AFP reported from Kabul that for the first time in a decade, Afghan public television had telecast images of an Afghan lady called Salma, singing, and that too a romantic ballad. The song lasted for about five minutes but was telecast at a time when most Kabulis are in front of their television. The idea apparently was to derive the maximum possible symbolical publicity. The important aspect was that this was the first time such an event had taken place since the fall of the communist regime of former President Najibullah in 1992. Considering the fact that under the hardline Taliban regime, women were unable to openly work, girls were denied schooling and television was forbidden from showing images of women, this was indeed a movement forward. It was also a sign that moderation was slowly returning to Afghanistan.

Kabul in the late 1960s was a cosmopolitan city. One recollects that the first Marks and Spencer store outlet in our part of the world was in fact opened in this city at that time. Subsequently of course, conservatism gained ground and liberal principles fled the scene.

This singing on television has been an important psychological step. However, one should be careful in reading too much into this. The situation on the ground in Afghanistan is still far from stable and very delicate.

The war in Afghanistan emanated from the US quest for security. The Bush Doctrine that drove the war was best explained in President Bush's address to the graduating class at the US Military Academy at West Point on 1 June, 2002. It was projected that the Doctrine rests on a definition of the threat being based upon a combination of radicalism and technology -- specifically, political and religious extremism joined by the availability of weapons of mass destruction.

The above perception led to the emergence of what the Bush Administration has chosen to call "anticipatory self-defence." It is also in this context that events unfolded in what is now called the 'war against terrorism.' The Taliban were removed from power and Kabul saw the return of the monarch and the emergence of the moderate President Hamid Karzai.

However, as political analysts have been pointing out for sometime now, it was easy winning the war but it has been difficult maintaining the peace. Creating a new, enduring and non-threatening political order has indeed been a daunting task in Afghanistan.

Many outstanding problems have continued to hamper political progress in that beautiful war-ravaged country. US intelligence officials, lawmakers and analysts are reluctantly recognising that finding Osama bin Laden still remains enormously difficult. Bin Laden is now believed to be hiding in the vast, rugged mountains that separate Afghanistan and Pakistan, where the population is largely sympathetic and US forces have limited access and mobility. Senator Jack Reed (D-R.I), member of the US Senate Armed Services Committee has identified the problem rather well. He has acknowledged that the Coalition forces lack 'good human intelligence' in Afghanistan. Another US military analyst has interpreted this situation most interestingly. He has commented that the US authorities 'have to win over the confidence of the people, or pay them or get lucky and pick somebody up who will talk.' The catchword in terms of phrasing is winning over the confidence of the people. The sooner the better.

Karzai has been taking small steps forward. The beginning of the year saw the adoption of Afghanistan's first post-Taliban constitution. The document, worked out by Afghanistan's loya jirga during three weeks of intense negotiations and after three months of public consultations, enshrines a presidential system of government with a bicameral parliament.

This represented the determination of the Afghan people to see their country transform into a stable and democratic state. UN Secretary General Kofi Annan observed very rightly that this was 'another important step in the peace process that justifies the commitment of the Afghan people and the international community. He also underlined the importance of this dynamics being sustained with international help.

However, at around the same time, the UN Secretary General in his report sent to the Security Council pointed out that Afghanistan had undergone 'a deterioration in security at precisely the point where the peace process demands the opposite.' This report, it may be recalled was released just hours after a bomb ripped through the southern Afghan city of Kandahar, killing at least 12 people, including several children.

This note of anxiety on the part of the United Nations is important in more ways than one. Continued violence in Afghanistan could jeopardise crucial mid-year elections. Unless checked, it will also delay reconstruction efforts in Kabul and also in the surrounding provinces. The association of international voluntary groups and activities of different NGOs have already been affected. Their presence outside Kabul and a few other cities is minimum to say the least.

The tribal and ethnic cleavages have been papered over, but only superficially. A process of transformation has been initiated but common political will is still relatively weak after two years of change. Tribal warlords continue to consolidate their own agenda, quite often at the expense of the central government. Lack of economic opportunities and credit extension facilities have also encouraged Afghans to revert to the cultivation of poppy and extraction of opiates and drugs. This has raised the anxiety quotient in the potential nexus that exists between drugs and criminals. Stability is inversely proportional in such an equation.

In an election year, quite understandably, President Bush's team would like having the elections in Afghanistan as soon as possible. It could then be projected as a foreign policy victory. One hopes however that this calculation to have the vote in June has not been too hasty.

It might have been preferable to have gained greater control of the countryside and then to have held the election in the autumn of this year. Inadequate security, a resurgent Taliban, Al-Qaeda and renegade warlord Gulbuddin Hekmatyar could have a field day terrorising voters in the Provinces and unleashing waves of violence. A low turn out and dubious, conflicting results might subsequently undermine credibility and discourage confidence in the newly elected government.

The new constitution created by the loya jirga has many important principles. It needs to be carefully explained to the Afghan people. Elements like association of women in politics, provision of a President elected by universal adult suffrage, answerable to the Parliament, having two Vice Presidents chosen from ethnic communities other than that of the President, having two national official languages, the Dari and the Pushtu, are new in scope and content. These have to be understood by the general citizens.

The United States and her allies in Afghanistan need to understand that they are there for the long haul. Their political calculations should not be based on what is going to happen in Washington at the end of this year. It needs to be remembered that the electoral process in Afghanistan is a dry-run for later events in Iraq. If it fails in Afghanistan, overall peace and stability will also not be secured elsewhere.

Muhammad Zamir is a former Secretary and Ambassador.