WAR ON DRUGS THAT MAY BE FUELLING TERROR

ON THE farm of 46-year-old Nazim Gul at the place known as "29 streams" in
the province of Nangarhar, it seems incredible that anything can grow. With
Afghanistan's drought now in its fifth year, women carry water from afar
and the place is an ancient seabed of stone and rock.

Although Mr Gul manages to grow wheat, cotton and maize for consumption by
his family of six, on a plot of land of only seven jiribs (about four
acres) he says: "Wheat needs much water, poppies need less and poppies are
the best cash crop. Our life depends on poppy cash."

He harvests about 14kg to 21kg (30lb to 46lb) of poppy paste per jirib.
Today, he says, the price per kg is "excellent" at around $700 (?450). By
contrast, for 700kg of wheat he says he earns only $100.

The high price for poppies is a result of the very low 2001 harvest last
year under the Taleban (only 185 tonnes and most of that from former
Northern Alliance areas).

This week, the UN Office for Drug Control and Crime Prevention (UNODCCP)
has again embargoed a report detailing how many tonnes of resin was
produced in this year's harvest. However a UN pre-assessment survey last
February estimated that output for this year would be between 1,900 and
2,700 tonnes.

Nazim Gul's situation encapsulates the poppy problem. "We have just
received a decree banning poppy cultivation, but no support from the
government," he said. "A ban would not be sustainable because there is no
job, no salaries, no assistance."

He is particularly vocal about the British government's most noticeable
contribution to the Afghan poppy issue so far - the underwriting of a "cash
for crops" compensation scheme this spring. "They destroyed our poppies
with sticks and then tractors, about 50 people came to our village from
Jalalabad, but no cash was paid to us."

Britain has led drugs policy in Afghanistan in the context of the G8
nations "security sector" reform programme. But the UN, which is working
with mullahs at provincial level in using religion to persuade farmers
against growing poppies and encouraging infrastructural development
assistance to enable farmers to find alternatives, is careful to distance
itself from the British scheme.

"We cannot verify all the problems as we were not involved," said an ODCCP
official.

But Bariolai Arsalai, who is running drugs awareness seminars, said of the
British scheme in Nangahar: "Many farmers were encouraged to over-declare
their land by local commanders who promised them kickbacks and things got
so rough that one surveyor was purportedly killed for refusing to 'cook the
books'."

The British embassy in Kabul was unable to verify the amount spent on
compensation but a German diplomat said that the scheme had cost around 40
million to 60 million (?25 million to ?37 million). The diplomat added: "In
April, British officials were confident that they could eradicate poppies
in only three years, but since then they have changed their philosophy, now
they are talking about ten years."

In Jalalabad recently, the British ambassador, Ron Nash, admitted: "We were
subject to massive fraud in the case of four districts. There were claims
made about production which were many times inflated."

When asked about the British scheme, Jalalabad's governor, Haji deen
Mohammad, said: "They compensated as an emergency measure, but not for the
long term. Now maybe they will discuss a better way."

A parallel problem is increasingly the link between drug trafficking and
the financing of terrorist operatives.

Visiting Kabul this week, the foreign office minister, Mike O'Brien, said:
"It is a worry that this [drugs] money could be diverted to the funding of
terror and there is substantial evidence that it has in the past."

The enormity of the 2002 crop as well as Afghanistan's porous borders may
well provide further funding for groups with links to terrorist
organisations, particularly as al-Qaeda is thought still to be operating
within the region.

But now even more damaging facts about the compensation scheme have come to
light as it seems that British money could have been diverted directly to
al-Qaeda.

For in Jalalabad the British sub-contracted the surveying of land (land was
used used as the basis of compensation) to a Pakistani based
non-governmental organisation called the Welfare and Relief Committee (WRC).

The man heading the survey for the WRC is known as Wuli Wullah. His cousin,
Haji Rohullah, was arrested by the US military in August and is being held
at Kandahar, for his alleged connections to al-Qaeda.

Mr Rohullah is leader of the Salafi, a Wahabbist Muslim sect in the Kunar
province, adjacent to Nangahar.

The Afghan interior ministry official is organising administration of the
payment, who gave his name as General Shujah, confirmed the connection
between the two men.

The question must hence be raised as to whether much of the British money
may have been directed to al-Qaeda or its sympathisers?