The re-armament and re-activation of Germany as a military power

[Magda Hassan]

Boycott through Silence
2009/08/26

WASHINGTON/KANDAHAR/BERLIN
(Own report) - Recently released US documents on CIA use of torture have brought to light crimes against humanity, committed by the West, with German support, in its "War on Terror". As became known from an internal CIA report, released Monday, even the new interrogation guidelines for the foreign intelligence agencies handed down in 2002, permitting numerous torture techniques, had been violated by both intelligence agents and employees of private repression firms. Simulated executions and suffocation attempts were used on presumed Islamists. Some were tortured to death. The US services could always count on a supply of information from German officials. The German government has taken no measures to halt US torture transports over its territory. German government efforts to thwart an investigation into what has been happening have now been ruled illegal by the German Constitutional Court. Whereas the change of administration has cracked, for the time being, the boycott through silence in Washington, nothing comparable is expected in Germany.


Disclosure
Last Monday, US officials disclosed parts of a previously confidential "Special Review" of the CIA's use of torture in the "War on Terror". The document was written in 2004 and was intended to provide a résumé of the "success" of the new interrogation guidelines handed down in 2002. In these guidelines well known methods of torture, including "waterboarding" - nearly drowning the presumed Islamist to force a confession - were declared permissible. According to the CIA's 2004 "Special Review," even those rules laid down in the new interrogation guidelines were violated by both government interrogation specialists (CIA) and private institutions (Blackwater/Xe), who employed even more brutal means of torture. The "Special Review" lists "Specific Unauthorized or Undocumented Techniques".[1]

Torture Techniques
The methods range from psychic brutality to physical violence. Specialists ("Debriefers") threatened naked, blindfolded prisoners with drills and firearms and announced the intention of committing brutal sexual violence to female members of their families. An "interrogator" threatened a prisoner, "we will kill your children". The torture included maintaining painful postures, "stress positions," scratching open the prisoner's skin with a scrub brush,[2] mock executions as well as sleep-deprivation. Prisoners were knocked to the floor, slammed against the wall or doused for 15 minutes with cold water, while lying on a plastic sheet. Others had their carotid arteries throttled. It has been admitted since some time that not all prisoners survived this torture. Reports of deaths have been documented.

Walking the Beat
Murat Kurnaz, from Bremen, who had been in Guantanamo for more than four years, reported such a killing. Before being kidnapped to Guantanamo, Kurnaz had been imprisoned in a US camp in the Kandahar Province of Afghanistan, where he was tortured also by hanging. US soldiers hanged him alongside another prisoner, who died during the hanging.[3] Kurnaz remembers that he was mishandled in Kandahar also by German soldiers - an accusation that German instances consistently refute. But it is a known fact that, at the time in question, the German special KSK unit (Special Forces Commando), which included an official of the BND (German Federal Intelligence Service), was on active duty in Kandahar. According to the press, quoting States Secretary in the Defense Ministry, Peter Wichert, "the duties of the KSK soldiers consisted of a 'reinforcement of the guard' for the US armed forces in the prison camp." German soldiers were not only deployed "in the guard towers" but also "walked the beat inside the camp" and helped with the transport of prisoners.[4] These soldiers have never reported cases of torture or death, even though these could not have been overlooked, according to former prisoners.

Sealed Dossiers
The German government persists in claiming not to have any concrete knowledge of US use of torture, even though it was not only applied during a period under German guard in a US camp, but also on German territory and in the EU. According to a report by the European Council's special investigator, Dick Marty, the CIA had been maintaining torture chambers in at least two European countries. Marty had also proven that CIA planes were crossing through German airspace, transporting prisoners to torture prisons.[5] According to Marty, a thorough investigation of the CIA's kidnappings has been blocked by Berlin. With its refusal to testify, under pretexts such as data security or an alleged consideration for matters of state security, the German government has blocked the path to a decisive elucidation. Last June, a German parliamentary committee made a similar experience, when submitting its final report. "The German government and German intelligence services have, at times, massively hampered the work of the BND Investigation Committee" concluded the human rights organization, amnesty international "drastically impeding the search for the truth."[6] The German government's use of sealed dossiers and denying permission to testify to impede the investigation, have been ruled illegal by the German Constitutional Court.[7]

Secret Agreement
Marty presumes that Berlin's boycott through silence is based on an accord reached October 4, 2001. NATO member states obligated themselves to fulfill US demands for closer cooperation of the intelligence services in the "War on Terror". Marty, a former prosecutor, has access to information indicating that a secret annex was added to the official Oct. 4, 2001 accord. The Swiss politician, referring to sources with access to the secret document, says that according to this annex, all US agents in the "War on Terror" are to be guaranteed freedom of movement and impunity within the territorial sovereignty of the NATO allies.[8]

Main Command Headquarters
This accord is of special significance to Germany. As the intelligence service expert, Erich Schmidt-Eenboom ascertained back in 2006, the CIA command headquarters, in charge of the Near and Middle East, is located in Frankfurt/Main. With its approx. 200 CIA operatives, it is "the most important command facility in the world" that the US foreign intelligence service has for kidnapping Islamists. With this facility on its territory, Germany "has accommodated the planning staff and the main command headquarters of illegal international kidnapping" concludes Schmidt-Eenboom.[9]

Not in Europe
After the sabotage, above all by Berlin, of his efforts to carry through his investigation, Dick Marty presumes that the elucidation of the kidnapping and torture, during the West's "War on Terror," will not happen in Europe, and certainly not in Germany. It could possibly happen in the USA, said Marty in March and added optimistically: "The truth will come out - even if not in Europe, which I sorely regret as a European."[10] The most recent development - the first disclosures of secret papers in the USA and the persistence of a boycott through silence in Germany and the EU - seem to confirm him.

Please read also Where is Haydar Zammar?, In Accordance With the Law, The Torturers, And Still Waiting, Lapse into Barbarism, Steinmeier and His Accomplices, Sinking Into Barbarism (II) and Examined and Interrogated.

[1], [2] Special Review: Counterterrorism Detention and Interrogation Activities (September 2001 - October 2003), 7 May 2004. C.I.A. Abuse Cases Detailed in Report on Detainees; The New York Times 25.08.2009
[3] Murat Kurnaz: Fünf Jahre meines Lebens. Ein Bericht aus Guantanamo, Berlin 2007. See also Zwei weitere Männer
[4] KSK war an Gefangenentransporten beteiligt; Die Welt 11.11.2006
[5] Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights: Secret detentions and illegal transfers of detainees involving Council of Europe member states: second report, 7 June 2007
[6] Staatsgeheimnisse statt Geheimdienst-Kontrolle? Pressemitteilung von Amnesty International 19.06.2009
[7] Verfassungsrichter rügen Informationspolitik der Regierung; Spiegel Online 23.07.2009
[8] Marty: Geheimes NATO-Abkommen deckte CIA-Flüge; tagesschau.de 26.03.2009. See also Oktober 2001
[9] Erich Schmidt-Eenboom: BND. Der deutsche Geheimdienst im Nahen Osten. Geheime Hintergründe und Fakten, München 2007
[10] Marty: Geheimes NATO-Abkommen deckte CIA-Flüge; tagesschau.de 26.03.2009

http://www.german-foreign-policy.com/en/...1dovp356b2

[Magda Hassan]

Deutsche Presse-Agentur
Septmber 8, 2009

Germany assumes control over Kosovo peacekeepers


Pristina: German Lieutenant General Markus Bentler on Tuesday took over the command over the NATO-led peacekeeping presence in Kosovo, known as the KFOR. Bentler assumed command from his Italian predecessor, General Giuseppe Emilio Gay.

"As a sign of our successful performance, KFOR has started moving towards a new phase, since the situation in Kosovo is improving," Gay
said after handing over command to Bentler.

KFOR was deployed in Kosovo in June 1999, after NATO ousted Serbian security forces from what was then a Serbian province....

Ethnic Albanians have a 90-per-cent majority in the former province. Kosovo declared independence from Serbia last year.

The new country has been recognized by the United States and the majority of European Union nations, but not by Russia, which is backing Serbia in its fight against Kosovo's secession.

The initial force of some 50,000 troops has fallen to fewer than 20,000, with NATO planning to further downsize its presence in Kosovo.

"The gradual reduction of NATO, does not mark the end of our engagement, but it intends strengthening our positive progress which we have achieved," Gay said at the handover ceremony.
http://www.earthtimes.org/articles/show/...epers.html

[Magda Hassan]

Important Customer: The Pentagon
2009/08/25

WASHINGTON/LEVERKUSEN/MUNICH
(Own report) - German companies are backing up their million dollar business deals with the Pentagon by providing special benefits to personnel of the US armed forces, according to NGOs in Germany and the USA. Employees of US military hospitals have their travel expenses to "congresses" and "trainings" paid particularly by pharmaceutical and medical technology companies. These include a prosthetics firm, but also the Bayer and Siemens Corporations, which have been business partners of the US defense department for years. The Pentagon's medical care budget for US soldiers has sharply increased with the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. Observers are estimating that by 2015, the annual drug budget alone could double to reach $15 billion. Even producers of sportswear, such as Adidas, are among the companies, sponsoring trips in support of their lobbying the US military. Boehringer Ingelheim is another company interested in the war business. It had already been involved in business operations with the Pentagon during the war against Vietnam, supplying the basic component for the herbicide Agent Orange. The dramatic effects of Agent Orange are being felt by hundreds of thousands of Vietnamese still today.


Presentation of Product Line
The "Coordination gegen Bayer-Gefahren" (CBG - Coordination against the dangers posed by Bayer - Duesseldorf/North Rhine-Westphalia) reported that German companies, including the Bayer Company (Leverkusen/ North Rhine-Westphalia), are paying large sums to cover travel expenses for personnel of the Pentagon and the US armed forces. The report is based on information provided by the US organization Public Integrity, which analyzes official documents in Washington. Between 1998 and 2007, according to this information, 22,000 trips, at an estimated value of $26 million, by personnel of the US defense department and US armed forces were sponsored by non-US government sources. Foreign governments, the German included, allocated $2,6 million for trips - usually to meetings and conferences. Among the financiers of these trips, one also finds think tanks, such as the Bertelsmann Foundation and the Clausewitz-Society, scientific and research institutions, such as various universities and the Max-Planck-Society as well as private companies. For the presentation of its product line, the sportswear company, Adidas, for example, sponsored several of its Pentagon customers' trips.[1]

Prosthetics specialist
Driven by financial interests, the medical industry is the largest sponsor of these trips. Public Integrity reports that companies of this branch paid for approx. 8.700 of the 22.000 externally sponsored trips. The total value is estimated at more than $10 million.[2] The CBG calls the 46.000 Euros paid alone by Bayer for travel of Pentagon personnel between 1998 and 2007, "a subtle form of marketing". CBG reports that the Pentagon's drug budget has clearly increased in the past few years, to reach almost an annual $7 billion - about two percent of the overall US drug consumption. The continuation of these wars could raise the US armed forces' drug budget to "about $15 billion annually," estimates the CBG.[3] Among the Pentagon's German financiers listed by Public Integrity, alongside Bayer, there is also a German Prosthetics specialist.[4]

Poison Gas Tradition
Bayer's business deals with the Pentagon already have tradition. Their cooperation aroused public attention in the spring of 2004, when reports were published on a heated controversy between Washington and this German company over the drug Lipobay. Bayer had taken the Cholesterol lowering drug off the market already in 2001 - because of alleged side effects, many of which were lethal. The interruption of a Lipobay supply contract, led to a dispute between Bayer and the Pentagon in 2004. But cooperation has not been limited to drugs. CBG reports that "the poison gas, VX, used still today by the US army, is based on a patent of this company in Leverkusen." Referring to the close affinity between pesticides - a Bayer specialty [5] - and chemical weapons, CBG calls this a "terrible tradition". CBG recalls that Bayer researchers played "an important role" in the development of chemical warfare agents already long before VX. "During WWI, Fritz Haber, in cooperation with Bayer's general director, Carl Duisberg, developed mustard gas testing it for the first time at the front, In 1938, Gerhard Schrader synthesized Sarin," reports CBG in a discussion with german-foreign-policy.com: "Schrader directed Bayer's herbicide department until 1964."[6]

Agent Orange
Boehringer Ingelheim is another German Company on the Public Integrity's list of Pentagon lobbyists. Already in the past, this company has been furnishing poison to the US armed forces. In the 1960s, Boehringer supplied 720 tons of Trichlorophenol for the production of the herbicide "Agent Orange" to a US Dow Chemical subsidiary. At the time, the US armed forces was using "Agent Orange" on a large scale against Vietnam, as a defoliant of Vietnamese forests - with devastating effects also on human beings. The effects of this chemical warfare are being felt by hundreds of thousands of Vietnamese still today.[7]

Million Dollar Deals
German travel sponsors also include the Siemens Company that is striving to establish good relations to medical technicians of the US military apparatus - not without success. In February 2007 for example, Siemens Medical Solutions USA landed a large contract to supply the US armed forces with $30 worth of equipment. In April 2009, Siemens Medical Solutions USA was awarded a US Defense Department contract, this time worth even $267 million for radiology systems to be used by the U.S. Army, Navy, Air Force and Marine Corps.[8] These Siemens', Bayer's and other German firms' million dollar deals are thriving on the wars currently being waged by Washington in Iraq and Afghanistan - and on the steadily growing number of US soldiers falling victim to these wars.

[1], [2] Pentagon Travel. How Outside Interests Sponsor Thousands of Military Trips; http://www.publicintegrity.org
[3] BAYER zahlt Reisekosten für Mitarbeiter des US-Verteidigungsministeriums; Pressemitteilung der Coordination gegen BAYER-Gefahren, 24.08.2009
[4] Otto Bock Health Care (Duderstadt/Niedersachsen) lud Public Integrity zufolge den Chief Prosthetist vom Walter Reed Army Medical Center/North Atlantic Regional Medical Command zu einem "Otto Bock Prosthetics Course".
[5] see also Deadly Poison and Mit Abstand Marktführer
[6] Jan Pehrke: Chemie-Waffen: tödliche Tradition bei Bayer; SWB 04/2003, http://www.cbgnetwork.org
[7] see also A Murderous Business
[8] Siemens unit in $267 mln Pentagon contract; Reuters 31.03.2009
http://www.german-foreign-policy.com/en/fulltext/56270

[Magda Hassan]

Threats, Protection Money, War
2006/02/05

MUNICH
(gfp.com) - Chancellor Angela Merkel demands more German influence in NATO and wants to increase the force of impact of the western war alliance through worldwide cooperation with third states. The plans, which Merkel made public last Saturday at the Munich armament meeting, extend the military-financial potential of the Transatlantic Pact and supplement US plans. According to US Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld, the NATO member states must decisively augment their defense budgets, in order to relieve the corresponding US budgets, which has attained US Dollar 600 billion. The German-American program seeks to extend the deployment of NATO to within the China Sea and is clearly directed at Beijing. The intended entry of Georgia and the Ukraine into NATO, as announced in Munich, and which the Georgian president and the Ukrainian defense minister demanded on Saturday, is seeking confrontations with Moscow. At the same time the Islamic world is being threatened with war. The German defense minister contemplates an assault ("military strike") on Iran but "at present" excludes this option. The comprehensive German-American alliance plans, lead to a further reduction of the global political significance of France.


According to the demands made by German Chancellor Merkel in Munich, NATO should expand its war capability to all continents and decisively increase cooperation with third states. As "partners in security," these allies of NATO would have to be gathered from "other regions of the world", explained the German head of state.[1] Considering the "multiplicity of crisis centers" and the "diversity (...) of the conflicts" the western military alliance must "intensify" its cooperation notably with Australia, New Zealand and Japan. Also African states (African union, NATO-Mediterranean Dialogue) should be linked more closely to the US and Germany. German Defense Minister, Jung, pleaded for a politico-military inclusion of the Golf-Cooperation Council.[2] German plans indicate a clear enlargement of the western war potential through affiliation of hitherto independent or indirectly associated regional alliances.

Billions for the war
This expansion is necessary, in order to make up for the further sky-rocketing war costs to the US and its NATO allies. New NATO members and cooperation partners are to pay protection money out of their national budgets. The perpetuity of western wars is threatening the finances of the leading western power. Washington announced Friday, that it must increase its defense budget by five per cent to approximately US $440 billion; in addition at least US $120 billion for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Particularly augmented are outlays for special operation forces and psychological operation units, as well as, occupation forces ("stabilization efforts units").[3] In order to prohibit further strains on the US budget, Defense Secretary Rumsfeld called on NATO states to also increase their military budgets. In Brussels, the goal has been set at two per cent of the gross domestic product. If Germany were to reach this goal, it would mean an inevitable two digit billion augmentation of the defense budget. Not unlike the US, also Berlin shifts the war loans onto third parties and "in consideration of the budgetary situation" refuses to make such increases.

Against France
The German-American plans boil down to a further reduction of the global political significance of France. The French Defense Minister Michèle Alliot Marie warned that NATO, with an expansion of its worldwide cooperation, could overextend itself. Paris, which sees itself as a western antipole to the US, seeks to limit an increase in NATO power, in order to maintain and elaborate its own influence potential. The entry of Georgia and the Ukraine into NATO, as Georgian President Saakashvili and the Ukrainian Defense Minister, Grytsenko, demanded [4], also conflicts with French interests, since Paris would not like to see further inroads of US influence into Eastern Europe and the Caucasus.

Against China
The intentions announced by Chancellor Merkel are aimed, above all, at the People's Republic of China. This is evidenced by the project to strengthen NATO cooperation with Japan. Tokyo, for quite some time, has been trying to shake off the politico-military restrictions imposed by the Allied Powers in the aftermath of the Second World War and attain its own warfare capability. Beijing is observing these efforts of its East Asian rival with uneasiness and warns Tokyo against reviving its traditional plans of hegemony in the China Sea.[5] The German NATO call addressed to Japan, supplements recent attempts to heave Japan into the UN Security Council and to further enhance Japan's international position. NATO's strategy against China becomes clear with the example of Australia and New Zealand. In reference to a future military ring closing in on China's southern flank, it was proposed in Munich that these US allies are to cooperate more closely with the North Atlantic Pact. Economic measures, aimed at keeping Chinese enterprises out of Southeast Asia, were the central theme of an economic conference that preceded the Munich security conference.[6]

To Act Autonomously
The aggressive program for a world-wide NATO advance, finds its current expression in the conflict around Iran's energy policy. Even though Teheran is not violating international law, Berlin is threatening with military measures, a "military strike".[7] The German Defense Minister couched this threat in provisional and purely subjective conditional considerations, which allows the belligerent character to be even more clearly accentuated ("a military strike is, for the time being from my point of view, not on the agenda").[8] As Chancellor Merkel stated, Berlin strives to build as broad of an alliance as possible against Teheran and wants particularly to pull Russia in. But it will depend also on "the stance on the issue of Iran adopted by countries which are gaining in prominence - I will cite China, India and Brazil as three examples among many", said the German head of state in Munich.[9] The People's Republic of China can block UN measures against Teheran with a veto in the UN Security Council. In Berlin this does present an obstacle to military measures. "NATO can take action within the framework of the United Nations peacekeeping system (...)", stated Defense Minister Jung in Munich, But "NATO must also be in the position to act autonomously."[10]

Militarization
The announcements confirm an inexorable crusade for subjugation and war carried into all corners of the world, that dare to oppose western economic interests. Although the military threats against Iran fundamentally run counter to the German constitution's peace imperative, they are perceived in relevant German media organs as appropriate. A basic challenging of the proliferating militarization of German foreign policy is not taking place.

[1] Angela Merkel: Rede auf der 42. Münchner Konferenz für Sicherheitspolitik am 4. Februar 2006; http://www.securityconference.de
[2] Franz-Josef Jung: Rede auf der 42. Münchner Konferenz für Sicherheitspolitik am 4. Februar 2006; http://www.securityconference.de
[3] Amerika stockt Spezialeinheiten auf; Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung 04.02.2006
[4] see also In neuen Grenzen
[5] see also Elite of Nations
[6] see also "Chinas Hoflieferanten"
[7] see also Under Time Pressure
[8] Militärschlag für Jung kein Thema; dpa 03.02.2006
[9] Angela Merkel: Rede auf der 42. Münchner Konferenz für Sicherheitspolitik am 4. Februar 2006; http://www.securityconference.de
[10] Franz-Josef Jung: Rede auf der 42. Münchner Konferenz für Sicherheitspolitik am 4. Februar 2006; http://www.securityconference.de
http://www.german-foreign-policy.com/en/fulltext/55972

[Jan Klimkowski]

Magda - a very important series of articles. Thank you.

So, the Gestapo returns.

Wearing German uniforms. And - metaphorically - the uniforms of the Axis of Good as it fights the War on Terror.

As a caveat, I was intrigued by the following:

German companies are backing up their million dollar business deals with the Pentagon by providing special benefits to personnel of the US armed forces, according to NGOs in Germany and the USA. Employees of US military hospitals have their travel expenses to "congresses" and "trainings" paid particularly by pharmaceutical and medical technology companies. These include a prosthetics firm, but also the Bayer and Siemens Corporations, which have been business partners of the US defense department for years. The Pentagon's medical care budget for US soldiers has sharply increased with the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. Observers are estimating that by 2015, the annual drug budget alone could double to reach $15 billion. Even producers of sportswear, such as Adidas, are among the companies, sponsoring trips in support of their lobbying the US military. Boehringer Ingelheim is another company interested in the war business. It had already been involved in business operations with the Pentagon during the war against Vietnam, supplying the basic component for the herbicide Agent Orange. The dramatic effects of Agent Orange are being felt by hundreds of thousands of Vietnamese still today.

Multinationals will always feed the beast, and provide cover for beasties. That much we know.

However, I've made a film about the history of military trauma medicine, and there is a clear historical trend which is worth considering in this context.

The soldiers of the First World are protected by increasingly sophisticated armour and protective clothing (govt incompetence permitting). They are also supported by brave and well-resourced medics.

The consequence of this is that soldiers are increasingly surviving major trauma - such as loss of limbs - that would usually have killed them in previous wars.

These unfortunate souls who are maimed, usually for life, need considerable medical support for the physical and psychological damage inflicted upon them.

This does of course provide a guaranteed long term source of cash (govt or insurance company) for medical and pharmaceutical companies.

Oink oink oink - with their snouts in the trough again.

Or perhaps I'm just a wizened old cynic....

[David Guyatt]

The mind boggles. I can just see Sportswear companies spinning up a new line of "for real combat clothing" -- Nike Disruptive Pattern fatigues or Mizuno webbing.

Yum, yum, luvely jubely.

[Keith Millea]

It had already been involved in business operations with the Pentagon during the war against Vietnam, supplying the basic component for the herbicide Agent Orange. The dramatic effects of Agent Orange are being felt by hundreds of thousands of Vietnamese still today.

I will add that American Vietnam Veterans are dying daily from Agent Orange afflictions.:banghead:

[Magda Hassan]

It had already been involved in business operations with the Pentagon during the war against Vietnam, supplying the basic component for the herbicide Agent Orange. The dramatic effects of Agent Orange are being felt by hundreds of thousands of Vietnamese still today.

I will add that American Vietnam Veterans are dying daily from Agent Orange afflictions.:banghead:

Not to mention 1,000,000's of Vietnamese.

[Magda Hassan]

Oh no! An outbreak of peace! Stop it now!

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/b5e131b8-9da1-...abdc0.html

Financial Times
September 10, 2009

Nato fears direction of Afghan debate
By James Blitz in London, Matthew Green in Kabul and,Daniel Dombey in Washington

Anders Fogh Rasmussen , Nato's new secretary-general, yesterday warned that a rush to withdraw from Afghanistan was not an option for the US-led alliance, in spite of increasing signs that western public opinion is tiring of the war.

With German opinion polls showing a sharp rise in support for a party that opposes the Nato operation, Mr Rasmussen will say in a speech in the US he is concerned that the public debate on Afghanistan "has started to go in the wrong direction".

But while allegations of fraud during the Afghan presidential elections have been "disturbing", he will add: "We must stay in Afghanistan as long as necessary, and we will stay as long as necessary. Let no one think that a run for the exits is an option. It is not."

Mr Rasmussen's comments come as the Left party, which is opposed to the conflict, received a sharp increase in support ahead of Germany's general election later this month.

Support for the Left, the only mainstream party that is demanding an immediate withdrawal of Germany's 4,200 soldiers in Afghanistan, rose four points to 14 per cent in the latest poll by Forsa for Stern magazine yesterday.

It also comes in advance of scheduled moves by the Netherlands and Canada to draw down or pull out forces from the country next year and in 2011 respectively.

US officials are in negotiations with The Hague to keep 500 of the 1,600-strong Dutch force in Uruzgan province.

Mr Rasmussen fully backed calls by Britain, France and Germany for a UN conference on Afghanistan to be held this year, to focus on transition in civilian sectors. Gordon Brown, UK prime minister, signed a joint letter with Angela Merkel, German chancellor, and Nicolas Sarkozy, French president, asking Ban Ki-Moon, the UN secretary-general, to endorse the international conference building on the heavily disputed presidential elections in Afghanistan, which the leaders claimed marked "an important step in its democratic history".

The UK government said the Afghanistan conference could take place before the end of the year in two phases, with one meeting in Kabul and the second in a venue outside Afghanistan. Mr Brown has offered London as a possible location.

Mr Brown is anxious the conference is not seen as the moment when Nato maps out a detailed exit strategy from Afghanistan, in spite of political pressure from inside Germany for a clear plan for withdrawal.

Nato diplomats dismissed the idea that the call for a conference suggested European Union states were looking for an exit from Afghanistan.

*The US yesterday struck an emollient note about the Afghan election. The state department said that by "refraining from publicly commenting on the outcome of the election" President Hamid Karzai was "giving a chance to the process to work out".

Additional reporting by George Parker

[Jan Klimkowski]

We fight wars in the Name of Spreading Democracy.

But when people vote the "wrong" way - Palestinians voting for Hamas, the Irish and others voting "No" to the EU constitution - or support parties with the "wrong" policies - as suggested above about the German Left - then the voice of the democratic majority is ignored in true patrician fashion.

I love the smell of hypocrisy in the morning.....

Sniff sniff....

It smells like..... Sniff.....

DEFEAT!!!!