Afghan Death Toll Mounts As Voting Nears

A man stands among the graves of foreign militants and Afghanis who have died in the fighting of the recent past since the American intervention in the country, at the cemetery in President Hamid Karzai’s home town of Kandahar, Afghanistan, Sunday, Oct. 3, 2004. Less than a week from an historic experiment with democracy, and three years removed from the brutality of Taliban rule, Afghanistan remains mired in a spiral of killing that undermine Western claims of success here. At least 957 the number of people reported killed in political violence this year, according to a review by The Associated Press. (AP Photo/Elizabeth Dalziel)

October 3, 2004 04:07 PM EDT

KANDAHAR, Afghanistan – The killing in Afghanistan spirals onward, undermining U.S. claims of success in pacifying the country with less than a week to go before an historic experiment with democracy – direct presidential elections.

The deaths of three Afghan soldiers and two militants over the weekend – barely noted in news reports – brought to at least 957 the number of people reported killed in political violence this year, according to an Associated Press review. The toll includes about 30 American soldiers.

With Afghanistan three years removed from the brutality of Taliban rule, President Bush has acclaimed the Oct. 9 presidential vote a beacon of hope for the Islamic world, and a prelude to even more tricky balloting slated for January in violence-plagued Iraq.

But the tally of dead in Afghanistan – a haven of tranquility compared with Iraq – is an indicator of the task facing both the U.S. military and whomever becomes Afghanistan’s first directly elected president – most likely the American-backed incumbent, Hamid Karzai – to consolidate a shaky peace.

The number of dead was drawn from a review of hundreds of daily stories by The Associated Press since January 1. The actual toll is believed to be significantly higher, since many killings in remote areas are not reported.

“Nobody relishes figures like that,” said Maj. Gen. Eric Olson, the No. 2 American commander in Afghanistan. “I think we’ve only just begun in terms of a permanent and lasting secure environment in Afghanistan.”

Afghanistan’s first post-Taliban vote will draw the world’s attention to Kabul, the battle-weary capital being transformed by a building boom as many Afghans bet on peace after more than two decades of horrific war.

The focus of the continuing insurgency lies in the south and east of the country, where regrouped Taliban rebels and other anti-government groups are expected to mount coordinated attacks before or on election day.

Western intelligence reports seen by AP warn of militants slipping over the border from Pakistan to attack the United Nations and polling stations in and around towns like Kandahar, the former Taliban capital.

Some also talk of possible car-bomb attacks, others of attempts to hide explosive charges in fruit carts – a tactic already used to tragic effect with the slaying of 14 children in Kandahar in January. The Taliban claimed it was planning to target passing American patrols.

“For sure, we are expecting some casualties,” said Talatbek Masadykov, the U.N. official in charge of a swath of southern Afghanistan, including Kandahar. Most foreign aid workers have already left the city because of the heightened threat of violence.

There were fresh signs Sunday of militants on the move.

U.S. and Afghan forces fought suspected Taliban near Spin Boldak on the Pakistani border, killing one rebel and capturing 16, said Khalid Pashtun, spokesman for the governor of Kandahar. No American or Afghan troops were wounded, he said.

On Saturday, rebels killed two militia guards at the home of a former senior official in Uruzgan province, said police chief Rozi Khan. A third soldier died when troops came under fire as they tried to flee with a suspect captured during the battle. The prisoner also was fatally wounded, Khan said.

The attacks continue despite the predominance of militants among the reported casualties.

Based on AP reports nearly half of those killed in just over nine months have been militants.

Some 260 Afghan security forces also have died – although that figure includes the victims of factional violence – alongside 160 civilians, more than 40 aid or reconstruction workers and about 30 U.S. soldiers.

Officials at the Afghan Interior Ministry and presidential palace were not available to comment on the figures.

Military officials and foreign diplomats say militants still are able to slip back and forth across the rugged Afghan-Pakistan frontier, making it hard for the 18,000-strong U.S. force and its Afghan allies to destroy them.

Meanwhile, a government offer of amnesty to former Taliban willing to end their resistance has seen hundreds of former fighters released from Afghan jails but has failed to produce any obvious political gains.

Copyright 2004 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

I do not really like centralization of power but Ismael Khan had to go. Most Afghans associate warlords such as Ismael Khan with the complete lawlessness and anarchy (raping of boys and kidnapping of married and unmarried women of opposing groups by the private militias was commonplace!) that existed between the collapse of Soviet occupation and the prison-style peace of Taliban. Currently, Afghans view these warlords as the surrogates of American military. Staying in bed with those who helped the US topple Taliban may not be in the interest of America in the long-run. As such, I think the removal of Ismael Khan (which Afghans think was done through indirect support of a competing warlord by American military) and restitution of power in the hands of a legitimate government set a good precedent. All warlords, including the one who was fast advancing against Ismael Khan’s forces and is currently under house arrest in Kabul, have taken note.

Again, I am an optimist and in another three years we will witness major improvements AS LONG AS America sticks to her guns.

On the other hand, I’ve read fairly consistently that the Herat governate has gone the farthest in bringing security and development to its’ residents.

Either way, I’m sure the situation is more complex than either of us understand. That being said, I’m not ready to write off Afghanistan and I have to hope Karzai is making the right moves. He strikes me as decent, forward looking and competent man. He’s got an enormous task in front of him and can use all the help he can get.

From the Kansas City Star…(free reg. required)
http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity/8614448.htm

“In some western provinces, life for women is so unbearable that dozens, perhaps hundreds, have committed suicide by setting themselves on fire. Ismael Khan, the warlord who rules the western city of Herat, has brought back many repressive rules, including forbidding women from working or from being seen with men who are not close relatives.

“Ahmad Bassir, Herat correspondent for Radio Free Afghanistan, reports that women there[under your Man, Ismale Khan] see no difference between their lives now and under the Taliban. Most human rights progress, says Amnesty International, is limited to the capital of Kabul.”

From the Sunday Herald

http://www.sundayherald.com/29101

“Human Rights Watch researchers reported this week that he has set up a sort of mini Islamic police state in the western province of Herat where he is governor. He has denied their claims Ð that his security services carry out torture and make politically motivated arrests and that police check to make sure couples can legitimately be out together, even taking unmarried women to doctors to find out if they have recently had sex.”

How high would you like your pile of skulls, Sir?

*The term dogwasher (sag-show-i) was first introduced in a poem in one of the first free publications in Kabul after the fall of Taliban. Two fictional characters from the relatively peaceful days of Afghanistan meet after 25 years of separation and start again their political commentary (all in poetry) about the state of affairs. One remained behind in Kabul and talks about the humilation he suffered under Taliban, and the other about the humiliation he had to go through in the West by “washing dogs” for a living while telling his relatives in Pakistan that he was a successful shopkeeper.

Well, we do that right now. But thanks to the law, we have to buy it from criminals before we can burn it, at inflated prices, yielding the criminals an enormous profit.

To whom? Us, or the Afghanis? Are Americans insisting on outlawing the drug trade over the locals’ objections? Or is this an initiative of the local government?

(I guess I should poke around Google for a while…)