

In an interview ahead of the start of the new academic year in most Afghan areas, Marjan tells RFE/RL that she loves going to school, studying, and socializing with friends and playing sports like volleyball.

"I really like it when our teachers give us homework. I enjoy doing my homework. And I like reading books. We have a library at school. We read books there," Marjan says.

Malalai, by contrast, is living a life-or-death drama.

Malalai would love to go to university and study to become a professional. Yet she’s unsure whether she will even be able to finish high school in southern Helmand Province.

Unlike Balkh, Helmand is one of the least secure areas in Afghanistan. The province is known as a hotbed of Taliban violence and is the biggest drug-producing province in the war-torn country.

Many obstacles stand in Malalai’s way. The Taliban, which forbid girls from studying during its severe rule, has burned down several local schools and attacked students and teachers. Those are fairly significant disincentives in an area where some conservative parents do not want daughters attending schools anyway.

"The situation is not good, but I still go to school. We appreciate our teachers helping us here at the school. We are very afraid of going to school because of insecurity, but they try to calm us down. We try hard and our teachers also want us to be teachers and doctors in the future," Malalai says.

Record Number Of Students

The contrasting fates of Marjan and Malalai starkly illustrate the different pace of progress across Afghanistan today. They also highlight the ups and downs of Afghanistan’s education system as students and teachers in 9,000 schools in 29 provinces prepare for the new academic year’s start on March 23.

The Afghan Education Ministry expects some 6.5 million children -- some 35 percent of them girls -- attend schools across the country. Historically, that’s a record number of students, Zuhur Afghan, a ministry spokesman, told RFE/RL.

Many Afghans believe that restoring and expanding the county’s education system has been one of Afghanistan’s success stories after the fall of the hard-line Taliban in 2001.

The Education Ministry says it intends to start construction on 30 new schools in each province. In addition, at least one teacher-training school is being set up in every province. More than 50 million new textbooks will also be distributed at schools during the first day of the new academic year.

By any measure, this is massive success in a country where a few years ago girls couldn’t even attend school and nonreligious subjects were barely taught. But success has come with a price.

Zuhur Afghan, the Education Ministry spokesman, says the lack of security remains the major concern for education workers.

As the Taliban has become more active over the past two years, they have increasingly aimed attacks at soft targets such as aid workers and other civilians. Officials say more than 230 people in the education sector have been killed. More than 220 others, including teachers and students, have been wounded in Taliban attacks. Many schools have also been torched, leaving 300,000 children temporarily out of school.

The Education Ministry acknowledges the international community’s financial support to Afghanistan’s education system. Most recently, the United Nations Children’s Fund has appealed to donors to provide an additional $15 million for Afghan schools.

That’s a drop in the bucket compared to the $3 billion that the Education Ministry says is needed to rebuild its educational system over the next five years. Nonetheless, Zuhur Afghan says the funds are needed now to build new schools and provide textbooks and other school materials.

"Sixty percent of our schools do not have a building; lessons take place in mosques, tents or simply under trees. Many schools lack desks, blackboards, and chalk. Many of our schools do not have water and sanitation facilities, such as bathrooms," Afghan says.

Nafisa Ghiyasi, the head of the Hashem-e Barat school in Mazar-e Sharif, tells RFE/RL that a key issue for her school was a shortage of classrooms. She says the school was waiting for funds from the government and donors to pay for new building and other key expenses, but the money never came.

Building  Brick By Brick

So teachers and students took the matter into their own hands. "Everybody made a contribution," she says. "Some people brought bricks, others provided construction materials, while others offered their labor. And in a few weeks, parents and teachers built six additional classrooms."

Ghiyasi says such initiatives demonstrate that Afghans want their children to get an education. It’s an opportunity that many parents never had.

Yet Ghiyasi says it’s not enough and that her school, with some 4,000 students and more than 110 teachers, still faces shortages of just about everything.

"Teachers say, ‘I don’t want to go far, give me a job in the city center.’ But there are too many teachers in city centers -- more than schools need. Other places lack teachers. For instance, my school faces a shortage of teachers of physics, math and English," Ghiyasi says.

Most teachers, especially female tutors, are reluctant to take jobs in remote villages. Zuhur Afghan says that the lack of female teachers in villages "is a huge issue" because most parents in villages refuse to send their daughter to school if the teacher is not a woman.

To attract more female teachers to village schools, the ministry has offered to pay them three times more than their regular salary. The ministry also offers jobs to the husband or a male relative of the female teacher to enable them to travel to and stay in rural areas.

Still, it’s not easy drawing talent from big cities, and the Education Ministry has asked the government to provide additional funds to increase teachers’ wages over the next three years.

"We have far too many challenges facing schools and teachers," Ghiyasi says. "Nevertheless, we should try to rebuild the education system both through our own power and donors’ assistance. We owe it to future generations."

Clinton Talks About Stepping Up Effort in Afghanistan

The New York Times - The Caucus - Katharine Q. Seelye February 29, 2008
WACO,

Here’s something that got lost today in all the coverage of Senator Hillary Clinton’s rally here, where she further questioned Senator Barack Obama’s readiness to serve as commander in chief: She also suggested she wanted to step up action in Afghanistan. She did not specify military action, but that was the strong implication. Her audience of about 1,200 people had applauded her every time she took a swipe at Mr. Obama. But they seemed decidedly cool toward the idea of deeper involvement in Afghanistan. When she mentioned it, the applause meter dropped.

“I will also be a commander in chief who refocuses on winning the war in Afghanistan,” she said. “I will do everything in my power to reverse our declining position in Afghanistan,” she said, vowing to make it clear to allies in NATO “that this is their war too.” There were a couple of off-screen moments that caught our eye too. These took place in satellite interviews she did from Waco with various TV stations in Ohio and Texas. In one, with WTVG, the ABC affiliate in Toledo, she reaffirmed the task in Afghanistan: “When you hire a president you are really hiring someone for that job and in this case it is someone who manages two wars, a war to end in Iraq and a war to win in Afghanistan.” The other, with WCPO, the ABC affiliate in Cincinnati, was in response to the question of whether she needed to win in Ohio in order to stay in the race: “I think winning is what matters,” Mrs. Clinton said. “You know, I’ve been around politics for a long time, what matters is winning. I feel good about our chances both in Ohio and Texas.”

It is worth fighting in Afghanistan

Telegraph.co.uk, United Kingdom - Last Updated: 01/03/2008

Most of us enjoy the sight of a young man taking pride in wearing the Queen's uniform. We only hope that the fuss made about Prince Harry over the past 48 hours will serve to draw attention to the other men and women carrying the fight to our enemies in the Afghan hills. A good deal of anti-war feeling was generated by the Iraq invasion, and some of it inevitably spilt over into Afghanistan. But, whatever the controversy surrounding Iraq, there is no question that we were and are right to be in Afghanistan.

Never forget that we deployed in response to an unprovoked attack: more British subjects died on September 11 2001 than in any other terrorist attack in our history. When we arrived, we found an advanced terrorist training infrastructure, and a number of British-born Muslims using that infrastructure, evidently in preparation for attacks in this country.

Although our presence is intended principally to ensure our own security, it has the happy secondary consequence of ameliorating the condition of the Afghans. On any measure, life in that hard, beautiful country is better. Schools and clinics are being built, fallow land brought back under cultivation, electricity generated. There are elections at local and national level. There is a free press. Girls are back in school.

Yet those who harboured the terrorists have not gone away. In the trackless hills of Helmand, they seek to seize by force what they could not secure through the ballot. The battle against the Taliban is, in short, a battle for civilisation in its widest sense. It is not one that we should be fighting alone. Yet it often seems that, not for the first time, the defence of freedom has fallen largely to the English-speaking peoples. There are brave contingents from the United States, Canada, Australia and New Zealand in the battle zone. But other Western allies are unwilling to deploy in anger, and are hanging back in the already pacified parts of the country. We hope they will assume their responsibility: they, too, have been the targets of jihadi violence. They, too, have a stake in the success of liberal democracy. They should play their full part.

McCain, Clinton criticize Obama for threatening to order attacks

NBC News - By Andy Merten 02/29/2008 

While recent campaign talking points seem focused on the nation’s flailing economy and its foreign wars, concerns over Pakistan remain an important, though somewhat less heralded, part of that dialogue.

“The reality is al-Qaida has created a safe haven in Pakistan that in some respects is more effective than what they had in Afghanistan before 9/11,” said NBC News Terror Analyst Roger Cressey.

“It is critical for our long-term strategy against al-Qaida, the Taliban, and Afghanistan.”

Pakistan was brought up early and often on the presidential campaign trail by Democratic contender and Senate Foreign Relations Chair Joe Biden.

At an MSNBC debate in October, the legislator even went so far as to say he feared Pakistan more than Iran.

“What is the greatest threat to the United States of America? 2.6 kilograms of highly enriched uranium in Tehran or an out of control Pakistan? It's not close.”

Biden’s campaign soon ended, and slowly, the topic receded into the background.

But that may have changed over the past week, as political opponents, both Republican and Democrat, have taken Sen. Barack Obama to task over his policy views toward Islamabad.

At Tuesday night’s MSNBC debate in Cleveland, Sen. Hillary Clinton criticized her opponent’s foreign policy experience, saying, “Last summer, he basically threatened to bomb Pakistan, which I don’t think was a particularly wise position to take.”

And speaking at his Wisconsin primary victory party last week, Sen. John McCain also brought up Obama's earlier statements on Pakistan.

"Will we risk the confused leadership of an inexperienced candidate who once suggested bombing our ally, Pakistan?" asked the Arizona senator. Even after the Wisconsin speech, McCain reiterated his criticism.

The next day, he said, “You make plans and you work with the other country that is your ally and friend, which Pakistan is.”

“You don’t broadcast and say that you’re going to bomb a country without their permission.

Both Clinton and McCain were making hay of a speech given by Obama in August, when he said he would consider unilateral bombings of al-Qaida camps in Pakistan, with or without consent from Islamabad.

"Let me make this clear: There are terrorists holed up in those mountains, that murdered 3,000 Americans," said Obama during the counterterrorism address.

"If we have actionable intelligence about high-valued terrorist targets and if President Musharraf will not act, we will."

But, despite the criticism, there’s some recent evidence that suggests Obama’s idea of unilateral strikes within Pakistan’s borders may not be that different from current U.S. actions.

Last week, The Washington Post reported that in late January, a CIA aircraft fired on several buildings in the Pakistani town of Mir Ali, killing a senior al-Qaida commander and several others.

The paper, quoting anonymous U.S. officials, said that the action was done without seeking approval from the Pakistani government.

Comparing The Washington Post report to Obama’s take on Pakistan, Cressey said, “There’s not a whole lot of distance between the policy he articulated and what the administration is doing now.”

“The reality is that any president, Republican or Democrat, will unilaterally go after a target when the intelligence is good,” he said, adding, “You’re not attacking an ally; you’re attacking a de facto sanctuary.”

Indeed, former White House Press Secretary Tony Snow resisted commenting on Obama’s opinions in August, but did concede that the administration would “keep all options open if there’s actionable intelligence” when it comes to al-Qaeda targets within Pakistan.

Still, the McCain campaign contends that it was foolish for Obama to announce he would carry out such an attack as president, especially while vying for the White House.

“Before the (Mir Ali) attack, did President Bush or Defense Secretary Gates get up and have a press conference?” asked McCain foreign policy adviser Randy Scheunemann. “Of course they didn’t.”

“You don’t telegraph your punches; you don’t announce to the world that you’re going to do things in a way that could harm your allies.”

It’s criticism that Obama responded to at Tuesday’s debate. “With respect to Pakistan, I never said I would bomb Pakistan,” said Obama.

“What I said was that if we have actionable intelligence against bin Laden or other key al-Qaida officials and we -- and Pakistan is unwilling or unable to strike against them, we should.”

Obama says Europe must do more in Afghanistan

(Reuters) By Jeff Mason Thu Feb 28, 7:55 PM ET BEAUMONT, Texas 

European nations must step up their efforts in Afghanistan and not count on the United States and Britain to do the "dirty work" in fighting the Taliban, Democratic presidential hopeful Barack Obama said on Thursday.

Obama, the front-runner to become his party's nominee for the White House, praised Britain's Prince Harry for secretly serving on the frontlines of the war and said other NATO allies should be doing more.

"With respect to our NATO allies, I've been very clear that we do need more support from them. We also may need to lift some of the constraints that they have placed on their forces there," Obama said on his campaign plane.

"You can't have a situation where the United States is called upon to do the dirty work, or the United States and Britain are called upon to do the dirty work, and nobody else wants to engage in actual firefights with the Taliban."

The Illinois senator said that characterization of avoiding combat did not represent each NATO country's position, and he did not single out specific nations.

Germany has faced growing pressure from NATO partners in past weeks to increase the number of German troops in Afghanistan and shift them from the north to dangerous southern regions.

Obama said Washington would pay closer attention to the opinions of its allies on foreign policy issues under an Obama administration, a nod to the strained relations that resulted between some European countries and the United States after the Iraq war, which he opposed.

"It is, I think, important for us to ask more from our European allies," he said. "It is also important for us to send a signal that we're going to be listening to them when it comes to policies that they find objectionable, Iraq being at the top of the list."

In a debate on Tuesday, Democratic hopeful and New York Sen. Hillary Clinton chastised Obama for not doing anything to address the situation in Afghanistan when he chaired a Senate subcommittee on Europe and was in a position to hold hearings.

On Thursday, Britain's Ministry of Defense said Prince Harry, third in line to the British throne, had served as a combat soldier on the front lines in Afghanistan for 2 1/2 months.

Obama praised the 23-year-old soldier: "I think that the fact that Prince Harry is serving is commendable, and I'm sure the people of Great Britain are very proud of him."

Letter from the past and the future

Toronto Star, Canada, Rosie DiManno Feb 29, 2008

The other day, I received an email from an old friend.

His name is Faramarz Sangi and the last time I saw him, he was putting me into a barge to cross the heavily mined Amu Darya River that separates northern Afghanistan from Tajikistan. That was in late December 2001, after we'd spent two months together running hither and yon with the jubilant Northern Alliance as American B-52s dropped megaton bombs on Taliban forces.

Faramarz was my fixer. He entered my life one fortuitous morning after I'd just finished using the running-water bathtub – the only contraption of its kind thereabouts – in a house owned by Ahmed Shah Massoud. The legendary Alliance leader was dead by then, assassinated by Al Qaeda on the eve of 9/11 in a quid pro quo between Osama bin Laden and one-eyed Mullah Omar.

It was a rescue of sorts, as Faramarz offered his services as facilitator and interpreter, to replace the totally inept fellow I'd been using, who'd turned out to be both a thief and incapable of stringing together more than a dozen words of English. Faramarz, by comparison, spoke English well, had a lovely disposition, was well-connected with the Alliance and devoted himself entirely to my well-being.

In the way of Afghan males, however, and the tradition of prolonged palaver, this required man-to-man negotiations just shy of the Oslo Accords. Two days they spent, drinking tea while I paced, Faramarz explaining that his rival's honour had to be appeased. Finally, said honour was appeased to the tune of several hundred U.S. dollars.

The only problem was that Faramarz would never leave my side, even when I wanted desperately to be alone and would bird-dog me from a distance on those occasions when I slipped away for some solitary rambling. "It is not done,'' he would admonish. "Women do not walk alone in Afghanistan.'' Adding: "You are shaming me in front of the other men.''

Eventually, Faramarz moved into my mud-walled hovel. Every evening, by candlelight, we played hours of gin rummy, which I taught him. He introduced me to Afghan folk music, the tapes he'd managed to save when such godless abominations were outlawed by the Taliban.

Faramarz had been a university student in Kabul when the Taliban came to power, far more educated than most Afghans. Yet I was shocked, one day, when I tried to have a conversation with him about Israel. He'd never heard of Israel. He'd never heard of Jews. This is how insular and primitive Afghan society remained, in the 21st century, although it was refreshing not to rehash Muslim-Jewish grievances. Faramarz didn't know anything about religious enmity and Middle East wars.

It is easy to forget, as the West laments Afghanistan's sluggish movement toward rehabilitation, how far that nation has come in the past six years.

When Faramarz and I were together, just finding food was a challenge, both of us subsisting on a diet of potatoes and rice, foraging for wood to boil well water. And now here he is, sending me email from an Internet café.

Let me tell you a story about Faramarz because it encapsulates the optimism and tragedy of Afghanistan.

His father had been a general in the Afghan air force – yes, they did have one. Just before Kabul fell, he'd flown the country's single remaining fighter jet to Amman, for safe storage. After the Taliban was deposed, he decided to bring the aircraft back, an act of symbolic triumph. The plane crashed short of Kabul and Faramarz's father was killed.

He wrote afterwards to tell me that, tears splashed on the paper. Faramarz is in Kabul now, working for the International Security Assistance Force.

I loved him, chastely. I love his country, ardently.

Rosie DiManno usually appears Monday, Wednesday, Friday and Saturday.

[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.]