It all started in mid-February of this year when Mullah Baradar, the second in command of the Afghan insurgency, was captured in a joint raid conducted by CIA and Pakistani forces in Karachi, Pakistan’s biggest city where members of the Taliban’s leadership council were reportedly hiding after being shifted from Quetta. Afterwards, local and international media outlets reported more captures of high command Taliban leaders and shadow governors in different parts of the country. The latest of the series was the apprehension of Mohtasim Agha Jan, former Taliban finance minister and son-in-law of Mullah Omar. With this, it is said that at least seven important members of the leadership council are now in Pakistan’s detention.

Click to read full story.

English Proverbs (A) پښتو متلونه

B

(428) Back again, like a bad penny.
(٤٢٨) بد عادتونه په اسانۍ سره نه ځي.
(429) Bad company is the devil’s net.
(٤٢٩) خراب ملګري د شېطان جال دى.
(430) Bad counsel confounds the adviser.
(٤٣٠) څوک چې اسمان ته لاړې توکي بېرته په هغه راپرېوځي.
(431) Bad customs are better broken up than kept up.
(٤٣١) د بدو رواجونو د پوره کولو نه پرېښودل غوره دي.
(432) Bad excuses are worse than none.
(٤٣٢) د درواغجنو بهانو نه يو “نه” ښه دى.
(433) Bald heads are soon shaven.
(٤٣٣) چې بخت خراب شي مصيبت صبر نه کوي.
(434) Barking dogs seldom bite.
(٤٣٤) چې ډېرې غوريږي هغه ورېږي نه.
(435) Bashfulness is an enemy to success.
(٤٣٥) په شرع کې شرم نيشته.
(436) Be a friend to thyself and others will be so too.
(٤٣٦) عزت کوه عزت به دې کېږي.
(437) Be always in time, too late is a crime.
(٤٣٧) چې ناوخته يې بدبخته يې.
(438) Be it weal or be it woe, it shall not be always so.
(٤٣٨) وختونه بدلېږي رابدلېږي، کله درياب کله کرياب.
(439) Be not ashamed of your handicraft.
(٤٣٩) په کار کې شرم نيشته.
(440) Be not the first to quarrel, nor the last to make it up.
(٤٤٠) په جنګ کې پېل مه کوه او په صلح کې ځنډ.
(441) Be spring in praising and more so in blaming.
(٤٤١) د چا ستاينه په احتياط کوه او نيوکه د هغې نه هم په زيات احتياط.
(442) Be surety, and danger is at hand.
(٤٤٢) ضمانت کې خطره خو وي.
(443) Be never so high, the law is above you.
(٤٤٣) د سر د پاسه سر شته.
(444) Bear and forbear.
(٤٤٤) د صبر مېوه خوږه وي.
(445) Beat the dot before the lion.
(٤٤٥) اول د مخامخ خطرې نه ځان خلاص کړه.
(446) Beauty and folly are often companion.
(٤٤٦) ښايست اکثر احمق وي.
(447) Beauty has a short date.
(٤٤٧) ښايست د ژمي ماځيګر دى تېر به شينه.
(448) Beauty is blossom.
(٤٤٨) د ګل عمر دوه ورځې وي.
(449) Beauty is potent but money is omnipotent.
(٤٤٩) ښکلا کې قوت شته خو د دولت قوت ته نه رسي.
(450) Beauty without grace is a violet without smell.
(٤٥٠) ښايست بې کماله لکه ګل بې خوشبويه.
(451) Bees that have honey in their mouth have stings in their tails.
(٤٥١) د ګل سره ازغي خامخا وي.
(452) Before old age my care was to live well, in old age, to die well.
(٤٥٢) په ځوانۍ کې د ښه ژوند او په پيرۍ کې د ښه مرګ فکر وي.
(453) Beggar’s bags are bottomless.
(٤٥٣) د سوالګر خېټه نه ډکېږي.
(454) Beggars must be no choosers.
(٤٥٤) زه دې دوکان ته نه پرېږدم ته وايې چې درانه يې وتله.
(455) Being on sea, sail; being on land, settle.
(٤٥٥) چې چېرې وسې په مذهب به د هغو شې.
(456) Believe that you have it, and you have it.
(٤٥٦) قناعت ستر دولت دى.
(457) Believe well and have well.
(٤٥٧) ښه کوه ښه به درسره کېږي.
(458) Bells call others to church, but enter not in themselves.
(٤٥٨) ملا بل ته مسئلې کوي پخپله پرې حملې کوي.
(459) Benefits please like flowers, while they are fresh.
(٤٥٩) ښه ژر هېرېږي.
(460) Best is best.
(٤٦٠) ښه ښه وي.
(461) Best is cheapest.
(٤٦١) چې نه پوهېږې ښه شى اخله.
(462) Best to bend while it’s twig.
(٤٦٢) عادتونه په ماشوموالي کې بدلېدى شي.
(463) Betrayers are hatred even by those whom they benefit.
(٤٦٣) غدار د هر چا بدي شي.
(464) Better a good expectation than a mean possession.
(٤٦٤) دنيا په امېد ولاړه ده.
(465) Better a penny with right than a thousand without.
(٤٦٥) يوه روپۍ حلاله د يو لک حرامو روپيو نه ښه ده.
(466) Better be alone than in ill company.
(٤٦٦) بدو خلکو سره د کېناستو نه ځانله ښه يې.
(467) Better be born lucky than wise.
(٤٦٧) عقل مه غواړه طالع غواړه رحمانه، عقلمند د طالعمنو نوکران دي.
(468) Better be half-hanged than ill-wed.
(٤٦٨) د بدلمنې ښځې نه لونډ ښه يې.
(469) Better be idle than ill-employed.
(٤٦٩) د بد کار کولو نه بېکاره ښه يې.
(470) Better be proficient in one art than smattered in a hundred.
(٤٧٠) په سلو کارونو کې د سر نښلولو نه د يو کار بشپړول ښه دي.
(471) Better deny at once than promise long.
(٤٧١) د نه پوره کېدونکو وعدو کولو نه “نه” کول ښه دي.
(472) Better do it than with it done.
(٤٧٢) د يو کار په باره کې د سوچ کولو نه ښه دا ده چې هغه کار وکړې.
(473) Better die once for all than live in continual terror.
(٤٧٣) د هرې ورځې د وېرې ډار نه مرګ ښه دى.
(474) Better go about than fall in a ditch.
(٤٧٤) په نېغه لار ځه که اوږده هم وي.
(475) Better go back than go wrong.
(٤٧٥) په غلطه لار د وړاندې تلو نه بېرته ستنېدل ښه دي.
(476) Better go to bed supperless than rice in debt.
(٤٧٦) په پور د خوړلو نه نهر ويده کېدل ښه دي.
(477) Better go to heaven in rags than to hell in embroidery.
(٤٧٧) د ناروا ګټې نه غريب ښه يې.
(478) Better go without medicine than call in an unskillful physician.
(٤٧٨) نيمچه حکيم پوره خطر دى.
(479) Better half an egg than an empty shell.
(٤٧٩) د خالي لوښي نه نيمه اګۍ هم ښه ده.
(480) Better ill-fed than ill-bred.
(٤٨٠) نهر ښه يې خو نه بې لارې.
(481) Better lose a jest than lose a friend.
(٤٨١) د داسې ټوکې کولو نه يې نه کول ښه دي چې دوست پرې خفه شي.
(482) Better short of pence than short of sense.
(٤٨٢) بې پېسو ښه يې نه بې عقله.
(483) Better still rise and fall.
(٤٨٣) د خپل څادر سره پښې غځول ښه دي.
(484) Better small fish than an empty dish.
(٤٨٤) د خالي لوښي نه ښه دا ده چې څه خو پکښې وي.
(485) Better suffer for truth than prosper by falsehood.
(٤٨٥) د حق زحمت د درواغو د راحت نه ښه دى.
(486) Better suffer ill than do ill.
(٤٨٦) غم په خپله زغمه نورو ته يې مه ورکوه.
(487) Better the feet sleep than the tongue.
(٤٨٧) د پښې ښويېدل ښه دي نه د ژبې.
(488) Better thou perish than truth.
(٤٨٨) د حق په لار کې د مرګ نه مه ويرېږه.
(489) Better go ask than go astray.
(٤٨٩) په غلطه لار د تللو نه ښه دا ده چې پوښتنه وکړې.
(490) Better to be blind than to see ill.
(٤٩٠) د بد نظر د اچولو په ځاى ړوند ښه يې.
(491) Better to die a beggar than live a beggar.
(٤٩١) د ذلت د ژوند نه مرګ ښه دى.
(492) Better to trust in God than in His saints.
(٤٩٢) په وليانو د عقيدې نه ښه دا ده چې په خداى عقيده وساتې.
(493) Better untaught than ill-taught.
(٤٩٣) د خراب تعليم نه بې تعليمه ښه يې.
(494) Between the devil and the deep sea.
(٤٩٤) چې نه مخکې لار لرې او نه وروسته تلى شې.
(495) Beware of a silent dog and still water.
(٤٩٥) د ژمي په لمر او د دښمن په خندا اعتبار نشته.
(496) Beware of him who regards not his own reputation.
(٤٩٦) چې د ځان عزت نه پېژني نو د بل به څه وپېژني؟
(497) Beware of no man more than thyself.
(٤٩٧) ښه او بد دې په خپل لاس کې دي.
(498) Beware of one who flatters unduly; he will also censury unjustly.
(٤٩٨) چې څوک دې هيڅ بې هيڅه ستاينې کوي هغه به دې هيڅ بې هيڅه بد هم وايي.
(499) Birds of feather flock together.
(٤٩٩) کوتره له کوترې سره او باز له باز سره.
(500) Black is the badge of hell.
(٥٠٠) تورتم د دوزخ نخښه ده.
(501) Black will take no other hue.
(٥٠١) په تور بل رنګ نه خېژي.
(502) Blame is the lazy man’s wages.
(٥٠٢) د ناراسته سړي معاش څه؟ خبرې!
(503) Blind zeal only does harm.
(٥٠٣) ړوند جذباتيت د زيان سبب جوړېږي.
(504) Blood is thicker than water.
(٥٠٤) لاس چې مات شي خپلې غاړې له ځي.
(505) Blow will answer blows.
(٥٠٥) د سُوک ځواب په سُوک.
(506) Blushing is virtue’s colour.
(٥٠٦) شرم د حيا نخښه ده.
(507) Bodies devoid of mind are as statues in the market-place.
(٥٠٧) د بې عقله سړي مثال د بُت دى.
(508) Bodily labour earns not much.
(٥٠٨) په مزدورۍ څه کېږي.
(509) Bones for those who come late.
(٥٠٩) ناوخته کولو کې تاوان دى.
(510) Books and friends should be few and good.
(٥١٠) کتابونه او دوستان لږ خو ښه ساته.
(511) Borrowed cats catch no mice.
(٥١١) د سوال په اوبو جرنده نه ګرځي.
(512) Brave actions never want a trumpet.
(٥١٢) ښه کارونه څوک د نوم لپاره نه کوي.
(513) Bright to sight, heart’s delight.
(٥١٣) کوم شى چې په زړه ښه ولګي هغه زړه خوشحالوي.
(514) Bring not a bagpipe to a man in trouble.
(٥١٤) په زهيرو زړونو ګوتې مه وهه.
(515) Broken sacks will hold no corn.
(٥١٥) مات شوي زړونه نه روغېږي.
(516) Brothers quarrel like thieves inside a house, but outside their swords leap out in each other’s defense.
(٥١٦) ورونه که د کور دننه د يو بل وينې هم وڅکي خو له کوره بهر بيا د يو بل ملاتړ ته رادانګي.
(517) Building and marrying of children are great wasters.
(٥١٧) په کور جوړولو او واده کولو پېسې خو لګي.
(518) Bullies are generally cowards.
(٥١٨) څوک چې لاپې وهي هغه ډارن وي.
(519) Burns not your hose to fright away the mice.
(٥١٩) په سپږه پسې لمڅى سوځول.
(520) Business neglected, business lost.
(٤٢٠) په کار کې بې پرواهي کار له منځه وړي.
(521) Business is the salt of life.
(٥٢١) د ژوند خوند خو په کار دى.
(522) But one egg and that too addled.
(٥٢٢) يوه ها او هغه هم سخا!
(523) Buy what you do not want, and you will sell what you cannot spare.
(٥٢٣) چې بې ضرورته شيان دې اخيستل نو د ضروري شيانو خرڅولو ته به اړ کېږې.
(524) Buyers want a hundred eyes; sellers none.
(٥٢٤) اخيستونکى خپل زړه ته ګوري، خرڅوونکى خپل ته.
(525) By taking always out and never putting in, the bottom is soon reached.
(٥٢٥) چې خوراک وي او ګټه نه وي د قارون خزانه هم ختمېږي.
(526) By doing nothing we learn to do ill.
(٥٢٦) د وزګار په مزغو کې شېطان ناست وي.
(527) By losing present time we lose all time.
(٥٢٧) وخت له لاسه ورکول هر څه له لاسه ورکول دي.
(528) By other’s faults wise men correct their own.
(٥٢٨) عقل د کم عقلو نه زده کېږي.
(529) By time all things are produced and judged.
(٥٢٩) وخت ښه قاضي دى.
(530) By trying the Greeks got into try.
(٥٣٠) په همت هر څه کېږي.
(531) By bearing with others, you shall be borne with.
(٥٣١) څه چې کرې هغه به رېبې.
(532) By his very concealment he added fame to fame.
(٥٣٢) مشهور چې ورک شو نور مشهور شو.

Continue to English proverbs (C) پښتو متلونه

MARJAH, Helmand Province, Afghanistan – People displaced from the Taliban-controlled town of Marjah, Nad Ali in Helmand province, welcomed a massive military operation launched February 13 aimed at flushing out the insurgents to pave the way for reconstruction and restoration of government authority.

The operation was launched early February 13 after weeks of extensive publicity that included press conferences and dropping leaflets in the area to avoid civilian casualties and give insurgents a chance to lay down their arms.

Around 6,000 troops — a majority of them Afghan soldiers — attacked the town of Marjah, which had been under control of extremists for nearly three years.

Click to read full story.
Click to read this story in Urdu.

“The latest sad news is that the Christian Crusaders (Americans) have burned a copy of the Holy Quran in Wardak province and have thus shown their enmity with Islam and the Muslims… The saddest aspect of this incident is that the American invaders have committed this heinous crime in a province (Wardak) that has been known for long as home to mujahedeen (the holy warriors). The people of this province have taken active part in past and current jihadi movements. The people of this province have always defended their country bravely and heroically. The people of this province had played a historical role in the war against British occupiers…”

Click to read more.

The United Nations, the United States, the Afghan government, and many other countries and entities have been very busy right now in making, or paving way for, a reconciliation plan with the Taliban that is likely to be announced at an important international forum: the London conference for Afghanistan, on Thursday, Jan. 28.
For his part, the U.N. special representative in Afghanistan, Kai Eide, ‘towards a first step to opening direct negotiations with the insurgent group, sought the removal of at least some senior Taliban leaders from the United Nations’ list of terrorists,’ The New York Times reported on Jan. 24. (The U.N. has now removed names of five former Taliban officials from the blacklist).
The next day, BBC reported that the top U.S. commander in Afghanistan, Gen. Stanley McChrystal, ‘told Financial Times newspaper that there had been “enough fighting.”’ And that ‘political solution in all conflicts was “inevitable.”’
Inevitably, President Hamid Karzai of Afghanistan had to outline a strategy for this whole reconciliation and reintegration plan. On Jan. 17, his spokesman, Waheed Omar, told a news conference that followers of the Taliban who defect will be offered jobs and security. Later, President Karzai himself provided more explanation and said: ‘Through a national reconciliation strategy, we want to absorb the Taliban fighters who don’t have links with Al Qaeda network and other terrorist groups.’
The response from the opposite side was clear: The Taliban militants launched a brazen attack on central Kabul, very close to the Palace where President Karzai was busy in preparing his reconciliation plan. The day-long standoff came to an end after three security men and two civilians were killed and 71 more injured. The attack was not very important in terms of casualties, but had much bitter impacts in terms of creating chaos and challenging the huge presence of the international and Afghan forces in a heavily fortified central part of the city.
Contrary to that, the response from a former jihadi warlord and currently wanted terrorist leader, Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, was softer and inviting. Instead of launching an armed attack, he released a taped statement in which, according to the Wall Street Journal, he outlined a roadmap for political reconciliation. President Karzai has included one of Hekmatyar’s former party members, Abdul Hadi Arghandiwal, in his new cabinet which may help the two to come close.
As the past 8 years’ war proved that fighting only brings more destruction and frustration, and in the particular case of Afghanistan it only helped the insurgents to grow and expand, the entire world is now suggesting for the peace talks with the insurgents. But a huge problem still remains at place: the lack of trust among the involved parties. Though the United States, Pakistan and Iran are the main partners of the conflict, Saudi Arabia, China, India and many other countries may also have their shares. And for now, it is clear that the United States is not going to trust on Pakistan, while Pakistan will never trust on Afghanistan and India. The same is true between Iran and the United States, between Pakistan and Iran, between India and China, and the rest.
The Taliban have their own reservations about this plan. Their utmost demand is the withdrawal of the international troops, while the international community is offering reconciliation amid sending more troops. Ostensibly the strategy is aimed to weaken the Taliban by deploying the additional troops and at the same time offering them an opportunity to reconcile with the Afghan government. That may work for people who are fighting for financial incentives but not for ideologically motivated core elements and the ones that are trained and supported from outside Afghanistan. There is a strong possibility that the Taliban who defect for money may switch sides back as soon as the international forces are out of the country or they think the Taliban are stronger again.
Taking this into consideration, many Afghans believe that this plan, and even this conference, is just another talk show that will not bring any change and will have not any new impacts on their lives and the situation in general in Afghanistan. Haji Naqeebullah Muhabbat Khan, a former jihadi commander and a tribal elder in eastern Afghan province, when asked about the moot, said:
‘During the last few years, several conferences were held for development of Afghanistan and huge amounts of money were pledged but most of it went back to the pockets of foreigners.’
This is a general concern about the money that comes to Afghanistan and much of it is taken back by the people who bring it. The sub-contracting system has made the construction work very complicated and the NGO business has underlined the government bitterly. This has now resulted into uncontrollable corruption in the government as well as the private sector. For Afghans, corruption is now a problem bigger and more dangerous than the insurgency.
For better and effective results, the international community, particularly the United States, has to make a realistic and long-term strategy that can work in the regional context. For that, the Afghan government needs to be fully supported and given more authority and independence in decision-making, especially when it comes to crucial issues like reconciliation, spending the aid money, and making security plans. The international community needs to work more with the neighboring countries that are part of the problem to pressurize them to adopt a positive approach towards the solution of the conflict and stop dreaming of conquering Afghanistan after the international forces leave.

It would have been undoubtedly a surprise if Major General Michael Flynn’s report, issued by a US think tank, the Center for New American Security, came out on Dec. 29. In the current circumstances, it was not a surprise; rather it provided a good explanation to the hardest blow the CIA ever had received on its face: the Dec. 30 deadly suicide attack on the Chapman Camp which left 7 senior and very experienced CIA and one GID, the Jordanian spy agency, official along with an Afghan officer.

There are different contradicting reports about the alleged bomber: first the Afghan Taliban claimed responsibility for it and said the bomber was an Afghan National Army soldier. Later the Pakistani Taliban claimed they were behind the attack and described the bomber as a local CIA informant. But then they changed their statement and said the bomber was a Jordanian double agent, Humam Khalil Muhammad.
Though the Khost attack was the deadliest for the CIA, it was not the only strike on the international community’s involvement in Afghanistan. 2009 turned out to be the most violent year of the last 8 year’s war in terms of attacks and deaths: 522 international troops were killed, according to www.icasualties.org, a website that tracks military casualties in Afghanistan and Iraq.

By now, Afghanistan has been in this war for 8 years but contrary to the people’s hopes and expectations, everything is going on the wrong way: thousands of international and Afghan forces along with thousands of intelligence personnel are fighting but the insurgency is growing; the government is in place but in a very corrupt and weak shape; thousands of people are killed every year and this number has been even increasing every month; and people no longer have hopes for a peaceful and prosperous future.

The reasons behind this mess are varying: no cooperation between the international community and the Afghan stakeholders; every country that is involved in Afghanistan has its own agendas and programs; and no clear cut international pressure on Afghanistan’s neighbor countries to stop sending weapons and fighters. And finally, which should be the most concerned, reason is this Major General Michael Flynn’s revelation in which he described the US intelligence personnel as ‘ignorant of local economics and landowners, hazy about who the powerbrokers are and how they might be influenced… and disengaged from people in the best position to find answers.’

Result? The clueless warriors are fighting a useless war!

Read: In Afghanistan, not-so-smart intelligence

The Taliban militants, leading the world’s bloodiest insurgency in recent history, have vowed to oust the international forces from Afghanistan in 2010, claiming that the year 2009 was very successful for them in terms of political and military achievements ‘against an arrogant western and American power.’

This was stated in a fresh statement posted on the movement’s website, www.alemarah.info (Pashto page). The statement, written in Pashto, and titled as ‘The year 2009: the Mujahedeen’s success and the invaders’ confusion,’ further says that everyone now is talking about reconciliation and peace talks with the Taliban which means a defeat to the Afghan government and its international supporters.

The statement refers to the heavy casualties inflicted on the international forces in 2009 and the low turnout in the August 2009 Afghan presidential and parliamentarian elections and hails them as their military and political successes. ‘This has put our enemy in a confusing and troubling situation and is now confronting internal conflicts and public opposition; has no solid and firm policy; on one side they talk about sending additional troops, but on the other side expresses the unreasonable opinion of their hurried withdrawal and on the same time demand for a political solution to the issue,’ the statement adds.

The statement also mentions the new Obama strategy, announced on Dec. 1, 2009, in which the US President promised to send additional 30,000 troops to change the momentum. ‘In response to this, the Leadership Council of the Islamic Emirate, in a letter, ordered the Mujahedeen across Afghanistan to launch new operations called ‘Nusrat’ (victory) from Saur (April),’ the statement continued.

The statement also gives figures of the casualties of 2009 which greatly differ from the figures given by the Afghan government and the NATO-led ISAF forces and independent sources. The Taliban statement puts the total number of the international forces’ deaths as 5587, but www.icasualties.org, a website that tracks military deaths in Afghanistan and Iraq, reported the total number of international forces’ deaths in 2009 as 506, of them 310 deaths were Americans, double than the deaths occurred in 2008. The Taliban statement says that 7254 Afghan soldiers were killed in 2009 and puts the Taliban fighters’ casualties only as 540. There is no independent source that could give the accurate numbers of the casualties of the Afghan soldiers and police, as well as the Taliban fighters. However, these figures greatly differ than those given by the Afghan officials in press releases.

At the end of the statement, the Taliban have repeated their determination to step up the attacks further in 2010, which, according to their claim, will eventually force the international troops out of Afghanistan.

Afghanistan in 2010: challenges and expectations.

First of all, a warm welcome to 2010 with hopes for peace and stability! This year is crucial for Afghanistan in many ways: the insurgency has expanded its presence to nearly every corner of the country and the perpetrators have vowed to carry it on with much more force; the international community has promised a long term commitment and the United States is focusing to change the momentum of the insurgents with a troop surge and several other programs, such as the expansion of a secretive commando operation which will target ‘the most lethal insurgent groups;’ an effective reconciliation and reintegration process is recommended and voiced for from most of the influential stakeholders; and the new-in-process Afghan government is expected internationally to crackdown on the most despicable problem of the country: corruption.

The additional 30,000 American troops along with the 7000 NATO soldiers to arrive next year while President Hamid Karzai has introduced his not-so-new cabinet to the Wolesi Jirga (Parliament). On the opposite side, the insurgents killed an American soldier in the south of the country on Dec. 27 confirmed by a NATO-led ISAF press release on Dec. 28. This new death, according to AFP, doubled the US casualties in 2009.

‘The death takes this year’s international military casualties in Afghanistan to 506. Of those deaths, 310 have been Americans. That figure compares with a total of 155 Americans for 2008. The total number of foreign troops killed in Afghanistan in 2008 was 295’ (506 in 2009).

The most important point for 2010 is a hope of victory on both sides. It was not only President Obama’s Dec. 1 strategy that promised to turn the situation in favor of the international forces in next 18 months, but a NATO official even warned that a shadow Taliban government is in place if the international community failed this year. Quoted by Reuters, this senior NATO official said, ‘Time is running out. We’ve got about a year to prove that our strategy can actually work. The Taliban has shadow governors in 33 out of 34 provinces.’

He was also quoted to have said that the reason behind this was a weak government (we are witnesses of this): ‘Where the government is weak, the enemy is strong.’ ‘He also said international development ‘has not met the expectations of the people’ and that the ‘Taliban have an incredible ability to sustain themselves.’ This is an alarming situation for the Afghan government as well as the international community.

So growth in the insurgency, reconciliation with the reconcilable elements, combating corruption, and more effective efforts for capacity building on all levels are the main challenges that the Afghan government and the international community are facing together. And unfortunately, after 8 years lost, we have only one year (2010) now. By no means should we loss this chance.

The suicide car bomb on Tuesday that killed at least 8 and wounded another 40 people in Kabul’s heavily fortified area of Wazir Akbar Khan district took place after a series of important events that affected or likely to affect Afghan politics. This was the first major attack in Kabul after President Obama announced his widely debated new Afghan strategy on Dec. 1, 2009. This coincided with the formation of a new cabinet that is internationally expected to curb corruption in the Afghan government. President Karzai has been under heavy pressure in picking up his new ministers. To work out both these crucial issues, the United States Defense Secretary Robert Gates recently visited Kabul followed by an unannounced visit by the British Prime Minister, Gordon Brown.

The main focus of the new Obama strategy was on sending the additional 30,000 troops to be arrived soon and deployed in different parts of Afghanistan. The Taliban had vowed to step up attacks and turn the new policy into a failure. The new wave of attacks – the killing of 16 policemen in Baghlan and Helmand in two separate attacks and the killing of 5 government officials in Paktia province – along with today’s deadly Kabul attack could be quoted as an example.

As usual, the Taliban spokesman, calling from an undisclosed place, took the responsibility of the attack and claimed that the target was a guest house, favorite of the European visitors and international workers, owned by the son of a former Afghan president Burhanuddin Rabbani. There are rumors that the owner of the guest house is going to be included in the new Afghan government formation. But nearby to the place where the attack took place is the house of the former first vice president, Ahmad Zia Massoud, brother of the legendary Afghan commander Ahmad Shah Massoud. The Massouds were reported to have claimed that the former first vice president was the target but he survived.

In any case, the attack was a ‘new message’ for the new Afghan government as well as the new international commitment with Afghanistan as how the Taliban have still the capability to responding to the new strategies. This emphasizes on the need of multi-faceted mechanisms on the part of the international community to combat terrorism. For the Afghan government, President Karzai has to realize the enormity of the challenges his next government will have to face.

For a long time, the Afghans have been the victims of policies, ideologies and strategies imported and enforced from outside the country. An internal Afghan solution has never been a priority for the international players of the Afghan conflict. The new Obama strategy, which has two main parts: sending more 30,000 troops to gain the momentum against the terrorists, and invest huge amounts to lure the Taliban fighters to switch sides, is another part of this series.

This strategy is for the next 18 months. The key question is: what will happen after that? The Taliban is not a pure Afghan dilemma. It has local and international powers behind it as supporters. If these supporters continue to support and pay for fighting, the insurgency will never see an end. They will pay to make them fighters and you will pay to switch sides. At the end of the day, Obama, or the next US President, will have to draw another new strategy. Thus, the conflict will continue until the time the basic regional problems and issues are understood and resolved, not through foreign strategies but through local mechanisms.

As an effort to provide a further explanation of the basic problem, for example, we can discuss the role Pakistan does play in the regional conflicts and politics. This nuclear-armed country is seen as the major contributor to the international terrorism and extremism and at the same time a major front to fight against the global threat of terrorism. From the events that have been taking place within this country, we can tell that Pakistan is extremely confused over the issue of fighting against terrorism. Two days back (on Dec. 12, 2009), Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani told reporters in Lahore that the anti-terror operation in South Waziristan was over. This he said after having claimed that the military had cleared the area of local and foreign terrorists and was now in its control. But the next day, while speaking to a different audience in Karachi, he changed his statement and said that the operation was not over but will continue to an indefinite time. This created confusion and suspicion about the coordination between the political officials and the military commanders.

Similarly, there are reports that the country is widely divided on the issue of anti-terror operations. According to these reports, the powerful military, the intelligence agencies, the political-religious parties that were originally created and later supported by the establishment, are against the operations and support the extremist groups for their local as well as international agendas, while the weak political government and the liberal circles want an all-out campaign to be launched against the terror groups that are hiding and operating in the tribal areas as well as the settled and urban areas.

The reasons behind the fact that a majority of Pakistan’s military, political, and religious elements support terrorism or extremism are not very much complicated: Pakistan has a 62-year long enmity with India and its military gets benefited from this conflict. And the use of terrorist groups has proved the most effective and lethal method against India. So, unless the Pak-India conflict is solved, the military will never want to put a complete end to the terror groups. The second reason: Pakistan is not happy with the US presence in the region because that has been harming its strategic role in Afghanistan. As troubling as the Pak-India conflict is the Durand Line issue between Pakistan and Afghanistan. This conflict has deep political dimensions. A remarkable majority of the Afghans believe that Pakistan has illegally occupied the Pashtun-dominated areas. They think that the Pashtun-dominated areas of Pakistan should be a part of Afghanistan or turned into an independent state, known as Pashtunistan. Pakistan’s political powers are aware of these perceptions and know that a stable and peaceful Afghanistan may mean a re-emerge of the Pashtunistan issue. So without resolving this crucial issue, Pakistan’s political powers may never want to stop supporting the Afghan insurgency.

So reconciliation with the insurgents is okay. But there is still a strong need to look at these issues as important factors because only the solution of these problems can bring a long-lasting peace and stability to the region.