Troops in Afghanistan for long term

New Zealand military forces would be committed to the war on terror in Afghanistan for "quite a while", the Prime Minister said yesterday after a short meeting with United States President George Bush.

Helen Clark said it seemed the US-led campaign would need a long-term commitment, possibly through a peacekeeping force.

She met Mr Bush for 20 minutes at the Apec leaders' summit in Mexico. They talked mainly about the Afghanistan conflict rather than a free-trade deal between the two countries.

New Zealand sent SAS soldiers to Afghanistan as part of the US retaliation against Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda, considered responsible for last year's September 11 strikes in the United States. A small number of Army engineers have also been working there.

The Government has been reluctant to give details about the SAS work and initially would not even confirm it was in Afghanistan.

Three soldiers were last week injured in a landmine explosion, thought to have happened near Farah, in western Afghanistan. One soldier had a foot amputated.

Helen Clark told Mr Bush about the injuries yesterday, and said he had expressed his concerns and reinforced the United States' gratitude for NZ's help.

Asked if New Zealand personnel would be in Afghanistan longer than expected, she said: "I think New Zealand is going to have an involvement, one way or other, for quite a while.

"There's the question of what shape the international peacekeeping force takes. It may be pushed towards a Nato structure, but that's something New Zealand could contribute to. It's got a long way to run yet."

Helen Clark returns to New Zealand today from the Apec summit, where the 21 member leaders issued a communique outlining free-trade objectives.

Developed nations have previously pledged to achieve free trade by 2010, and developing nations had until 2020 to achieve the same.

However, the summit's declaration appeared little different from past plans. Since 1994 there has only been slow progress towards Apec's objectives.

Helen Clark said she did not think the communique was as concrete as previous ones.

"This one doesn't break substantially new ground. I think Apec has slipped behind as a leader [on trade liberalisation]."

Leaders of developing nations have criticised the developed countries for not practising the trade liberalisation they preach, and Helen Clark partially backed that view.

"We're now halfway towards 2010 and there are major economies, like the US, which have gone back on protectionism," she said. "Japan just won't concede anything on agricultural protectionism.

"Unless that changes, Apec is going to be behind the game, not ahead of it."

She said some of the less-developed nations had agriculture-based economies, but the US, Japan and Canada practised strong protectionism in those industries.

However, she did not think Apec was a waste of time, as critics suggested.

"The main value is that leaders get around a table and talk in a reasonably frank way about their own economies and their issues ... at the leaders' level it is the personal interaction that counts the most."

Helen Clark used the summit to sign a three-way trade deal between New Zealand, Chile and Singapore, while exploring the prospects of a trade deal with Mexico.

The leaders' declaration also denounced terrorism.

- STAFF REPORTER, NZPA

Story archives:

War against terrorism

Terror in America - the Sept 11 attacks

Links: War against terrorism

Timeline: Major events since the Sept 11 attacks