[Afghan News] December 3, 2011

[یاسمینه]

The problems and promise of Bonn II
By Omar Samad Saturday, December 3, 2011 Foreign Policy
On Monday, Germany will play host to the second Bonn international conference, chaired by Afghanistan and attended by more than 100 delegations. The conference's opening comes at a time when, once again, tensions are high between Washington, Islamabad and Kabul over a U.S. airstrike along the Mohmand agency's Salala mountain range last Saturday, which claimed the lives of 24 Pakistani soldiers. As a result, Pakistan says it is downgrading its presence at Bonn, opting to send its ambassador in Berlin in place of the Foreign Minister.

The tenth anniversary sequel to the first Bonn conference will attempt to chart a new decade-long (2014-2024) roadmap for engagement between Afghanistan and the world community, as many Afghans are gripped by a sense of uncertainty mixed with frustration, baffled that a decade of staggering investment in their country has yielded such precarious results in areas such as security, political cohesiveness, economic sustainability and neighborly relations.

The Ghost of Bonn

Bonn I has undergone waves of revisionism and debate in the 10 years since it was held, especially among those who claim that it was not inclusive enough, and should have incorporated the then-fleeing Taliban and some of its militant fellow-travelers. But what Bonn I actually lacked -- not unlike the recent Istanbul conference on regional cooperation -- was a binding political accord with an enforcement mechanism that would have put an end to regional proxy interferences in Afghanistan, thus ensuring the shutdown of cross-border sanctuaries once and for all. That was probably easier to attain in 2001, when the Taliban were on the run and regional conditions more conducive to a dismantling of militant support structures.

It is a myth that Bonn I would have been able to cobble together a near-perfect and fair representation of a war-torn society under prevailing conditions on the ground in December 2001. The objective since then has been to create a political tent inclusive enough to accommodate all political forces, including the armed opposition groups. However, the militants have refused thus far to be part of such a structure.

Hence, the focus of any credible political outreach or reconciliation initiative coming out of Bonn II should be on encouraging the armed opposition to join a participatory and pluralistic peace-building structure leading to democratic governance, tightening the parameters for a just settlement that would leave no wiggle room for forces that adhere to violence.

Furthermore, Bonn I's weakest points were less about its benchmarks (the source of much discussion among Afghans over the years) and more about the short delivery timelines of tangible results and reforms prescribed in an environment void of any coherent studies on damage and needs assessment in postwar Afghanistan. This rushed feeling was compounded by a lack of strategic resolve to provide appropriate funding during the first five years of the mission in order to lay the foundational elements to fix a failed state. In a country where agriculture and water form vital arteries of the economy and communal life, it took both Afghan and foreign decision-makers at least six years to realize that those two sectors required priority attention. It took us even longer to consider indigenous energy generation as an essential element of growth. Add to that list weak governance, outdated management practices, burgeoning parallel governance and economic structures, a wasteful contracting regime, a decaying system of patronage and impunity for powerful figures, and the inability to enforce basic laws. These fault lines of the past 10 years should no longer be tolerated by Afghans and those who invest in their future.

The promise of Bonn II

While the Bonn I accords generated a blueprint for a post-Taliban political process, Bonn II, which is not billed as a pledging conference, will represent a moment of political reckoning as the baton passes from transitional work to "transformational responsibilities" in the words of conference organizers. Bonn II aims to restore Afghan sovereignty by 2014, when international forces are scheduled to withdraw. It is also seen as a reality-check moment for all sides concerned, as major donors are expected to commit to continue to stand by Afghans during the upcoming decade. In other words, to shift the focus from military to civilian work and agree to incur new costs to keep the country's economy and its nascent institutions afloat, especially by providing training and mentoring in security and governance fields especially, all at a fraction of the colossal expenditures (estimated on the civilian side alone to be more than $50 billion) borne between 2001-2014. The initial yearly financial outlay for the Afghan government beyond 2014 is estimated by Afghan officials to be approximately $8 billion for security and $5 billion for development work. According to a recent World Bank study, unless the international community steps in, aid-reliant Afghanistan will face a yearly budget deficit of $7 billion from 2014 through 2021.

In light of the 2014 drawdown, separate strategic agreements between Afghanistan and members of the international community can also benefit the Bonn process by creating agreements and mechanisms through which Afghanistan will adhere to principles of democratic governance, institution building, and access to economic opportunity, service delivery and resolving outstanding issues on its peripheral flank. It is becoming urgently necessary for Afghans to agree on a legitimate domestic mechanism to discuss the colonial legacy of the Durand Line, and engage Afghanistan's neighbors on key issues, such as the sharing and management of water resources under international law.

Good news, bad news

In my discussions with officials and participants in the new Bonn process, two major themes will emerge that Afghans will view favorably:

A shared realization that the incomplete rebuilding mission in Afghanistan, begun after the fall of the Taliban, has garnered international support and commitment for the next phase of transformation, with international partners set to focus on governance, reconstruction and institution building.

A message relayed to the international community that Afghans yearn for stability, prosperity and democratic governance. And a message in turn from the international community to Afghans that the former will not allow a repeat of the 1989-1992 debacle, when a premature Western disengagement followed by Soviet suspension of aid precipitated a power vacuum that led to civil war and the Taliban.

However, there is also bad news:
The Afghan government is accused of going to Bonn with little regard for parliamentary and democratic opposition, women's groups, and civil society input. All four pillars are eager to be part of more substantive deliberations. But with the exception of a handful of members of Parliament and civil society, most others have been shut out of the process. This type of short-sighted political manipulation will not help create the political cohesiveness that is sorely needed in the years to come.

Unless Bonn II can address structural and constitutional deficiencies that have gradually eroded trust in government over the last ten years (rising tension between the three branches of government, political polarization, weak transparency and accountability -- mainly with foreign aid -- and deep disenchantment with the justice system), most other efforts and investments may end up going to waste.

The focus of Bonn II is on the new decade (2014-2024) of engagement. However, we may not reach that stage if the immediate period of 2012-2014 is not managed and prioritized accordingly. Dealing as soon as possible with real security, political, transition, governance and perception pitfalls.

Following Bonn, the Afghan focus will prematurely turn to politicking and positioning for the 2014 presidential elections, which happens to coincide with the end of the NATO drawdown. This will sap energy and focus from the real work of governance by preoccupying an already weak system with Afghan-style power politics.

Having neglected for some time the over-arching objectives of nurturing Afghan unity and shared national identity, dented by three decades of conflict, Afghan political and social leaders have a duty and a new opportunity to help instill a belief in common national interest rooted in moderation and equality that transcends tribal, linguistic and sectarian loyalties.

Pakistan's boycott of the Bonn conference will not impact the political commitment to help Afghanistan's transformation phase over the next decade. It will, however, be seen as a missed opportunity for Pakistan -- and all concerned parties -- to not be part of important deliberations on issues concerning regional cooperation, terrorism and radicalism, and to explore peace-building opportunities, as well as a chance for Pakistan to show that it wishes to be a productive regional partner, rather than an instigator. Independent views on the subject were best reflected in a sobering editorial published this week in Pakistan's Daily Times that said:

Whilst braving the ‘war on terror' on the domestic front, we [Pakistanis] have been waging a proxy war in Afghanistan for so-called strategic depth. When taking such risks, incidents such as the one on Saturday are likely. Our shock and response at what is essentially the result of our double game is overcooked. It is time we wage this war in a manner that reduces the fatalities on our side and decreases the potential of having our ‘sovereignty' violated, by abandoning the proxy war in Afghanistan.

Bonn I and Bonn II are obviously quite different conferences, convened for different reasons under different circumstances; history will judge both based on the deliberations and outcomes, and the way we think about them will undoubtedly change and shift over time. But what will not change is that fact that they were convened because there was a dire need to jump-start efforts to stabilize Afghanistan at critical times, and in the case of Monday's conference, to absorb the shock of another withdrawal and provide continuity for the vital mission of trying to bring a semblance of order to South Asia's vital crossroads.

Omar Samad is the former Ambassador of Afghanistan to France (2009-2011), Canada (2004-2009) and Spokesperson for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (2001-2004). He worked as CNN's onsite commentator during Bonn I.

Afghanistan says needs billions long after troops go
By Daniel Magnowski | Reuters
KABUL (Reuters) - Afghanistan's international backers must not cut funding to Kabul to the degree that it forces the government to choose between spending less on security or development, the finance minister said on Saturday.

A World Bank study released last month said Afghanistan was likely to need around $7 billion a year from the international community to help pay its security and other bills long after foreign troops leave at the end of 2014.

"The World Bank's study makes a case for continued assistance," Finance Minister Omar Zakhilwal said, speaking from the German city of Bonn. "We have done our own analysis and our conclusion with regard to the fiscal gap is not too different from the World Bank's."

Asking Kabul to cut spending on security forces would risk allowing the Taliban-led insurgents to make a comeback, while if services such as health and education were reduced instead, that could indirectly bolster support for the insurgency.

"What they are saying is, these are not options that the Afghan government should be pushed into, we have to know the consequences of pushing the government into these choices," Zakhilwal told Reuters.

Without foreign help, Afghanistan would not be able to pay for its army and police after 2014, currently estimated as a 352,000-man force after the pullout.

"Post-2014, the current level of the security forces is not sustainable for Afghanistan because of the cost," he said. "In the longer term, (the size of) our security force will come down."

With an economic crisis gripping Europe, smaller budgets in the United States, and electorates weary of a decade-long war, Western politicians want to spend much less on Afghanistan, without letting the country descend into civil war.

Aid, which in 2011 was nearly $16 billion, will decline along with troop numbers as the West scales down its presence in Afghanistan. But the United States and its allies face a serious financial burden for many years after the official end of combat operations.

Without detailing levels of foreign assistance required, or the finance ministry's own budget projections, the minister said Afghanistan expected to bring in more revenue from mining projects, trade and transit, and more efficient collection of taxes.

On Monday, Bonn will host a major international conference about the future of Afghanistan.

"What we want to get out of this (conference) is strong, believable political statements from our partners (of) long-term support for development and security," Zakhilwal said.

"I do expect strong, believable statements of support."

Despite the presence of tens of thousands of Western forces in Afghanistan, the United Nations and other groups say violence is at its worst since U.S.-led Afghan forces toppled the Taliban from power in late 2001.

NATO-led forces say they have seen a decline over recent months in attacks launched by insurgents against their troops.
(Editing by Nick Macfie)

Afghanistan Warns Bonn Against 'Security Or Development' Choice
December 3, 2011 Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty
Afghanistan's finance minister has warned international backers against a perceived choice between funding the country's security and development needs when they gather for a major security conference in Germany on December 5.

Finance Minister Omar Zakhilwal, speaking from the site of the upcoming conference in Bonn, said that cutting funding for security forces would risk allowing the Taliban to make a comeback while reducing funding for health and education would risk indirectly increasing support for the insurgency.

The foreign ministers and top officials of some 90 countries meet in Bonn to recommit to helping Afghanistan and to discuss funding plans for after the end of 2014, when foreign forces leave the country.

compiled from Reuters reports

Malaysian FM to attend Afghanistan Conference in Germany
KUALA LUMPUR, Dec. 3 (Xinhua) -- Malaysian Foreign Minister Anifah Aman will attend an international conference in Bonn, Germany next Monday, to express Malaysia's view on the future of Afghanistan, the Malaysian Foreign Ministry announced Saturday.

Anifah will join over 60 foreign ministers and 17 representatives of international organizations, including UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, to attend the International Conference on Afghanistan, which was first held in Bonn a decade ago.

The theme for this year's conference is "From Transition to Transformation".

Anifah is expected to deliver Malaysia's views and comments on the progress of development and the way forward for Afghanistan and its people in achieving long-term peace and stability, the Malaysian Foreign Ministry said in a statement.

The statement said the invitation from the Afghan government to Malaysia to participate in the conference represents a clear recognition of Malaysia's involvement in supporting and assisting the country.

Malaysia sent a 40-member medical team to the Afghan province of Bamyan last year to provide medical services to local residents, and will continue its presence in the country until 2014.

Pakistan Says U.S. Gave Wrong Information on Hit
Wall Street Journal By TOM WRIGHT, ADAM ENTOUS and JULIAN E. BARNES DECEMBER 3, 2011
Washington, New Delhi - Pakistan on Friday said U.S. officials preparing to launch an attack near its border with Afghanistan had given the wrong information to Pakistani officials about where they intended to conduct an airstrike, leading to a hit on two border posts that killed 24 members of the Pakistani military.

U.S. officials in Washington on Thursday said that Pakistani officials at a border control center had given an all-clear. U.S. officials believe the correct coordinates were given to the Pakistanis, but said it's one of the issues investigators are looking at in the aftermath of the attack.

Military officials in Washington also said Friday that Pakistan had decided for now not to participate in the U.S. investigation of the episode, which has further inflamed tensions between the sides over the 10-year Afghanistan conflict's worst friendly-fire incident. U.S. officials have called the Pakistani deaths a tragedy.

Pakistan, in protest of the attacks, halted the flow of NATO supplies across its border with Afghanistan.

The U.S. and its NATO allies could start running low on supplies for troops in Afghanistan in as little as 60 days if Pakistan keeps the border closed, according to officials briefed on the Pentagon's contingency planning. A monthslong border closure potentially could force NATO to slow the pace of military operations to conserve supplies, the officials said, though the Pentagon voiced confidence Friday that alternative ways would be found to bring in what troops need.

Pentagon spokesman Capt. John Kirby said border closures have yet to have an "appreciable" impact on NATO operations in Afghanistan but that any shutdown "magnifies over time."

He said Marine Gen. John Allen, the commander of U.S. and NATO forces in Afghanistan, has started making an assessment of available supplies to figure out what he needs.

According to officials, the Pentagon sharply expanded stocks of ammunition and other military supplies inside Afghanistan after a 2010 cross-border raid prompted Pakistan to close the border for 10 days.

U.S. officials said they were concerned that border closures this time could last several weeks, if not longer.

"This is going to be a really painful one," said a senior defense official. "I wouldn't count on them opening the border anytime soon. The Pakistanis are really, really mad."

"The strategic effects of this are going to be long term," the official added.

NATO's main alternative to shipping through Pakistan is the so-called Northern Distribution Network, a system of rail, sea and truck routes that begin at Baltic and Black Sea ports and extend to Afghanistan through Central Asia. Officials said the military is drawing up contingency plans to temporarily expand the amount of cargo entering Afghanistan through that network to meet up to 75% of NATO's immediate resupply needs. The network, however, has its limits, since it was set up to only carry nonlethal supplies.

Officials said the biggest concern for NATO was a potential shortage of fuel if the border stays closed for long. NATO relies heavily on land routes through Pakistan to bring in much of the fuel Western forces use. "If two months go by we are talking megacrisis," said one official.

If Pakistan keeps the border closed for more than two months, officials said, the military might need to start reducing the pace of military operations in order to stretch out the supplies that it has, officials briefed on Pentagon planning said.

The official predicted that the Obama administration will not wait more than a month to begin to step up pressure on the Pakistani to open the border. The U.S. could threaten to withhold aid or exert other pressure on the government to begin to allow at least some critical supplies through.

Pakistan orders troops to return fire if attacked on Afghan border
McClatchy Newspapers By Saeed Shah Friday, Dec. 02, 2011
ISLAMABAD - Pakistan's top military commander has issued orders to the country's troops to return fire should they come under attack again from U.S.-led coalition forces, a move that's likely to increase tensions after an American-led air raid on two border outposts last week killed 24 Pakistani soldiers.

Gen. Ashfaq Parvez Kayani, Pakistan’s army chief, issued the order in a letter to his troops that set out the rules of engagement against any “aggressor.”

The new orders came as Pakistan and U.S. officials continued to trade conflicting accounts of what happened in the incident, which American officials say came after a joint U.S.-Afghan unit took fire from the Pakistani side of the border but which Pakistani officials say was unprovoked. No American or Afghan casualties were reported in the incident, which now is thought to have occurred shortly after midnight last Saturday.

On Friday, published reports quoted unnamed U.S. military officers as saying they'd called in the airstrike on the border posts only after asking for and receiving permission for it from Pakistan.

A senior Pakistani military official, speaking only on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the subject, denied those accounts, saying the U.S. went ahead “without getting clearance from the Pakistani side.” He acknowledged that the U.S. had contacted Pakistan before the attack, but he said the coordinates the U.S. gave for the proposed strike were incorrect.

“It was an unprovoked and indiscriminate attack by U.S. helicopters and fighter jets,” the officer said.

Kayani's order, distributed Thursday, could lead to a skirmish between Pakistani and coalition forces, supposedly allies, if there's another incident of “friendly fire” at the border. It also turns the deployment of more than 100,000 Pakistani troops along the country's western border from a force meant to stop the Taliban to one charged with protecting the border.

Kayani is under immense pressure due to anger within his ranks over the two-hour bombardment of the mountaintop outposts known as Volcano and Boulder. The Pakistani air force didn't respond to the attack .

It was the second time the Pakistani military had failed to respond to an incursion by American troops this year. In May, a U.S. special forces operation found and killed Osama bin Laden deep inside Pakistan without being detected, an incident that the military found humiliating.

“I want to emphasize and leave no ambiguity in the rules of engagement for everyone down the chain of command,” Kayani said in the letter to his troops. “When under attack, you have full liberty of action to respond with all capabilities at your disposal. This will require no clearance at any level.”

“I have very clearly directed that any act of aggression will be responded with full force, regardless of the cost and consequences,” he said.

Local commanders will read out the command communique — issued in the national language, Urdu — to their soldiers.

Kayani also clarified that the air force didn't swing into action “due to breakdown of communication with the affected posts” during the attack.

The incident happened on the border between the Afghan province of Kunar and the Mohmand section of Pakistan’s tribal area. The Pakistani posts were some 300 yards within the country's territory.

Pakistan claims that the attack continued even after it alerted NATO that its post was coming under fire. U.S. officials have claimed that the combined Afghan and American special forces squad operating close to the border came under fire from the Pakistani side, and it responded by calling in air support, which then hit the two Pakistani posts. An investigation by the U.S. military is under way.

In retaliation for the incident, Pakistan has blocked the transit of NATO supplies through its territory, ended the American use of an air base in western Pakistan and is boycotting next week’s high-level international meeting on Afghanistan in the German city of Bonn.

Pakistan’s cooperation is considered vital to stabilizing Afghanistan and, in particular, for pushing the Taliban into peace talks.

The new U.S. assertion that Pakistan had approved the strike was reported first Friday by The Wall Street Journal.

According to that account, American officials contacted Pakistani officers about the airstrike at one of the border coordination centers, where NATO, Afghan and Pakistani representatives work together. The Pakistani officers replied that no Pakistani soldiers were in the area.

The senior Pakistani military officer said, however, that the wrong location was given and that in any case Pakistan never gave permission for the strike.

Afghan Women Use Boxing to Fight Stereotypes
VOA News December 3, 2011 Sean Maroney
Kabul, Afghanistan - During the Taliban's oppressive rule in the 1990s, Afghan women were stripped of most of their rights. Women were not allowed to work or get an education, much less take part in sports. Now, more than a decade later, a group of young women in Kabul not only are learning to box, but doing it in the same Kabul stadium that was once used for Taliban executions. VOA's Sean Maroney visited their practice and has this report.

These young women are pushing the limits of cultural acceptance in Afghanistan. They wear boxing gloves instead of burqas. They are members of Afghanistan's national female boxing team, created in 2007 by their country's Olympic Commission.

Nineteen-year-old Shabnam Rahimi has been with the team since the start.

“This sport is very exciting. I love its action,” she said.

Rahimi grew up surrounded by war, nearly constant violence. Here, she trains as a woman, free to fight back.

“I love that we can defend ourselves,” she said.

Studying the sweet science

This is the sound of women fighting against prejudice in Afghanistan. These young women say boxing gives them a sense of confidence that they want to share with future generations.

“I want to become a good trainer, and I want to teach other girls how to box. I will encourage other girls to learn boxing," said Rahimi.

Each week, these women come here. Boxing is their sport, and their passion, their personal fight against years of oppression. But only inside this gym - where it is safe and sanctioned by the government. When they step outside these doors, they still face oppression and fear of Taliban retaliation.

Team trainer Mohammad Saber Sharifi said all Afghans take risks as they try to move out of decades of war.

"There are a lot of difficulties in Afghanistan, for example security and economic problems. But this is a big step for us, and also for the world," said Sharifi.

Organizers hope to take the team to the 2012 Olympic Games in London. But for these boxers, this fight isn't only for a championship, but for a new vision of Afghanistan.

A decade on, what can U.S. accomplish in Afghanistan?
By Missy Ryan | Reuters
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - As senior U.S. officials head to a major meeting on Afghanistan next week, underlying their talks will be a simple question: what can Washington hope to accomplish there with fewer troops, less money, and less time?

U.S. objectives in Afghanistan are far more modest than they were in the months following the September 11 attacks, when the West hoped to replace the Taliban's backwardness and brutality with a secure democracy at the crossroads of Asia.

After years in which the war was overlooked and underfunded, President Barack Obama focused this "war of necessity" in 2009 on the threat from al Qaeda and on enabling Afghanistan to fend off its enemies for itself.

Yet even U.S. goals for Afghanistan today, which include providing a modicum of security, making progress against endemic poverty and improving weak, corrupt governance are in question as Western nations move to curtail their role in a war most officials believe cannot be won on the battlefield.

The United States "has yet to present a credible and detailed plan for transition that shows the U.S. and its allies can achieve some form of stable, strategic outcome in Afghanistan that even approaches the outcome of the Iraq War," Anthony Cordesman, a long-time security analyst at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, wrote recently.

"Far too many U.S. actions have begun to look like a cover for an exit strategy from Afghanistan."

The U.S. military and diplomatic blueprint, especially for the next two years as foreign troops hand over to local forces, takes center stage ahead of Monday's summit in Bonn, Germany.

The meeting, headlined by Afghan President Hamid Karzai and U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, will focus on Afghanistan's economic future and on defining the West's future presence in Afghanistan.

Despite plans to steadily shrink its Afghanistan force, the Obama administration has vowed it will not abandon the country as the West did following the Soviet withdrawal in 1989.

Officials link investment in a long-term presence in Afghanistan - which could include bases and a major diplomatic footprint even after most foreign combat troops go home at the end of 2014 - to defending U.S. national security.

Obama scored a major victory this spring in his tightly focused approach to the war when U.S. Navy SEALs tracked down al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden in Pakistan and killed him.

The military mission on the ground in Afghanistan, however, has been much broader than just defeating al Qaeda.

U.S. commanders say Obama's 2009 decision to deploy an extra 30,000 troops has paid off in the Taliban's southern heartland. They now hope to connect that to the capital.

Yet the outlook in the country's rugged east, where militants from the Haqqani network and other groups crisscross the lawless border with Pakistan, is much more troubling.

A series of high-profile attacks this fall, including an assault on the U.S. embassy in Kabul and the assassination of the former Afghan president, the country's top official for peace talks, also rattled the narrative of improving security.

"We have important work to do inside Afghanistan. I will say that a great deal of progress is being made. Insurgents have been under increasing pressure," Pentagon spokesman George Little told reporters on Friday.

"The enemy remains dangerous, and they are capable of violence, as we have seen, regrettably," he said.

'PURE NUMBERS'

Many worry that an array of militants, in the absence of enough foreign troops and an adequate improvement in local security forces, will plunge Afghanistan back into major violence.

"If you don't deal with that, then where are you going to be five years from now?" asked Jeffrey Dressler, a security analyst at the Institute for the Study of War in Washington.

"You could have even a greater sanctuary and safe haven than you had before 9/11," he said.

Military commanders are now drawing up plans for how they will stretch a shrinking force to match that threat as Obama moves to withdraw the surge force by next fall.

Underlying Obama's plans is the new fiscal reality of the U.S. government, mired in debt and facing big budget cuts.

"Here it's just pure numbers and the amount of money we're spending in Afghanistan," said Brian Katulis, a security analyst at the Center for American Progress.

The Pentagon has sunk $330 billion into Afghanistan. While lawmakers are loathe to be seen as stiffing the troops, support for future spending of that order is all but inconceivable.

Fiscal pressures are compounded by Congress' mounting exasperation with what they see as Karzai's erratic behavior and with growing recognition that Pakistan may never cooperate as desired against militants fueling violence in Afghanistan.

Even the most Herculean of U.S. efforts may not matter without more cooperation from Pakistan, which is boycotting the Bonn conference after NATO aircraft accidentally killed two dozen Pakistani soldiers along the Afghan border.

While the details of what happened are still unclear, the incident has laid bare lingering bilateral tensions and the gap between U.S. and Pakistani ambitions for Afghanistan.

U.S. officials are pressing ahead with efforts to broker a deal outlining the long-term U.S.-Afghan relationship even though night raids and other issues remain sticking points.

The deal will include a commitment in principle to a U.S. military presence after 2014, which will focus on supporting Afghan forces and on targeted operations against militants.

U.S. officials insist Washington is not walking away. One senior U.S. official said the goal of the conference in Bonn and an earlier one in Istanbul was "to send a message to the Taliban and anybody else that, actually, international engagement and investment in Afghanistan is not over."

FIGHT, TALK, BUILD

Despite tactical successes in the south, even Western military officials say Afghanistan cannot be won by fighting alone - it also requires effective diplomacy and a viable plan to put Afghanistan on its feet economically.

Yet the impact of the West's aid effort - Congress has provided nearly $73 billion to rebuild and train local forces since 2002 - is another question mark beyond some important achievements in education and maternal and child health.

The U.S. strategy now rests on two objectives: building a local army capable of fending off militants, and brokering a peace deal with the Taliban. Both are ambitious goals.

While Clinton has pointed to initial contact between U.S. officials and the insurgency in efforts to broker a peace deal, there is scant evidence that a substantive agreement can be reached in the near term. It is also a politically risky course for Obama with his re-election bid less than a year off.

Efforts to build a strong local security force have succeeded in adding and arming men - and in many cases teaching them to read - but it remains unclear whether this force will have the ability and desire to take on the Taliban and other groups as foreigners go home.

The West, especially the United States, will be required to underwrite that efforts for years to come.

Analysts say the U.S. effort in Afghanistan remains hobbled by bureaucratic tensions and the lack of a shared goal for what Afghanistan can and should look like after 2014.

"We fought, we tried to build, and then quite belatedly we mapped out a strategy for trying to talk," said Katulis, of the Center for American Progress, referring to Clinton's triple strategy to 'fight, talk, build' in Afghanistan.

"But those three components were never well synced with one another."

(Editing by Arshad Mohammed and Vicki Allen)

10 injured in bicycle bomb blast in S. Afghanistan
KABUL, Dec. 3 (Xinhua) -- Ten people were injured when a bicycle bomb went off Friday in Shahjoy district of Zabul province with Qalat as its capital, 340 km south of Afghan capital Kabul, the country's Interior Ministry said on Saturday.

"An Improvised Explosive Device (IED) which was placed by enemies of peace and stability on a bicycle exploded in Shahjoy district of Zabul province at 11:00 a.m. local time Friday. As a result of the blast, 10 people were wounded including eight civilians," the ministry said in a statement.

In an unrelated incident, Taliban insurgents opened fire on a vehicle in neighboring Kandahar province, killing a civilian and injuring his wife.

A statement released by the Kandahar provincial government on Saturday said the incident occurred in Zhari district on Friday afternoon.

However, the motive behind the attack was not cleared at the moment.

The Taliban stepped up their attacks on Afghan and NATO-led troops since a rebel offensive was launched in May this year in the insurgency-hit country.

NATO Says 3 Troops Killed in Eastern Afghanistan
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS December 3, 2011
KABUL, Afghanistan (AP) — A roadside bombing killed three NATO service members Saturday in eastern Afghanistan, the U.S.-led coalition said.

The coalition recently shifted its focus from southern Afghanistan to the east, where militants are fighting Afghan and coalition troops along the long, porous border with Pakistan.

The exact location of the bombing was not disclosed, nor were the nationalities of the dead.

So far this year, 519 NATO service members have been killed in Afghanistan, including at least 389 Americans.

Separately, tribal elders in Logar province, also in the east, continued to negotiate with insurgents on Saturday in an effort to free eight Pakistani laborers kidnapped by militants on Thursday, said provincial spokesman Din Mohammad Darwesh.

He said they were kidnapped by a gunman on a motorcycle who ambushed a bus carrying the laborers to work at a hospital construction site in Pul-e-Alam, the provincial capital. The assailants took them into the woods at gunpoint.

Military operation kills 10 insurgents in W. Afghanistan
HERAT, Afghanistan, Dec. 3 (Xinhua) -- Afghan police and army have eliminated 10 insurgents and captured 16 other suspects in a military operation which concluded on Saturday in the country's western Herat province, provincial police chief said.

"Afghan National Police (ANP) and Afghan army concluded today a cleanup operation after clearing up insurgent fighters in Pashtun Zarghun, Obe, Guzara, and Chishti Sharif districts," Sayed Agha Saqib told reporters in a press briefing here.

He said joint forces have killed 10 insurgents and captured 16 suspected armed men besides injuring five armed insurgents and seizing several weapon caches during the raids that was launched nearly one month ago in the province 640 km west of capital city of Kabul.

The Taliban insurgents, who launched in May this year a rebel offensive against Afghan and NATO forces, have yet to make comments.

In the second phase of security transition plan begun on Thursday, the Afghan soldiers and police will take full control of security from U.S. and NATO forces in six Afghan provinces as well as seven provincial capitals and over 40 districts in different provinces in near future.

Herat city was among seven areas where Afghan security forces took security responsibilities from NATO forces in July this year, in the first part of a security transition process which will run to 2014 when Afghanistan will take over the full leadership of its own security duties from U.S. and NATO forces.

Suicide Attack Near Afghan-NATO Base Kills Civilian
VOA News December 2, 2011
Afghan officials say a suicide truck bomb blast outside a NATO base has killed at least one person and wounded more than 70 others.

Authorities say the truck driver was stopped Friday morning before he could enter the base in the Muhammad Agha district of Logar province.

The bomber then detonated a trailer full of explosives, killing an Afghan carpenter who worked at the base. At least three Afghan security personnel and two intelligence officials were among those wounded.

Police say the huge blast destroyed several nearby government buildings.

The Taliban claimed responsibility for Friday's attack.

The suicide blast comes as NATO forces continue to transfer security control of parts of Afghanistan to local forces, ahead of the withdrawal of all international combat troops by the end of 2014.

The risks of military cutbacks
Washington Post By David Ignatius Saturday, December 3, 2011
As Defense Secretary Leon Panetta prepares his recommendations for Pentagon budget cuts, he is likely to reduce the military’s resources for future, large-scale counterinsurgency operations of the sort that were ballyhooed just a few years ago in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The boom in “COIN,” as these operations are known, has proved to be something of a bubble. Budget pressures have curbed the appetite for the ambitious, “protect-the-population” missions that were promoted with such enthusiasm by Gen. David Petraeus and Gen. Stanley McChrystal. The focus increasingly is on raids by the tighter, more kinetic Special Operations Forces, which are seen as the big success story of these wars, to the extent success can be claimed.

“It’s not going to be likely that we will deploy 150,000 troops to an area the way we did in Afghanistan and Iraq,” said one top Pentagon official, explaining the rationale for Panetta’s budget review.

Panetta has been signaling for several months that the Army and Marines, which have carried the fight in Iraq and Afghanistan, will be cut in his 2013 budget. His final recommendations won’t be finished until year-end, but the Army and the Marines are already planning force reductions, recognizing that new and prolonged, large-scale counterinsurgency missions aren’t likely anytime soon.

A second big theme of Panetta’s review is an emphasis on Asia — and on countering China’s growing military power there. President Obama announced last month that he will send 2,500 Marines to Australia to convey the message: “We are here to stay.” And he underlined, if anyone missed the point, that defense cuts “will not — I repeat, will not — come at the expense of the Asia-Pacific.”

The practical impact of this Asia tilt will be to boost relative spending for the Navy and Air Force, which are America’s traditional means of projecting military power in the Pacific. Pentagon officials caution, however, that the Centcom region — an arc of instability from Morocco to Pakistan — will also remain a top priority, and won’t be starved for resources to pay for the new emphasis on Asia. That makes me wonder: How can Panetta go “big” on Asia and the Middle East at the same time and also cut costs?

A third priority for Panetta is to maintain the U.S. technological edge. “As we get smaller, one way to compensate is better capabilities,” explains a senior military official. This will mean more spending for cyberwarfare, special forces and new measures to protect against exotic threats.

Panetta’s review has had strong backing from President Obama, who is said to have insisted that defense cuts be driven by a strategic plan, rather than by a fixed percentage reduction across the board. Obama met Thursday with Panetta and 15 top military commanders to discuss these issues.

Panetta’s budget-cutting plans fit awkwardly with the continuing, grinding war in Afghanistan. Critics might well question why, if the Pentagon knows it can’t afford big counterinsurgency campaigns in the future, it’s continuing to fight one now in Afghanistan. Pentagon officials insist that they aren’t speeding up withdrawal plans, to which a skeptic would counter: Why not?

Pentagon officials argue that, despite all the setbacks in Afghanistan, the United States is still on track to transfer responsibility for security to Afghan ¬forces. When the second round of transitioning announced last week is completed, about 50 percent of the population will be in areas under Afghan control. Whether those districts can maintain stability remains to be seen. As for population-centric COIN tactics, they may have lost support among budget-cutters, but they’re still being practiced every day in Afghanistan by U.S. troops, often with good results.

As COIN has fallen out of fashion, there’s a new bubble of enthusiasm for the counterterrorism tactics used by the special forces in their “night raids” against Taliban targets. But Petraeus, the intellectual architect of modern Army doctrine, has long argued that it is a mistake to juxtapose the “population-centric” and “enemy-centric” approaches as if they were alternative strategies. Instead, according to Petraeus, they are mutually reinforcing parts of a broad counterinsurgency campaign.

Perhaps it’s a sign of the times that Petraeus, the COINista in chief, is now at the CIA, where his focus is necessarily on the counterterrorism side of the equation.

There’s a consensus in the country that the big expeditionary ground wars of the past decade should end, and Panetta has his budget priorities right. But it would be wrong to repeat the mistake that followed the Vietnam War, when hard-learned counterinsurgency tactics were jettisoned in favor of conventional weapons for fighting quick “winnable” wars.

During the COIN years, the Army and Marines learned how to adapt and fight in the most difficult environments. What a waste if those skills, acquired at such cost, were discarded and lost.

Nato plans push in eastern Afghanistan to quell Pakistan-based insurgents
Exclusive: Isaf aims to reduce threat to Kabul by insurgent groups and has not ruled out cross-border raids into Pakistan
Guardian.co.uk By Julian Borger, diplomatic editor Friday 2 December 2011
Nato commanders are planning a substantial offensive in eastern Afghanistan aimed at insurgent groups based in Pakistan, involving an escalation of aerial attacks on insurgent sanctuaries, and have not ruled out cross-border raids with ground troops.

The aim of the offensive over the next two years is to reduce the threat represented by Pakistan-based groups loyal to insurgent leaders like the Haqqani clan, Mullah Nazir and Hafiz Gul Bahadur. Nato hopes to reduce the level of attacks in the eastern provinces clustered around Kabul to the point where they could be contained by Afghan security forces after transition in 2014.

The move is likely to add to the already tense atmosphere following the recent border post attack by Nato helicopters that killed 24 Pakistani soldiers. On Thursday, Pakistan's army chief, General Ashfaq Kayani, ordered his troops to return fire if they came under attack again by its ally.

While drawing down forces in Helmand and Kandahar, the US will step up its presence in eastern provinces bordering Pakistan, bringing the long-festering issue of insurgent sanctuaries in the Pakistani tribal areas to a head. The message being given to the Pakistani military is that if it cannot or will not eliminate the havens, US forces will attempt the job themselves.

Western officials had been encouraged by the fact that a blitz of drone strikes against commanders loyal to insurgent leaders Jalaluddin and his son Sirajuddin in Miran Shah, the capital of North Waziristan, and against forces loyal to Mullah Nazir in South Waziristan, had produced few civilian casualties and no reaction from the Pakistanis. Consequently, an increase in cross-border raids by special forces – and even the withdrawal of the Pakistani army to create a free-fire zone – have not been excluded.

"The Pakistanis may not have the strength to defeat the Taliban and the Haqqanis on their own, even if they wanted to," a western diplomat said.

It is unclear to what extent the killing of 24 Pakistan soldiers will have on the Nato strategy. An investigation is underway into the incident, which appears to have started with an exchange of fire between Pakistani and mixed Afghan-Nato forces, with the latter calling in air support. Nato sent in aircraft believing the fire from the Pakistani side was from insurgents.

As a consequence, Pakistan has closed supply routes used by the Nato-led International Security Assistance Force (Isaf) and barred the US from using a Pakistani air base to launch drones. However, Nato officers said that Pakistani forces had been co-operative in a similar incident on Tuesday, helping prevent it from escalating.

Isaf statistics published earlier this week showed a 7% drop in insurgent attacks across Afghanistan in the first 10 months of this year compared to the same period last year. The decrease in the Helmand area was 29%. But in the eastern provinces the figures show a 21% rise in attacks, now the most violent area, accounting for 39% of all attacks.

The Isaf commander, General John Allen, said the need to confront the sanctuaries in Pakistan was "one of the reasons we are shifting our operations to the east".

In an interview in Kabul, Allen, a US marine, did not give specifics of the strategy and said nothing about cross-border operations. The day before the fatal border clash, he had met Kayani, to discuss cross-border co-operation ahead of the eastern surge, clearly hoping the move against the sanctuaries would be a joint effort.

Allen said he did not know what the long-term consequences of last Saturday's clash would be, describing it as a "tragedy", but made clear that the push to the east would continue.

"Ultimately the outcome we hope to achieve in the east is a reduction of the insurgent networks to the point where the ANSF [Afghan National Security Forces] can handle them, reducing them in 2012, if necessary going after them in 2013," Allen said.

"I wont go into the specifics of the operations but as we consolidate our holdings in the south and as the population centres there in the Helmand River valley and in [Kandahar], we will conduct substantial operations in the east the idea being to expand the security zone around Kabul.

"In particular we are going to pay a lot of attention to the south of Kabul – Wardak, Logar, Ghazni, Zabul. Because in the end if you have a population in the south that feels secure and it's secured by the ANSF, and you have a population in the east in and around the centre of the gravity of Kabul, and those two are connected by a road so you have freedom of movement, you have a pretty good outcome."

Pakistan welcomes Indian aid to Afghanistan: UK envoy
Dec 3, 2011, 06.20AM IST The Times of India
NEW DELHI: Britain may have been asked by Pakistan to mediate with the US in the wake of the killing of its 24 soldiers by NATO forces, but on Friday UK special AfPak envoy Mark Sedwill went a step further in extolling Pakistan when he stated that Islamabad even welcomes all Indian civilian developmental assistance to Afghanistan.

On a day-long visit to Delhi ahead of the crucial Bonn conference on Afghanistan, Sedwill said he had got that sense from his interaction with Pakistani officials. "Pakistanis talk about regional economic integration and welcome Indian developmental assistance to Afghanistan," Sedwill told reporters.

"The distinction which they seek to make is between civilian and military support," he added. When it was pointed to him that Pakistani agencies were found involved in terror strikes at the Indian Embassy in Kabul, he said this may not be the same as targeting India's economic assistance to Afghanistan.

Indian officials maintain Pakistan has rarely sought to make such a distinction between military and civilian Indian aid to Afghanistan and, on the contrary, has not shied away from even using violence to curb Indian activities in the Islamic country.

Sedwill was in Delhi to discuss the upcoming Bonn conference, where India will be represented by foreign minister S M Krishna. While Krishna had said in the Istanbul conference earlier this year that the international community had not given enough importance to the role of regional countries in finding a long-term solution to Afghanistan, Sedwill suggested this may no longer be a valid argument.

"I suppose one could argue like that before the London conference in 2010, but since then there has been an acknowledgment that the region has a critical role to play and there is genuine agreement among regional countries on the need for stability," said Sedwill.

Pakistan has persisted with its threat to boycott the Bonn conference to protest the killing of its soldiers by NATO and while Sedwill described the move as regrettable, he emphasized that Pakistan's absence may not undermine the summit as is being speculated. "Pakistan's absence will be unfortunate, but the fact is that Bonn is about broader international commitments made to Kabul," he said.

Ahead of the Bonn meet, UK special AfPak envoy Mark Sedwill said he got this sense from his interactions with Pakistani officials, who are keen on regional and economic integration.

Pakistan to Respond ‘Instantly’ to Any Border Aggression
VOA News December 2, 2011
The head of Pakistan's military has ordered his country's forces to respond instantly to any future aggression along the border with Afghanistan without waiting for instructions from high command.

Pakistani military sources confirmed to VOA Friday that General Ashfaq Kayani has told his soldiers to fully retaliate “irrespective of the cost and consequences” to any future aggression, following the deadly NATO bombing on two Pakistani border outposts nearly a week ago.

Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani told the country's Parliamentary Committee on National Security Friday that under no circumstances would his government allow Pakistan's sovereignty and territorial integrity to be jeopardized by, what he called, “ill-considered and rash actions.”

He reiterated Pakistan's frustration over continued calls from the West to do more in the fight against terrorism, saying there is a limit to Pakistan's patience and that “cooperation cannot be a one-way street.”

In Washington, the Pentagon said Pakistan is refusing to participate in a U.S. military investigation into the airstrikes.

The Pentagon spokesman said Pakistan was invited to be involved in the probe but has “elected to date not to participate.”

Meanwhile, thousands of Pakistanis protested across the country following Friday prayers.

One Karachi University student said the Pakistani army is under attack.

“That shows that Pakistan is in a state of war. It's our message out to the citizens of Pakistan, to the world outside, that Pakistan is in a state of war and the citizens of Pakistan are not dead.”

Pakistan's military has blamed a communications breakdown with preventing it from responding effectively to the incident that killed 24 Pakistani soldiers. Pakistan maintains the attack was unprovoked.

Pakistani officials also deny a Wall Street Journal article that quoted U.S. officials as saying Pakistani authorities gave their approval for the November 27 NATO airstrike, unaware that their forces were in the area.

According to the unnamed U.S. officials in the report, an Afghan-led assault force, including American commandos, was hunting Taliban militants when the group came under fire from an encampment along the Afghan-Pakistani border in the Mohmand tribal region.

The U.S. officials said the commandos thought they were being fired upon by militants, but the assailants turned out to be Pakistani military personnel who had established a temporary campsite.

The article also says the initial U.S. account from the field indicates the U.S. commandos contacted a joint border-control center, which said there were no Pakistani troops in the area, before requesting airstrikes against the encampment.

The Wall Street Journal says U.S. officials have acknowledged there were errors made on both sides of the incident, which has prompted Pakistan to boycott next week's international conference on Afghanistan's future.

The newspaper says U.S. authorities have warned that the latest account is based on interviews with members of the commando team and could change as more information is gathered. It says a formal report is due to be completed by U.S. military investigators by December 23.

Russia warns against secret contacts with Taliban
KYIV Post - Sat Dec 3, 1:43 pm ET
Interfax-Ukraine Russia warns all countries involved in the settlement efforts in Afghanistan from secret contacts with the Taliban.

"According to information we have, both the Afghan authorities and a number of their international partners had sporadic contacts with members of the Taliban movement. Moreover, Kabul was not always notified of these meetings," Russian presidential representative for Afghanistan Zamir Kabulov said in an interview with Interfax.

"Such behind-the-scenes contacts between representatives of foreign states and organizations with the Taliban are fraught with wrong signals of the international community's true intentions in the context of the settlement efforts on Afghanistan," he said.

Russia is convinced that dialogue with the armed opposition could have a positive effect for normalizing the situation in Afghanistan only if militants lay down their arms, recognize the constitution and break away from al-Qaida and other extremist organizations, he said.

On the other hand, Russia has repeatedly supported proposals on removing Taliban officials from the UN Security Council sanction list, Kabulov said.

"In addition, we have also supported the proposal on separating the sanction regime imposed by UN Security Council resolution 1267 into two independent mechanisms, with the establishment of new Security Council committees separately on al-Qaida and on the Taliban," he said.

"At the same time we suppose that reciprocal reconciliatory steps on the Taliban part should be a precondition for further actions on relieving the sanctions for the Taliban members on the list," he said.

2.6 million Afghans at risk of hunger from drought
By DEB RIECHMANN Associated Press December 2nd, 2011
MAZAR-E-SHARIF, Afghanistan - Zara, an Afghan mother of seven, doesn't know what to tell her children when they ask about dinner.

"I simply tell them that we must wait until their father gets home to see if he's going to bring anything," she said, speaking from under a dusty blue burqa covering her from head to toe.

Zara, who uses just one name, is one of an estimated 2.6 million Afghans facing food shortages after one of the worst droughts to strike northern Afghanistan in a decade, according to Afghan officials and aid agencies. Already living in poverty in a country at war, many have been left destitute by the drought, which has affected 14 of Afghanistan's 34 provinces- all in the north.

Wells have dried up. Hundreds of children have been treated for malnutrition. Families are selling their animals at below-market prices. People are moving to cities to try to find food, water, work and, in some cases, a refuge from the fighting.

The Afghan government and aid agencies are racing to help them before snow blocks access to remote areas.

Rahmatullah Zahid, disaster coordinator in Balkh province, which has been hard-hit by the drought, said he is not worried yet about people starving to death, but he wonders how people will survive the winter, especially in remote areas.

"If the weather gets very, very cold in the remote areas and if the aid doesn't come, those families will be in danger of starvation," he said.

Beyond the relief effort, aid officials are trying to figure out how to end a vicious cycle of drought, drought relief and drought again in an area of the country that has suffered water and food shortages in eight of the past 11 years. Instead of trying to cultivate chronically dry land, perhaps farmers could grow almonds or grapes, which require less water than wheat, or industry could be lured to the area to extract its prevalent gas and oil.

Zara and her family moved to Mazar-e-Sharif, the capital of Balkh province, so her husband, whose crops dried up, might find work as a day laborer.

She and hundreds of others who fled the rugged Alburz Mountains in the province gathered last week in a dirt lot in Mazar-e-Sharif to receive large canvas bags of kitchen supplies, blankets, lamps and other items, including a phone card. The aid was distributed by the Norwegian Refugee Council.

"We have very little food," Zara said, squatting next to her aid bag. "If my husband finds work, he can buy some breads and vegetables on his way home, but otherwise there is nothing."

As she spoke, a light mist began to fall. The rain came too late. The crops were ruined months ago.

"There was no rain so everything was burned up," said Mir Ahmad, a 58-year-old wheat farmer who also moved to Mazar-e-Sharif from the mountains.

"There is not much work here in the city right now," he said, fingering a strand of yellow prayer beads as the large blue bags were unloaded from a truck. "Some days there is nothing and I have to borrow food or money to feed my family."

The U.N. issued an appeal for $142 million on Oct. 1 to help those hit by the drought in 14 northern provinces, where up to 80 percent of non-irrigated fields yielded little to no crops. So far, about $49 million has been pledged by aid groups, the U.S. and European nations.
The Afghan government also is distributing about 40,000 tons of wheat, 5,000 tons of rice, 10,000 tons of wheat seed and 20,000 tons of animal feed.

Sayed Anwar Rahmati, the governor of neighboring Sar-e-Pul province, said more aid is needed.

"Every day people are coming and complaining," he said. "The crops were lost and the cattle were seriously affected."

Zainab Noori, a member of the local council in nearby Bamiyan province, said people in six districts were waiting for aid.

"If the aid is not delivered in the next month, the road will be blocked by snow," she said. "At least 50 families have left already to go to Kabul and Iran to find work."

Aidan O'Leary, head of the U.N. office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, said repeated droughts in northern Afghanistan suggest that economic development is needed in addition to drought relief.

"What you're dealing with here is basically trying to maintain a rural, agrarian lifestyle in a climate that might not be conducive," O'Leary said. "What's the solution? Are you looking at better seeds? ... Are you looking at alternative crops? Are you looking at alternative livelihoods?"

With the international focus on pulling troops from Afghanistan, it's difficult to get nations sending development aid to discuss long-term solutions that would end the need for drought relief in the north every couple of years, he said. Compounding the problem is that while international aid has been flowing into Afghanistan for years, only a fraction has been targeted to reducing poverty, he said.

O'Leary noted a World Bank report this month that said the expected decline in international aid will have only a modest impact on the poor. The report said the majority of aid was spent to improve security and governance mostly in more urban areas where there is less poverty.

Ironically, it rained both days last week that O'Leary traveled to the north to check on drought aid with Michael Keating, deputy special representative of the U.N. secretary-general for Afghanistan with responsibility for relief, recovery and reconstruction. The first day it sprinkled. The second day it poured. Muddy water filled deep ruts in unpaved roads in Dawlat Abad district.

Keating and O'Leary tried to visit a nearby village, but one of the heavily armored U.N. vehicles in their convoy got stuck. They left the vehicle, turned around and drove on better roads to their next stop: a medical center where children are being treated for acute malnutrition.

The number of cases of malnutrition treated at the clinic increased threefold after the drought, said Dr. Said Mahmood Shah, nutrition coordinator for Save the Children. In the summer months, up to 90 malnourished children showed up at the center where a tiny office was crowded with cardboard boxes of eeZee Paste Nut, a peanut butter-like food with high energy, proteins and nutrients.

Now, rain, snow and poor roads have prevented some children from getting help, Shah said. "There are lots of cases, but they can't get here," he said.

The last stop was a meeting with villagers, including women who had received seeds and tools as part of a backyard garden project run by ActionAid, a British aid group.

One of the women, Jan Bibi, said that because of the drought, she and 10 other members of her family eat only once a day. Bibi, who is in her 70s with no land or home of her own, said she had not eaten meat for six to eight weeks.

"We are sticking to one meal a day," Bibi said, holding up a forefinger. "This year, it's really, really bad."

US will stick with Aust in Afghanistan: top brass
The Canberra Times BY DAVID ELLERY DEFENCE REPORTER 03 Dec, 2011
America has invested too much in Afghanistan to leave its allies, including Australia, high and dry by unilaterally withdrawing vital medical and evacuation support services, chief-of-defence force General David Hurley says.

''The US is not going to close the door and just walk out and leave people high and dry,'' he told The Canberra Times in an exclusive interview.

International Security Assistance Forces are due to hand responsibility for national security over to the Afghan Government by the end of 2014. America has already begun drawing down its troops and Defence Minister Stephen Smith has said Australia may start drawing down its troops in 2013 or earlier.

Defence analysts have said this could be because American support services would have already left.

Independent defence analyst Raspal Khosa said, ''We can only operate in Uruzgan as long as we have the support of the US.''

General Hurley, however, expects the support to remain.

''As we work our way through this, talking to the Afghans [about] which provinces go when, how we step back from mentoring and so forth, we'll be very conscious about that support that will be left in the field. We just won't have a unilateral decision by one country that 'we're going and you're not going to have these'.''

General Hurley welcomed the increase in the use of Australian defence facilities by United States forces announced during President Barack Obama's visit. He said it had not affected the ADF's relationship with China's People's Liberation Army.

''This week we have had people in China exercising with the PLA,'' he said. ''If the PLA was as sensitive as [some] people make out, that exercise, in all probability, would have been stopped.''

The General, who rang the leader of the Pakistani military, General Wynne, on Sunday to express his condolences on the death of 24 Pakistani soldiers in a NATO strike, said Australia's relations with that country were strong.

''The whole tone of the conversation, and the fact he took the call, reflected that our relationship with the Pakistani military is very good.''

Defence had escaped relatively unscathed from Treasurer Wayne Swan's mid-year budget review this week, he said.

''We're affected by the one-off increase in the efficiency dividend but the other measures don't have an impact on us,'' he said. ''I haven't seen the sum [Defence has to cut] yet, we'll just go through the normal processes.''

General Hurley, who has been visiting Defence bases in Australia and overseas, said despite a string of scandals and controversies, ADF morale was high.

''Why do I say that? A; the feedback I get from talking to people. B; this is an organisation that is very focused on performing operations and C; it is an organisation that knows it has some big challenges. There is a real determination in the organisation to meet these challenges,'' he said.

''You don't get that sort of desire to get the job well done in an organisation that is down on its cups.''

The introduction of women into frontline combat positions has not been a hot issue during the General's field visits.

''It's only been raised once with me,'' he said. ''That was in Tarin Kowt. I was talking to a group of young [female] officers. One was quite opposed, one was supportive and one was waiting to see.''

Arguments that the decision would lead to women coming home in body bags just don't hold water.

''Women could have been coming back to Australia in body bags for the last 20 years,'' he said.

''We have women who commanded our ships in the Gulf, we have women who fly our aeroplanes, we have women who fly our helicopters. They are just as exposed to being casualties as males are.''

General Hurley is hopeful Defence will be able to issue a coordinated response to the six different culture reviews commissioned in the wake of the ADFA Skype scandal before Christmas. ''We didn't want to turn this into six reviews for culture, each of them with 15 recommendations and say 'that's 90 recommendations, go away and do the tick and flick for three or four years and then say we've implemented the recommendations','' he said.

The rotation of large numbers of US Marines through Australian training bases in the Northern Territory afforded an opportunity to develop Australia's interoperability capability with the US and to get the best out of the landing helicopter docks that are currently under construction.

''It is an increased opportunity for us to operate with them [the Americans] at a higher level in more complex environments,'' he said.

''I don't think we will be Marines, we're not structured that way. [But] many of the operational techniques they use and the way they go about their training and generating that capability will be of genuine use to us.''

One piece of good news is RFA Largs Bay, the amphibious ship snapped up from the British at the bargain price of $100 million earlier this year, will be ready to render humanitarian assistance before the looming cyclone season.

Ship watch websites say the vessel should arrive in Western Australia next Friday. She will be commissioned into the Royal Australian Navy as HMAS Choules shortly after.

Road out of Afghanistan: On the ground with US troops in potential final push
The recent battle for the Kajaki Valley in Helmand Province, which ended with few casualties and Taliban fighters in flight, may mark the last major operation for US troops in Afghanistan.
By Tom A. Peter, Correspondent December 3, 2011 at 8:39 am EST The Christian Science Monitor
Kajaki Valley, Afghanistan - A group of marines huddles around the top enlisted marine in their unit, who had come to visit newly established US patrol bases throughout the Kajaki Valley in Helmand Province.

A week earlier, they had been part of a force of 600 marines and several Afghan Army and police units who flooded the valley. Though US forces have made progress throughout Helmand during the past year, Kajaki had remained one of the last major areas still under Taliban control.

Now, with several US Marine and Afghan military bases established in the valley and little resistance from the Taliban, the Helmand operation appears to have been more successful than many marines had expected.

Afghanistan's Bonn Conference: 4 things you need to know

Looking to inspire a platoon that had three men medevacked during the initial assault and had been living outdoors without tents or cots since the operation began, the 1st Battalion, 6th Marine Regiment's Sgt. Maj. Larry Harrington tells the group of assembled marines, "It started for me in Kandahar in 2001, and now I'm seeing the end of it."

While the insurgency continues, the war is indeed nearing its end for the marines in Helmand and for other International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) units elsewhere in the nation. With all the surge forces scheduled to leave Afghanistan by the end of next summer, and troop levels expected to keep falling from there, this operation is quite possibly the last major US Marine offensive designed to gain and hold new ground for the rest of the war.

"From my perspective, it's the last piece of real estate that ISAF forces are going to really clear," says Marine Maj. Gen. John Toolan, the ISAF commander in the southwest region of Afghanistan.

This ending battle echoed many that had come before, with the US overrunning its foe, the Taliban choosing to flee more often than fight. But a big question lingers over the durability of the gains. Marines express optimism that the lessons learned over the decade-long war will help them stabilize the area and hand it over to the Afghan government.

A decade of war in deadliest province

There are some 140,000 international forces in Afghanistan, a little less than 100,000 are American. US and international troops came here more than a decade ago following the Sept. 11 attacks, when the ruling Taliban regime refused to hand over Al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden. Since then the war has grown into a large nation-building effort with the United States alone investing more than $70 billion on development projects designed to strengthen Afghanistan's government and social institutions. Meanwhile, some 1,843 US and 970 international service members have lost their lives here. Another 14,342 have been injured.

Throughout the Afghan war, the south – Helmand in particular – has seen the most fighting. More than 795 international troops have been killed in Helmand, more than in any other province and nearly twice as many as in Kandahar, the second-most deadly province.

There are about 30,000 foreign forces in Helmand, equivalent to about one-third of the US force in Afghanistan. The area has been the primary responsibility of US Marines and British troops.

But will the improvements hold?

Although there are numerous indications that international forces have made progress in Helmand, there are just as many questions among locals about how long these improvements will last.

A report released by the New America Foundation in October found that while locals in Helmand say the Taliban are weaker now compared with 12 months ago, 49 percent of the population say they believe the country is headed in the wrong direction. Nearly three-quarters of those surveyed in Helmand and Kandahar say that violence will lead to a civil war after international troops withdraw in 2014.

In the face of continued skepticism from the Afghan population, the US Marines pushed into the Kajaki Valley to take this last Taliban stronghold in the hope that it could make the difference for the region's lasting stability. Kajaki is of particular importance because of a dam there that provides electricity for much of southern Afghanistan.

Though many marines say Afghan forces in Helmand are increasingly capable, they also say that it was important to take advantage of the Marine presence here to clear out the Kajaki Valley. Afghan forces still lack the specialized equipment and troop levels necessary to conduct the type of major assault required to clear an area this large under insurgent control.

"Once we leave, I think Afghan forces will absolutely be able to have the manpower to hold it, but that initial going in and trying to secure something like this, that does take a lot of force and power that they initially wouldn't have," says Capt. Brandon Turner, operations officer for 1/6 Infantry Battalion.

'Surprised' by lack of fighting'

During the initial assault, the marines and Afghan forces faced about two days of resistance that cost the lives of two marines and injured a handful of others. Shortly after, most of the valley went quiet.

The marines had expected to face much heavier fighting. Once inside the valley, they found a number of abandoned Taliban bunker complexes that indicated insurgents had been ready for a battle.

"Their unwillingness to fight surprised me," says Lance Cpl. Terrence Moran, a marine from 1st Platoon, Bravo Company, 1/6 Infantry Battalion.

When the operation started, the marines and Afghan forces inserted into the valley from the north, south, and center, which many say caused insurgents in the area to feel overwhelmed.

"I think they expected us to come from one direction, and only that direction, so they were confused," says Moran.

Prior to the operation there had been no bases inside the valley, except for a small US base next to the dam. Taliban domination of the area had grown so strong that locals said the roads leading in and out of the valley were unsafe, and villagers around the dam lived virtually under siege.

"The situation in Kajaki was really bad before the operation," says Ghulam Ali Baryal, a tribal elder from Kajaki. "People were stuck in the area around the dam. They were concerned that there would be food shortages because no food or supplies were arriving to the city and the farmers couldn't export their crops outside Kajaki."

Marines bring hard-won lessons to bear

As is the plan throughout Afghanistan, the marines will gradually cede ground to their Afghan counterparts as they leave Helmand. For now, there is much optimism among the marines working here.

After 10 years of the US-led war, it's common for soldiers and marines inheriting the security responsibility of an area to be hampered by the mistakes of the unit that preceded them, or even those of units that were stationed in the area years before. But the 1/6 Infantry Battalion is the first international unit based in Kajaki Valley.

"Kajaki is kind of like a blank slate for us," says Lt. Stephen Grodek, who commands Bravo Company's 1st Platoon.

Many marines say they hope they can take what they've learned in a decade of fighting in Afghanistan and apply it here.

One example: When the military began to focus heavily on development projects as part of their strategy to "win the hearts and minds" of the Afghan people, units would make big promises about what services they could provide. Many were broken, causing locals to lose faith in foreign forces. Marines say it is now critical to keep expectations on both sides in check and promise only what they can provide.

"We were able to take the lessons we learned in other districts ... so you don't come in and create the wrong expectations or start inadvertently working through the wrong people. We're able to take a lot of those lessons and do it the right way in Kajaki," says Lt. Col. George Benson, commander of 1/6 Infantry Battalion.

German Military Fears Civil War in Afghanistan
Spiegel Online 02/12/2011
Officially, NATO troops in Afghanistan are making progress in the fight against the Taliban and will be able to hand over security responsibilities to Kabul as planned in 2014. Unofficially, according to secret US and German documents revealed in a German daily, military leaders fear civil war once they depart.

Officially, the Afghanistan conference set to kick off in Bonn on Monday is, according to the German Foreign Ministry website, intended to "solidify together with Afghanistan the long-term engagement of the international community and to advance the political process in the country."

Unofficially, however, many see the gathering, which will bring Afghanistan President Hamid Karzai together with NATO foreign ministers, as but a prelude to withdrawal. US President Barack Obama has begun the American drawdown and has said it will be complete by 2014. His NATO allies, including Germany, have followed suit, with Germany planning to reduce its presence in Afghanistan by 950 troops by the beginning of 2013. The remaining 4,400 troops are to leave by the end of 2014.

NATO has referred to the process as a handover of security responsibility to Afghanistan. But a report in the German tabloid Bild on Friday, citing secret US military intelligence documents as well as confidential German military documents, indicates that military officials in both countries believe that civil war in Afghanistan will be the result.

The paper quotes what it describes as a secret, collaborative appraisal by the US and German militaries as saying: "When the ISAF troops leave the country, there will be civil war." (Eds. note: Quote translated from the German.) The paper says that once withdrawal is complete, leaders of the insurgency, who are currently in Pakistan, "will return to Afghanistan."

'Meeting Our Goals'

While it is certainly no secret that the situation in Afghanistan remains far from stable, the pessimism displayed in the secret documents stands in stark contrast with the message political leaders have been eager to convey. Just in June, when Obama announced the beginning of the US drawdown, he said that troop reduction had become possible because "we are meeting our goals."

In a message posted on the German Foreign Ministry website, German Foreign Minister Guido Westerwelle also does not question that Afghanistan forces will be able to take over full responsibility for security in the country in 2014. Westerwelle has been a leading voice in Germany pushing for withdrawal, driven by widespread voter frustration over the length and cost of the engagement.

NATO officials have been careful to warn that the international engagement in Afghanistan, particularly when it comes to training security forces and to economic reconstruction, will continue long after the combat troops have been withdrawn.

The Bild story also claimed that the documents contained indications that the Afghanistan intelligence service had participated in attacks on the German military, and that German weapons had ended up in the hands of Taliban fighters.

The revelations printed in Bild are the first time that high-level doubts about the efficacy of NATO's engagement in Afghanistan have reached the public eye. Several analysts have openly doubted whether the international community will be able to beat back the Taliban sufficiently by 2014 to enable Afghanistan's military and police forces to maintain control. Just this autumn, a top German general said that the mission in the country had failed.

A Negative View of the War

"The mission fulfilled the political aim of showing solidarity with the United States," Harald Kujat, formerly Germany's top-ranked soldier and a leading planner of Germany's mission to Afghanistan 10 years ago, told the Mitteldeutsche Zeitung in October. "But if you measure progress against the goal of stabilizing a country and a region, then the mission has failed."

General Stanley McChrystal, who led the Afghanistan troop increase ordered by Obama in 2009, likewise voiced his doubts this autumn. He said that the US and NATO were only "50 percent of the way" toward achieving the goals they had set for themselves.

In addition, the Afghanistan War Logs released by WikiLeaks last year and reported on extensively by SPIEGEL and other major news outlets provided a view of the war that opened the public's eyes to the difficulties faced by the operation.

Merkel Demands Political Reconciliation

The civil war concerns would appear to be well founded. When the Soviet Union pulled out following its own less-than-successful attempt to pacify the country in the late 1980s, Afghanistan quickly descended into a decade of civil war. It was out of that war that the Taliban -- and a safe haven for al-Qaida -- emerged.

Increasingly, many have come to the conclusion that the only possibility to achieve peace in Afghanistan is via negotiations with moderate members of the Taliban. In an interview with the Bonn daily General Anzeiger published on Friday, Merkel said "not everyone who at one point fought for the Taliban stands permanently in the way of a peaceful development. Many of these people can and should contribute to a stabile future for Afghanistan."

"Afghanistan needs an internal process of political reconciliation, and externally it needs to be embedded in good partnerships with its neighbors," Merkel continued. She said that the West wants to avoid "repeating the errors of others in the past," and pledged that Afghanistan would not be left to its own devices even after 2014. "The goal in Bonn is to strengthen Afghanistan ahead of the transition phase."

What happened when US forces left Afghan hotspot?
3 December 2011 BBC News
What happens when US forces pull out of the most dangerous parts of Afghanistan? The BBC's Bilal Sarwary, the first journalist to visit one of the areas the US left in Kunar province, uncovers a disturbing situation.

Kunar has always been a crucible of conflict. Tucked away in the north-eastern corner of Afghanistan, it borders Pakistan's tribal badlands. It is one of the first ports of call for war-minded militants crossing the mountain passes.

But after the US-led invasion, troops began to assert their hold over the province. It is now littered with US and Nato bases and despite bloody battles there, the US invested heavily. Roads were asphalted, buildings renovated and a sense of security slowly developed. Villagers went about their business while infrastructure was put in place.

The US pulled out of parts of Kunar last year, beginning the withdrawal process. What has happened in the province since then makes for grim reading.

The new roads are now pock-marked with craters left by militants who plant bombs targeting Western and Afghan forces.

The province is becoming more dangerous - UK aid worker Linda Norgrove was kidnapped on one of the main roads in Kunar last year and in the past few months an Afghan translator was also abducted from exactly the same area.

The stretch between Chaw Kay and Nur Gal has become a favourite haunt of militants seeking targets.

The Taliban now roam at will in some rural districts, ruling villages by night while the government exerts nominal power by day. Taliban radio stations broadcast daily and hypnotic chants exhorting jihad (holy war) dominate Kunar's airwaves.

Intelligence officials say the Taliban operate radio stations from transmitters loaded on the backs of donkeys. "The donkeys are always mobile and they are guarded by armed insurgents," one spy told me.

It is a potent weapon for insurgents, they argue. A number of Kunar youth are being recruited as suicide bombers and there is evidence of militant training camps in areas where the US used to patrol. Rising against militants

When I visited the picturesque Pech valley in the west of the province, a cloud of gloom hung over it.

In Barkanday village, I found a group of tribal elders brooding over their predicament: where once US forces were a deterrent to the Taliban, the Afghan government is notable only for its absence.

"It is Taliban across the river," one elder said. "They are lying in wait. At the first opportunity, they will descend on the village to take their revenge," he said, refusing to give his name for fear of retribution. Barkanday dared to rise against the Taliban when they blew up a bridge over the river, restricting the villagers' movement and obstructing water meant for their fields. The revolt did not go down well with the Taliban leadership, the elder said.

One local pointed to a dozen men in the distance carrying grenade launchers and machine guns, most dressed in Afghan army and police uniforms. They were Taliban, I was told.

Inside the village, 30-year-old Suleman told me insurgents enter the village at night. "They catch hold of anyone who dares to step out," he said.

Several people whose family members work for the security forces fled after US forces left the village. "Those still here live in fear day and night," another elder said.

Suleman spoke of one recent morning when villagers woke to find a bullet-riddled body. There was a typed note saying anyone found working for the "infidels" would meet the same fate.

"When US forces left, they told us that our security was now the responsibility of the Afghan government," Mohammad Akbar said. "But the Afghan government exists only in the district headquarters at Mano Gai."

I did not come across a single soldier or official on my way there or during my four-hour stay. Villagers say development has also suffered.

"US forces built bridges, roads, schools and clinics in the area," said Abu Zubair. "Now there is no such activity." Taliban judiciary

The Taliban even run a shadow judiciary in parts of Kunar. Like increasing numbers of Afghans in rural areas looking for speedy justice, Bibi Gul turned to a Taliban court when her son was murdered after a spat with a neighbour.

When government officials failed to act she took her grievance to the Taliban.

"I crossed the river and travelled several hours... I met the Taliban-appointed governor. He promised me justice," she said, showing me a letter from him.

It said: "Tell us if there is a tribal solution to the woman's complaint. If not, we will resolve the dispute our way."

Several villagers told me that Taliban judges hold court every Friday in nearby areas, deciding cases ranging from robbery to murder.

"They don't make us wait for months justice is handed out instantly," one woman said.

The governor of Kunar, Fazlullah Wahidi, rejects the argument that there is no government in places such as Barkanday. But he admits that there are not enough Afghan forces to instill confidence, admitting "that is our weakness".

Afghanistan's intelligence spokesman, Luftullah Mashal, insists that training camps are based over the border in Pakistan.

But as Western forces withdraw, more areas like those in Kunar will be handed over to Afghan forces. Many Afghans ask if local forces will be able to hold on to these areas. If Kunar is an example, there will be many doubts.

Nurturing Wildlife in War-Torn Afghanistan
New York Times By RACHEL NUWER December 2, 2011
When Wildlife Conservation Society scientists talk about their work in Afghanistan, they typically draw puzzled reactions. “Wildlife conservation in Afghanistan?”

Given the enormity of the country’s human needs, protecting animals does not seem like an obvious priority to some people. But because of its place in the world — at the nexus of three distinct biogeographic regions — Afghanistan is a biological crossroads boasting an unusually diverse array of rare and unique animals. And as I report in Friday’s edition of Timescast, scientists suggest that conservation projects can contribute to stabilizing the country.

“As much as we are the Wildlife Conservation Society and we try to save wildlife, a great deal of our efforts are focused on building the human capacity to manage those resources,” said Peter Zahler, the deputy director for the group’s Asia programs, who has worked in Afghanistan since 2002. Supported by the United States Agency for International Development, the society is the only conservation organization presently operating in Afghanistan.

About 80 percent of Afghans live near wildlife and depend upon natural resources for survival, but war has degraded the country to the point of threatening those lifelines. Aside from the ravages of combat, people in desperate economic circumstances have leveled forests, and much of the land is overgrazed.

Although few animals are hit by bullets or bombs, Mr. Zahler said, “the overall slow but steady loss and degradation of the environment was immense.”

He and his team of local and foreign scientists set out to see how wildlife fared during decades of Afghan conflict. Almost no studies of Afghanistan’s wildlife exist, so the researchers first conducted camera trap surveys to see which species were present. They found snow leopards, Persian leopards and lynx, among numerous other big cats. Because big cats are on the top of the food chain, their presence indicates that the ecosystem is hardier than they had expected.

The survey team also identified 38 bird species newly observed in the country, and scientists genetically analyzed the droppings of giant Marco Polo sheep to estimate the size of the herds, determining that the species remains viable.

Their wildlife surveys complete, the team set out to create grass-roots initiatives. Local communities with direct ties to the land are more concerned about management of their resources than distant governments, the group reasoned, so on-the-ground conservation management is often more effective than initiatives that are centrally planned.

Classroom spaces were set up at the Kabul Zoo to teach people about their natural heritage, veterinary training was arranged so that locals could detect and prevent livestock disease, and scientists schooled community rangers in wildlife protection.

Government involvement was essential, however, given that protected species and national parks cannot be established without legal support. The first law passed by the post-Taliban parliament was environmental legislation that the Wildlife Conservation Society helped draft. The law requires that local people’s wishes be taken into account in the management of protected areas.

In 2009 Afghanistan announced its first provisional national park, Band-e-Amir. The Wildlife Conservation Society helped the 14 villages surrounding the park form a committee that now oversees the park’s management.

By paving the way for natural resource management and community involvement, the thinking goes, the conservationists are contributing to the process of democratization.

“The idea of conservation in Afghanistan may seem unrealistic to some,” the researchers write in a recent paper in the journal BioScience, “But hope is realism with its sleeves rolled up.”

British soldier fired for stabbing Afghan boy
Grenadier Guardsman Daniel Crook jailed and dismissed from the army after bayoneting boy, 10, in kidneys for no reason
Guardian.co.uk By Nooruddin Bakhshi, Rob Evans, Richard Norton-Taylor and Jon Boone Friday 2 December 2011
A British soldier has been dismissed from the army after stabbing a 10-year-old Afghan boy in his kidneys with a bayonet for no reason.

Grenadier Guardsman Daniel Crook was suffering from a hangover after a heavy vodka drinking session when he bayoneted the boy, who was running an errand. He could not explain why he carried out the attack.

After being traced by the Guardian, the boy's father said the attack had left his impoverished family bitter and financially burdened. More than 18 months after the attack, his son is still unable to go to school. He said British forces were "in Afghanistan to build the country and remove insurgents, not to stab a child".

The unpublicised conviction of Crook is the latest in a series of prosecutions mounted against British military personnel accused of causing civilian casualties in Afghanistan.

The Guardian has learned that in a separate case, another soldier is being investigated on suspicion of murder after allegedly shooting dead an Afghan civilian who was digging near a military base.

Prosecutors are considering whether to charge the private in the Royal Welsh Regiment over the incident in Helmand province in June last year.

The Guardian has pieced together the the court martial of Crook from an interview with the boy's father and an account from the Service Prosecuting Authority (SPA), the agency established in 2009 to conduct independent prosecutions of military personnel.

One evening in March last year, Crook "drank a considerable quantity of vodka which was sent to him in a mineral bottle contained in a welfare parcel", according to prosecutors. He was so drunk that medics had to treat him overnight.

At 9am the next day, his unit left a checkpoint in the Nad e Ali district of Helmand to go on patrol. Crook followed his colleagues after arming himself with a pair of grenades and a bayonet. His rifle had been confiscated as a safety measure, the court martial heard.

He soon came across two Afghans riding bikes. One of them was the 10-year-old boy, Ghulam Nabi. His 72-year-old father, Haji Shah Zada, said his son had been sent to collect a bottle of yoghurt.

The soldier was "alone and not patrolling and he ordered Ghulam to stop. But he was just a little child and he didn't understand. The soldier had just come out of his base and he didn't have a gun, only a bayonet. He grabbed Ghulam and stabbed him in the back, near his waist."

Prosecutors said the boy had pesteredCrook for chocolate. "In response Crook took hold of the boy's shoulder and stabbed him in the region of his kidneys with his bayonet. Crook felt the bayonet pierce the boy's skin but did not see if he was bleeding." His father said: "His clothes were covered with blood. We put him in a car and raced to Lashkar Gah but the doctors couldn't treat him there and we took him to Kandahar."

Meanwhile Crook had caught up with his patrol and admitted he had stabbed a child. The bayonet and grenades were taken from him and he was handcuffed. He later told military police he could not explain why he stabbed the boy.

At the court martial in June, the judge described the trigger for the crime as "the considerable amount of alcohol consumed the night before" and ruled that he had put the lives of his comrades in danger. Crook was jailed for 18 months and dismissed from the army.

This week, the boy's father said he had a big scar on this back from the wound. He boy is still not going to school as he struggles with the 1km walk and riding his bike is impossible.

The attack has imposed an extra financial burden on the poor family as Ghulam cannot run errands or help his father collect grass for their animals.

Shah Zada, a shopkeeper and farmworker, says he cannot understand why his son was attacked and has received no apology from the British forces. Although he credits Nato troops for expelling the Taliban from his village, the attack has soured his opinion of western forces. "Of course foreigners are the enemies of Afghans – otherwise he wouldn't do that to innocent child who was just going by on his bike." On the question of compensation, he said: "We asked for $40,000 but they only gave us $800."

Six members of the British armed forces have been, or are being, prosecuted over allegations of abusing or wounding Afghan civilians since March last year.

The prosecutions, which have led to four convictions, were brought by the SPA , headed by Bruce Houlder QC, a former chairman of the Criminal Bar Association. Ministers were forced to set up the civilian-run agency following severe criticism that military prosecutors had failed to properly prosecute British troops accused of killing or abusing Iraqi civilians.

Details of the prosecutions are deeply embarrassing given that foreign troops in Afghanistan say their mission is to build up a stable and lawful country. Civilian casualties play an important role in the propaganda battle to win the "hearts and minds" of Afghan civilians – waged by both Nato and the Taliban.

In a separate prosecution which was reported at the time, two Royal Marines were dismissed from the navy for assaulting an Afghan civilian. Sergeant Mark Leader and Captain Jody Wheelhouse assaulted Mohammad Ekhlas, 48, with a boot. He needed four stitches to his lip.

Michael Hunter, the judge at the court martial, ruled that "this was a sustained assault on an injured and unarmed prisoner". He added that it was understandable that soldiers who have seen the effects of roadside bombs should "feel a degree of hatred towards those who plant them", but assaulting prisoners undermined the standards of the armed forces and everything they were trying to achieve in Afghanistan.

In a further prosecution, Dane Keir Leyland-Jones, of Ist Battalion, the Duke of Lancaster's Regiment, was fined £1,000 in May for negligence after an Afghan policeman was shot. According to the SPA, he was manning a checkpoint in Nad e ali in May last year when a bullet from a gun he was handling struck the left leg of the policeman. Medics decided that they needed to amputate his lower leg, but he vanished and has not been found since.

The SPA is also prosecuting a corporal, understood to be in the special forces, for allegedly assaulting an Afghan in March last year.

Many Afghan civilians have been killed or injured by British forces during the decade-long conflict, although United Nations figures show that the Taliban kill far more civilians than Nato troops.

Britain's military police investigated 99 incidents in which UK forces had been accused of killing or wounding Afghan civilians between January 2005 and March this year.


www.afghanistannewscenter.com