Ideological differences are bone of contention

An ideological battle is gathering pace in Afghanistan as conservative leaders and emerging democratic parties wrangle over the type of government that will define the country's future.

The more conservative elements tend to be those men associated with the jihadi (mujahideen) parties who routed the Russians and many have prominent influence with the current transitional administration. But Sebghatullah Sangar, a young Afghan who heads the Republican Party of Afghanistan, says his party has grown from 5,000 members last year to about 35,000 today.

"Many people were so disappointed with what happened at last year's Loya Jirga (pan-tribal gathering) that they joined us," he said.

Many perceived the Loya Jirga to have been a political fix. Battle areas in the run-up to next year's elections are likely to revolve around a new political parties law and Afghanistan's new constitution which has not yet been made public.

However, Sangar's party is forced to keep a low profile in most parts of the country because the law legalising the formation of political parties has been delayed.

A UN political staff member said: "The result is that many of the emerging parties are too scared to come out in the open, leaving only the well-established jihadi parties in the field."

Leaked drafts of the law indicate that so far it is indeed dominated by the more conservative elements.

"The mujahideen are trying to maintain their power by preventing anyone who is married to a foreign woman from registering a party and, in Afghanistan's new constitution, by removing the word "democracy" from the first article. This means the only choice is for an Islamic republic, not a democratic Islamic republic."

An hour's drive south of Kabul lives Osman Tariq who is tipped to lead the new "United Front for Democracy", an alliance of 106 democratic parties, youth groups and women's groups. Yet he cannot operate from Kabul because of hostility from personalities in the present transitional government and says: "They will all club together at the time of next year's elections to ensure they keep power."

But with security breaking down across the country, it could be that the elections are cancelled. Efforts to force the remit of the Karzai government beyond the capital are being expanded by the American-led coalition in the absence of a commitment to expand the Kabul-based ISAF into rural areas.

The Americans have already set up three Provincial Reconstruction Teams – PRTs – in Gardez, Kunduz and Bamiyan. They signify a further development in militarily-led humanitarian work. But a UN official said recently: "It would have been easier for all if they had not been called "reconstruction" teams as they are meant to be more about central government outreach than reconstruction."

The British recently signalled their intent to establish one in Mazar-e-Sharif and their 60-man team will comprise staff from the FCO and the Department for International Development and soldiers from the Royal Anglian Regiment.

However a Turkish diplomat said recently: "Other European countries were surprised that Britain chose to support the concept. The idea is still too vague. For example, in Mazar how far will the British engage in inter-factional fighting?"

With the recent upsurge in attacks on foreigners, aid workers are particularly concerned that to have soldiers carrying out reconstruction activities will further blur the distinction between combatants and non-combatants, thus putting more lives at risk.

The aid community feels that the PRTs should be limited to providing a secure environment in which humanitarian work can be conducted, rather than conducting it themselves. They also believe that the pounds 7.2 million budget will be too small to impact upon security.