By Glenn Kessler
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, May 21, 2002; Page A01

Influential lawmakers have begun challenging the Bush administration's handling of post-Taliban Afghanistan, fearing that the administration's reliance on regional military chiefs is undermining security and hindering the establishment of democratic institutions.

The Republican-controlled House plans to approve a bipartisan bill today providing $1 billion in reconstruction aid to Afghanistan over four years, and Rep. Henry J. Hyde (R-Ill.), chairman of the International Relations Committee, is backing an amendment that would require President Bush to quickly submit a plan explaining how the administration will address the deteriorating security situation in Afghanistan.

"We accompany the funds with a rather strong request that the administration give us a plan that is effective," Hyde said. Rep. Tom Lantos (Calif.), the senior Democrat on the committee and sponsor of the amendment, said "a failure to act on this important issue may well lead to a failure to win the war on terrorism in Afghanistan."

The willingness of leaders in both parties to question the administration's policy on Afghanistan appears to signal a further fraying in the near-universal support President Bush has received in the war against terrorism. Democrats in the past week have raised sharp questions about the administration's handling of intelligence prior to the Sept. 11 attacks. They now appear to view the reconstruction efforts in Afghanistan as also ripe for tough scrutiny.

"There is a real concern that the administration is seizing defeat from the jaws of victory," said a senior Democratic congressional aide, who argued that the interim government in Kabul has little chance to succeed unless it can prevent factional fighting among competing power centers.

Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), who favors expanding the international peacekeeping force beyond Kabul, has circulated a letter to Bush among other Senate Republicans who have also begun to doubt the administration position, sources said. McCain declined to discuss the letter. Hyde, too, said he supports expansion of the security force outside the Afghan capital.

Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Joseph R. Biden Jr. (D-Del.) sent his own letter to Bush last week urging deployment of the 5,000-strong United Nations force throughout the country with expanded rules of engagement. "These must be peacemakers as much as peacekeepers," Biden said in a statement to the Senate that was sharply critical of the administration's position.

Biden proposed shifting $130 million that the Pentagon has requested to dispense to allies in the fight against terrorism, instead using it to support peacekeeping efforts, such as expanding the U.N. force. "Without internal security, the country will again become a den of terrorists, narcotic traffickers and exporters of violent insurgency," Biden said.

Bush has resisted expanding the international force beyond Kabul, in part because of fears it would hamper U.S. military forces operating in the country. But Afghan leaders, nongovernmental organizations and some administration officials say the stance is undermining Bush's goals of building strong political institutions and a functioning economy.

For several months, Afghans have been meeting to elect representatives to the loya jirga, a traditional nationwide assembly that will meet next month to choose a transitional government to serve through the end of 2003. But local military commanders have held sway in some regions, intimidating and bribing residents into supporting their candidates.

"An unstable security situation coupled with a hurried, high-stakes political process is a recipe for potential disaster, and the signs that the country could once again come apart at the seams are evident," said a report last week by the International Crisis Group, a research organization based in Brussels.

The United States has taken the lead in helping build an Afghan national army, while Germany is focusing on creating a police force. The interim Afghan government has budgeted for an army of 60,000, and a State Department official said yesterday that within 18 months the army should total 20,000. "At that point, it should be by any measure the largest domestic fighting force," he said.

The official said the international security force has a substantial presence in Kabul. "It is the most important place to be, more important than being spread out across the countryside," he said.

In an interview with Washington Post editors and reporters last week, Afghan interior minister Yonus Qanooni played down any problems of lawlessness, saying all but two of Afghanistan's 32 provinces outside Kabul were secure. Qanooni yesterday concluded several days of talks with administration officials, including Vice President Cheney.

Another administration official said U.S. officials in Kabul have been hampered in overseeing aid distribution because the security situation has forced them to remain in the U.S. Embassy compound every night. Much of the $300 million in U.S.-pledged humanitarian aid this year will be administered by surrogates with nongovernmental organizations -- who do not face the same restrictions -- but "it makes it very difficult to get out and about and evaluate the projects," he said.

"The ultimate solution in Afghanistan is an economic rebirth of the country and that requires a secure environment," the official said.

But key administration policymakers have argued that the current policy of working with regional leaders is well adapted to the unique circumstances of Afghanistan. In an interview with The Washington Post's editorial board last week, Deputy Defense Secretary Paul D. Wolfowitz said Afghanistan's culture is one of "regional powers with a great deal of autonomy." To intervene too actively on behalf of the central government creates a risk, he said, "that people find it so comfortable that you're taking over for them" that they come to depend on you or "they even overreach."