The alliance said many Taliban insurgents who had hijacked the tankers were killed but it admitted it had reports of many civilian casualties.

The Nato-led forces said they regretted “any unnecessary loss of human life”.

President Hamid Karzai said targeting civilians was “unacceptable” and announced his own investigation panel.

A statement from his office said the president expressed “deep sorrow for the loss of our compatriots” and “emphasised that innocent civilians must not be killed or wounded during military operations”.

Sensitive issue

Gen Stanley McChrystal, issued new guidelines recently saying much more still needed to be done to avoid civilian casualties.

Nato Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen said an investigation had been launched.

“Certainly, a number of Taliban were killed. There is also the possibility of civilian casualties as well.”

He added: “Civilian casualties caused by Isaf are down over 95% from last year’s levels. But, as we all know, in conflicts like these, mistakes can happen. In this case, let us now see what the investigation concludes.”

European governments expressed concern at the scale of civilian casualties in Kunduz and urged a prompt investigation.

British Foreign Secretary David Miliband said Nato needed the commitment of the Afghan people for its mission, adding: “Obviously incidents like this undermine that.

“That’s why it’s important that we are open and clear about what happened and make sure it does not happen again.”

The number of those killed in the Kunduz strike is still not confirmed, with reports varying from 56 to 90.

The reports of the number of militants and civilians killed also varies.

Pictures from Kunduz showed members of the local community preparing some of those who died for burial, while others showed images of the injured being treated in hospitals.

The Nato attack occurred about 7km (four miles) south-west of Kunduz city at about 0200 on Friday (2130 Thursday GMT), 40 minutes after German and Afghan forces called in an air strike.

They reported the two tankers had been hijacked by insurgents as they travelled from Tajikistan to supply Nato forces in Kabul.

One of the drivers of the tankers told the BBC that two of his colleagues had been beheaded when the Taliban carried out the hijacking.

Witness Mohammad Daud, 32, told AFP the militants had been trying to transport the tankers across a river to villages in Angorbagh.

“They managed to take one of the tankers over the river. The second got stuck.”

The insurgents apparently opened valves to lighten the load and called in villages to help themselves to fuel.

At this point, the Nato air strike hit the tankers. Nato insists its commanders believed only militants were present.

When day broke, clothing, shoes, jerry cans and other debris could be seen strewn around the two stricken tankers.

Mr Daud said: “Everyone around the fuel tankers died. Nobody was in one piece. Hands, legs and body parts were scattered everywhere.”

International Security Assistance Force (Isaf) spokesman Brig Gen Eric Tremblay was later quoted by Reuters as saying: “It would appear that many civilian casualties are being evacuated and treated in the local hospitals.

The air strike came shortly before UK Prime Minister Gordon Brown delivered a key speech defending the Afghan strategy.

He said the aims of Britain and its allies there were “realistic and achievable”.

The Pacific Tsunami Warning Center of the National Weather Service said the 7.1 magnitude quake struck Java, Indonesia’s main island, at 2:55 p.m. local time. The center’s initial report, at 3:06 p.m., triggered a tsunami watch, although that was canceled 15 minutes later.

“No tsunami threat exists to coastlines in the Pacific,” the center’s official bulletin said. “However, earthquakes of this size sometimes generate local tsunamis that can be destructive along coasts located within a few hundred kilometers of the earthquake’s epicenter.”

The Health Ministry said it was sending medical teams to Tasikmalaya, the town nearest the epicenter, where several buildings were reported to have collapsed, Reuters reported.

At least 27 people were injured in Jakarta, a Health Ministry official said.

In Jakarta, residents felt buildings shaking and thousands of people streamed onto the streets.

No tsunami watches, warnings or advisories were in effect by Wednesday evening, although the center urged local authorities to be aware of possible local surges and take appropriate precautions.

The most powerful recorded earthquake to hit Indonesia was on Dec. 26, 2004. The 9.1 magnitude quake off the western coast of northern Sumatra created tsunamis that rolled through the Indian Ocean and killed 227,898 people, according to the U.S. Geological Survey. Since then, Indonesia has been hit by 29 quakes of 6.3 magnitude or higher.

WHY IS CHINA ANGRY ABOUT THE DALAI LAMA’S PROPOSED VISIT?

A visit to Taiwan by the Dalai Lama brings into sharp focus two of China’s most sensitive territorial claims, over Taiwan and Tibet, and thus strikes a raw nerve.

China regards Taiwan as a breakaway province that must eventually be reunified with the mainland, by force if necessary. The island, a former colony of Japan, came under the rule of Nationalist or Kuomintang (KMT) forces when they retreated there

in 1949 as the Communists took over the mainland.

Taiwan has been under KMT rule since, except between 2000 and 2008 when the independence-leaning Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) won presidential elections twice in a row.

The Dalai Lama fled Tibet in 1959, following a failed uprising against Chinese rule. Since then, he has campaigned for self-determination for his homeland, seeking the high-level autonomy for Tibet that Chinese law claims to bestow. Beijing says his demands amount to a campaign for independence

HOW COULD CHINA RESPOND?

In addition to angry words, China might curtail some meetings between officials.

But the wording of its protest indicates it is likely to avoid directly denouncing President Ma Ying-jeou or the ruling KMT, with whom it is trying to build better relations with an eye to eventual reunification.

China also has to avoid making threats that raise expectations among its own people, especially the more vociferous nationalists, that it might take action to stop the visit.

So far it has reserved its ire for the opposition DPP, which invited the Dalai Lama and generally follows a more anti-China stance.

The DPP’s constituency is largely the Taiwanese, especially in Taiwan’s south, whose presence on the island dates from before 1949 and therefore have little loyalty to mainland China.

WILL THIS DAMAGE TRADE FLOWS?

Unlikely. Past behaviour indicates that China is unlikely to take steps that could directly damage trade and investment flows.

China, including Hong Kong, is Taiwan’s largest trading partner with trade on both sides totalling about $130 billion in 2008, official data from Taiwan showed.

China, with its 1.3 billion population, is also Taiwan’s favourite investment destination with Taiwanese companies investing more than $100 billion there, private estimates showed.

With China’s own export-oriented economy fragile, it is unlikely to do anything to damage investments by the many Taiwanese whose capital has fuelled mainland growth for three decades.

Zuma held talks in Harare with President Robert Mugabe, who looked well despite speculation over his health, and the prime minister, Morgan Tsvangirai, in a bid to end feuding between the coalition partners.

But even as Zuma struck an optimistic note, new figures showed a surge in violent attacks and human rights abuses by soldiers loyal to Mugabe.

Zuma, on his first visit to Zimbabwe as South African president, told a state banquet today: “It is indeed very encouraging to note the significant progress that has been made under the auspices of the inclusive government.”

He added: “The remaining issues are not insurmountable and can be overcome. The most difficult path has already been travelled.”

Speaking at the same event, Mugabe said: “I am happy to inform you that the inclusive government is alive and well and that the three principals [including the deputy prime minister, Arthur Mutambara] are committed to its success. Indeed, a political accommodation of this nature is bound to experience teething problems.”

Tsvangirai’s Movement for Democratic Change is hoping that Zuma, who is the current chairman of the Southern African Development Community (SADC), will put pressure on Mugabe to rein in hardline supporters and fulfil his commitment to the country’s global political agreement.

Tsvangirai said after a meeting with Zuma early this morning, that he had briefed the South African leader on the “outstanding issues” of the political deal.

But in an interview with the Guardian earlier this month, Tsvangirai admitted he could not expect preferential treatment from Zuma. “He doesn’t take sides,” the prime minister said. “He is committed to ensuring all the issues of the global political agreement are implemented, because he’s chairman of SADC.

“He cannot pick and choose between Zanu-PF and MDC. What he wants to see is the strengthening of the inclusive government. He wants to see progress, he wants to see more positive outcomes.”

The politicians’ performance was criticised by non-governmental organizations. The Zimbabwe Human Rights NGO Forum said cases of political violence and rights abuses surged to 125 in June compared with 99 incidents recorded in May.

“The month of June saw the levels of organised violence being sustained with little indication that the Government of National Unity was committed to ending human rights violations in the country,” the forum said. “Of note in the month of June is the increase in incidents of violence reportedly perpetrated by members of the army against civilians … It is alarming that some members of the ZNA [the army] appear to be a law unto themselves and continue to harass defenceless civilians.”

Environmental organisations, trade unions, religious groups, scientists, anti-poverty campaigners and others representing tens of millions of people teamed up to put pressure for curbs on greenhouse gas emissions.

“Time is running out,” said Kumi Naidoo, chair of the Global Campaign for Climate Action of the “TckTckTck” campaign, meant to refer to the sound of a clock ticking as the U.N. meeting draws closer.

TckTckTck would include actions such as rallies or online advertisements to show, for instance, how people in developing nations are already suffering from global warming and how a shift to green jobs could help recovery from recession.

Friday is exactly 100 days from the Dec. 7 start of the two-week meeting in Denmark due to agree a successor to the U.N.’s Kyoto Protocol to rein in changes such as more droughts, floods, rising sea levels, a spread of disease and heatwaves.

“We are deeply anxious that the negotiations are not where they need to be,” Naidoo told Reuters in a telephone interview from South Africa. TckTckTck calls itself in a statement “the biggest ever climate change campaign”.

Naidoo urged a “massive push by ordinary men, women and young people in the remaining 100 days.” Two negotiating sessions remain before Copenhagen, in Bangkok and Barcelona.

TICKING

He said Friday was the official launch of the campaign, which has already staged some events such as installing a loud ticking noise in a hotel in Bonn where climate negotiators from 180 nations met in June.

Participants include environmental groups Greenpeace and WWF, Christian Aid, Oxfam, the World Conference of Religions for Peace, the Union of Concerned Scientists, an international umbrella group for trade unions, the U.N. Children’s Fund UNICEF and a group run by ex-U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan.

“The outlook is looking bleak — but it doesn’t have to be,” Greenpeace wrote in a report on the state of the U.N. talks.

It said negotiators were deadlocked over whether developed nations would adopt strong 2020 targets to cut greenhouse gas emissions and whether they would also provide billions of dollars to help developing nations.

The service member’s vehicle struck a roadside bomb in the east, NATO forces said. U.S. forces spokeswoman Capt. Elizabeth Mathias confirmed the nationality but did not provide further details.

The death brings to 45 the number of U.S. troops who have died in Afghanistan this month, surpassing the 44 troops killed in July, which had been the deadliest.

More than 60,000 U.S. troops are in Afghanistan to fight rising insurgent violence, boosted by about 21,000 pouring in this summer as part of President Barack Obama’s effort to rout the resurgent Taliban and increase security for presidential elections held last week.

Attacks typically rise in Afghanistan during the summer and U.S. officials had warned that violence was likely to increase along with the troop surge. Roadside bombings have skyrocketed as U.S. troops move into areas where insurgents have been entrenched for years.

The increased military presence and the political tension surrounding this month’s presidential election have strained U.S.-Afghan relations.

President Hamid Karzai has angrily accused the U.S. of pushing for a runoff vote during a heated meeting with the special envoy to the region, according to officials familiar with the encounter.

The verbal exchange occurred the day after the Aug. 20 vote during a meeting in Kabul between Karzai and U.S. special envoy Richard Holbrooke, according to two officials who were briefed about the meeting. They spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the information.

Karzai assured Holbrooke he would accept the election results but bristled when the envoy asked if he would also agree to a runoff if none of the 36 candidates won more than 50 percent, the U.S. officials said.

An angry Karzai accused the U.S. of pushing the idea of a second round even before all votes had been counted. He said would accept the election commission’s tabulation as long as it reflected the facts. He did not elaborate.

Final results are due next month but partial figures released this week show Karzai leading former Foreign Minister Abdullah Abdullah and 34 other candidates but falling short of the 50 percent mark needed to avoid a runoff.

The U.S. Embassy confirmed the Aug. 21 meeting and said the two discussed the election but would not go into details.

“There was no shouting and no one stormed out,” said Caitlin Hayden, an embassy spokeswoman. She noted Holbrooke and Karzai met again a few days later. Karzai spokesman Humayun Hamidzada also confirmed the meeting but gave no further details.

Tension in U.S.-Afghan relations emerged after President Barack Obama’s administration took office this year. Karzai enjoyed close ties with the Bush administration, which helped propel him to power after the collapse of the Taliban government in the 2001 U.S.-led invasion.

U.S. officials have accused Karzai of weak leadership in the face of the resurgent Taliban, corruption, and allowing the flourishing drug trade. However, the U.S. has insisted it is neutral in the election and will work with whoever wins.

The New York Times reported this week that the Obama administration is alarmed at the prospect that Karzai’s running mate, Mohammad Qasim Fahim, may be linked to the drug trade.

Quoting an unidentified administration official, the newspaper said if Fahim becomes vice president, the U.S. would likely consider imposing sanctions such as refusing him a U.S. visa or going after his personal finances.

A U.S. official in Washington confirmed the essence of the report, saying there were “a number of individuals” whom the U.S. would not like to see in a future Afghan government. The official said the U.S. had conveyed those sentiments to the Afghan government. He spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitive subject matter.

Relations between the Americans and Afghans have also been strained by the U.S. policy of detaining suspected insurgents without charge and killing civilians in military operations. The new U.S. commander, Gen. Stanley McChrystal, has issued new orders sharply limiting use of airstrikes and encouraging U.S. troops to protect civilians.

Nevertheless, friction persists.

On Friday, an Afghan lawmaker accused the U.S. military of violating Islamic and international law two days before by using a helicopter gunship to fire on a medical clinic where an injured Taliban commander had bunkered down. The U.S. military said it cleared the clinic of civilians and government officials approved the use of the helicopter to end the firefight.

After the battle, Afghan and U.S. forces met with villagers and discussed rebuilding the clinic, a U.S. summary of the meeting said. The wounded Taliban commander was taken prisoner.

“There must have been another way or tactic to use to get to him without destroying the hospital,” said lawmaker Khalid Faroqi, calling the action “an offense.”

Human rights group Amnesty International has urged NATO forces to investigate the attack, saying the military alliance may have violated international laws of war that protect wounded fighters getting medical aid.

Afghanistan’s health minister said insurgents violated the sanctity of the clinic by bringing their guns inside. They hid the weapons under their clothes and were the first to fire, he said.

Also Friday, militants ambushed a police convoy in central Ghazni province, killing three policemen and wounding 28, said Abdul Karim, a police official.

The president’s remarks, in a speech prior to the nationally broadcast Friday Prayer ceremony in Tehran, underscored the grim reality of a nation whose political factions are deeply divided, hostile and exhibiting no appetite for common ground or compromise.

“I honestly believe the cracks in the leadership are so severe, I don’t think they will be able to heal this,” said Abbas Milani, the director of Iranian studies at Stanford and a sharp critic of the Islamic leadership.

Mr. Ahmadinejad spoke in front of thousands of government supporters gathered in an outdoor covered arena at Tehran University. The president appeared unafraid to effectively contradict the supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who on Wednesday said he was not convinced that reform leaders had conspired in advance with foreign forces to orchestrate the post-election unrest. The supreme leader did, however, stick by the government’s claim that the protests were planned fromabroad.

If Ayatollah Khamenei was hoping to blunt calls for revenge, more arrests and severe punishment, Mr. Ahmadinejad showed no signs of softening.

“We must deal with those who led these events,” Mr. Ahmadinejad said. “Those who organized, incited and pursued the plans of the enemies must be dealt with decisively.”

But, in one of several signs that his desire to ramp up the conflict would not come to pass, Kazem Sediqi, a new Friday Prayer leader appointed by the supreme leader, called for “unity and friendship” and to resist “widening differences and adding to our problems.”

Mr. Ahmadinejad addressed the nation as part of what is called Government Week, an annual national observance intended to present achievements of the government and to commemorate the assassination of a former president and prime minister in 1981. In this environment, economic and social priorities have been overshadowed by the many political fights the president has been caught up in since his disputed election victory in June.

His remarks were clearly aimed at Mir Hussein Moussavi, Mehdi Karroubi, Mohammad Khatami, and Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani — some of the most important and influential figures in the Islamic republic’s 30-year history — whom the president has wanted to jail as enemies of the state

“Serious confrontation has to be against the leaders and key elements, against those who organized and provoked and carried out the enemy’s plan,” he was quoted as saying by The Associated Press. “They have to be dealt with seriously.”

Mr. Khatami, a former two-term president and reform leader, lashed out at Mr. Ahmadinejad in a statement issued on his Web site the night before, sharply criticizing the government crackdown and what he called “these so-called trials,” which have been held for the dozens of intellectual, former officials and journalists arrested since the election conflict began.

“The sacred Friday Prayer podium has been given to those who call for the punishment of prominent figures while they are accused in the eyes of the public of committing treason themselves,” he said.

Even as President Ahmadinejad remained firm in his desire to deal with his crisis of legitimacy through more arrests, it appeared increasingly unlikely those leaders would be arrested, at least now, given the position of the supreme leader, and of Sadeq Larijani, the head of the judiciary, as well as his brother, Ali Larijani, the speaker of the Parliament, political analysts said.

The Parliament has also moved to challenge the mass trials of former officials, journalists and academics who are accused of conspiring with Western powers to stage the post-election conflict.

On Thursday, the speaker, Mr. Larijani, welcomed a proposal from a reformist representative, Mostafa Kavakebian, to establish a “political jury” for the trial of political crimes.

“Attacks on the dignity and reputation of those detained or imprisoned is forbidden and must be punished,” Mr. Kavakebian said in the chamber.

If instituted by Sadeq Larijani, such a jury would likely undercut the aims of the proceedings being run by Mr. Ahmadinejad and his allies, which critics inside and outside Iran have called “show trials.”

The president will have to turn his attention to another battle on Sunday, when Parliament is scheduled to debate and begin voting on his 21 nominees for the cabinet. Leaders of Parliament, which is dominated by conservatives, have already indicated that five or six nominees are likely to be rejected, and political analysts have said that animosity toward the president has grown so sharp that there have been discussions about perhaps rejecting as many has half his nominees.

More than a week after the election, Afghanistan remains in a state of political limbo, with authorities having published results from just 17 percent of polling stations, giving inconclusive figures.

President Hamid Karzai’s main rival, Abdullah Abdullah, has complained about fraud and said he would not accept the result if large-scale abuse was found to have played a decisive role.

The complaints commission, which was partly appointed by the United Nations and includes Afghan and foreign members, said more allegations from polling day are still arriving. The numbers of serious complaints reported on Friday were far higher than it had listed in the initial days after the voting took place.

It has received 2,207 complaints, including 1,740 since polling day. It has so far categorized 984 of the complaints, and listed 270 as Category A, “which, if proved valid, could have material effects on the results”, it said in a statement.

“Received complaints vary. They include allegations of ballot stuffing, poor quality ink, intimidation and accusations against polling staff.”

Partial results released so far show Karzai leading with 44.8 percent, with Abdullah winning 35.1 percent. If no candidate wins 50 percent of the vote, a run-off must be held between the two top candidates.

Although the results so far suggest a run-off would be needed, it is still too early to predict the eventual outcome. Many provinces in the south — where Karzai draws much of his support but fraud allegations are widest and turnout was most affected by Taliban threats — have yet to be tallied.

Taliban fighters threatened to disrupt the poll and launched rocket attacks across the country on polling day, especially in the south. Those attacks failed to halt the election itself, but do seem to have dampened turnout, especially in the south.

The complete preliminary results are due on September 3, with another two weeks for complaints to be investigated before the final outcome is announced. A second round if needed should be held two weeks later, presumably October 1, though dates can change.

The initial tallies suggest only about 5.5 million Afghans voted, a disappointing figure in a country with about 30 million people and an estimated 15 million eligible voters

Pour turnout in the violent south could increase the chance of a run-off, by restricting votes cast for Karzai by his fellow Pashtuns.

Endemic government corruption and Karzai’s close ties with former militia leaders have eroded his support, both with the Afghan people and with Washington policymakers.

Ahmed Aboul-Gheit told reporters in Stockholm on Friday that Jerusalem is Arab “and it will continue to be so.”

He said the Arab world expects the area to be included in a moratorium on Israeli settlements.

The Obama administration has hinted it may be backing down on its insistence that Israel halt all settlement activity as a condition for restarting peace talks with the Palestinians.

U.S. officials have denied Israeli media reports that Washington has agreed to leave East Jerusalem out of the agreement and settle for a nine- to 12-month freeze in the West Bank.

Most experts doubt the Obama team is ready to fuse the two crucial policies, particularly in the aftermath of Iranian elections.

Yet if the White House is looking for a European partner on a tougher line against Iran, and in pursuit of renewed Mideast talks – France could well play a key role. In the past two years under President Nicolas Sarkozy, France has taken an ever tougher line against Iranian nuclear development – partly to close the earlier gap with the Americans over Iraq, and partly because France and other European nations have crept closer to Israel.

Yet with authority in Tehran now in flux, European diplomats say, it is far too early to pose clear sanctions policies since their outcome could in the end hurt moderates and others seeking reform.

“Sanctions are not part of any headlines in the US, France, and Britain, right now,” says François Heisbourg, author of “Iran, The Choice of Arms” and adviser at the Foundation for Strategic Research in Paris. “We don’t know who is in charge in Iran. We don’t know who has a brief to do what. We don’t know consequences. It’s difficult to do diplomacy when you don’t know who is affected by your policy.

“But the French support sanctions, as an alternative to bombing. As Voltaire said, it’s a terrible idea, but what’s the alternative?”

If anything, the French position on Iran’s missile and nuclear ambitions has become tougher than the American one – though not widely advertised.

“It is hard for France to have a more hard-line position than the US, since that puts France in the target line of Tehran,” says Clément Therme, an Iranian expert at the Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies in Geneva. “The French position is weak on Iran and will follow any move from the Obama administration, I’m sure of that. The British are in the same position as the French. But there is no unity in the EU on Iran. Without the Americans competing there, everyone has interests.”

If there is a resumption of Israeli-Palestinian peace talks, French officials confirm that they are eager to host the talks. Russia, as the Guardian reported, is also keen to host any such talks.

Skepticism in Europe

In Europe, deep skepticism exists that Israelis and Palestinians are politically or psychologically ready to find serious common cause – either on the ground, or between Prime Minister Netanyahu and Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas. Yet Monday’s story in the London-based Guardian outlining a breakthrough by President Obama in forging Israeli-Palestinian talks was widely translated and reprinted on the continent. It claims Israel’s cooperation with Mr. Obama is based on gaining tough oil and gas sanctions against Iran, which allows the Israeli leader to sell the idea at home under the oft-stated formula that Iran is an “existential threat” to Israel, whereas settlements are not.

On Tuesday, after meeting with Netanyahu, Britain’s Prime Minister Gordon Brown said he was “more optimistic” about the Middle East peace process, but said that Israeli settlements remained an obstacle. Netanyahu also met with US envoy George Mitchell in London. Netanyahu will meet with German Chancellor Angela Merkel Thursday in Berlin.

US stuck on settlements

Mideast expert Robert Malley of the International Crisis Group in Washington, among others, doubts a clear linkage between Iran and Israel in the current Obama plans, feeling that the Guardian and other news reports were simply “amalgamating” evidence that is inconclusive.

“Netanyahu can use Iranian sanctions to sell this, but I don’t think that Israel and Iran are yet factually related in the White House. These are still parallel matters.

“The question marks [on an Israeli-Palestinian deal] are as sharp as ever, we aren’t anywhere near the heart of the matter,” Mr. Malley says. “But the Obama people were getting stuck on settlements. It wasn’t working so it looks like they decided to pivot, declare victory, and try to move as far as possible.”

One Harvard University scholar reached by phone in Israel, who spent the summer in Gaza and Hebron, argues that a US-brokered deal that does not adequately challenge Israel’s domination of Palestinians on the ground, in the wake of the Gaza bombing, will not satisfy the Palestinian need. The scholar asks: “How can anyone in their right mind consider ‘a partial freeze on settlements’ a fair exchange for potentially destroying the Iranian economy?”

More than 60 were hurt as buildings collapsed in the city centre attack. Almost all those hit were civilians.

Teams spent Wednesday sifting through rubble looking for more wounded.

The Taliban deny they were behind the car bombing. Correspondents say the militants often deny attacks involving civilian casualties.

Kandahar is a stronghold of the Taliban and has seen a number of attacks in 2009.

The explosion took place shortly after the first results were announced in the presidential election.

Officials say it was the deadliest blast in Afghanistan since July 2008, when more than 60 people were killed in a suicide bombing at the Indian embassy in Kabul.

Election attacks

Reports said injured people were still being pulled to safety on Wednesday.

“There are some people still trapped in the buildings and we are trying to get them out,” said rescue worker Mohammad Darwish, the Associated Press news agency reported.

Dazed locals joined security teams in the search, reports from the scene said.

Among those who lost their lives was a local staff member of the International Committee of the Red Cross.

Taliban spokesman Qari Yousuf said: “We are not responsible for the attack and we condemn it.”

He suggested it could be “government propaganda”, but correspondents say it is difficult to see who else could be to blame.

Nato spokesman James Appathurai in Brussels said: “The Taliban carry out terrorist attacks on a regular basis. They cannot absolve themselves of responsibility for this attack, either directly or indirectly.”

Afghans are currently observing the Muslim month of Ramadan and the explosion took place soon after dusk as they broke their fast.

Some reports said bombs were packed in cars that exploded simultaneously, others that a truck or tanker had been used.

The explosion struck close to the offices of the Kandahar provincial council. Windows across the city were shattered by the force of the blast.

The area has several hotels and offices of non-governmental organisations.

A wedding hall was one of the buildings damaged, along with the headquarters of a Japanese construction company.

There have been a series of insurgent attacks across the country as Afghanistan held its presidential election.

The Nato-led International Security Assistance Force (Isaf) said there were more than 400 attacks on election day alone, last Thursday.

Four US soldiers were also killed in fighting on Tuesday, making 2009 the deadliest year for foreign troops in Afghanistan since the 2001 US-led invasion.

Early results in the presidential poll give incumbent Hamid Karzai a slender lead over former foreign minister Abdullah Abdullah.

Fewer than a fifth of votes cast have so far been counted amid allegations of widespread fraud.

Forecasters say the storm has top winds of 45 mph and is moving to the west-northwest at 18 mph. The storm could get stronger in the next two days.

As of 11 a.m. EDT Tuesday, the storm’s center was about 445 miles (715 kilometers) east of Nassau, Bahamas and about 775 miles (1,250 kilometers) south of Cape Hatteras, N.C.

The current forecast has the storm on a path to clip the U.S. East Coast over the weekend, but a storm’s track can be difficult to predict days in advance. People in the Bahamas and the southeastern U.S. were advised to monitor the storm.

Meanwhile, far out in the Pacific, Tropical Storm Ignacio has weakened as it moves northwest with top winds of 45 mph.

The death of Sen. Ted Kennedy — announced early this morning by his family — brings to a close nearly five decades in which he stood atop the Democratic political world.

The arc of Kennedy’s career — from his election to the Senate in 1962 as the youngest of a trio of political brothers to his pivotal endorsement of President Barack Obama during last year’s primary campaign — shows the evolution of a politician to whom much was given and of whom even more was expected.

Kennedy’s political career began amid charges of nepotism — a family friend had held the Senate seat between 1960 and 1962 until Ted was old enough to take his older brother John’s place — but the public perception of the youngest son of the famous family was changed by tragedy.

The assassinations of John Kennedy in 1963 and Bobby Kennedy in 1968 — as well as Ted’s stirring eulogy for the latter — effectively transformed him in the eyes of the general public from a silver-spooned child of privilege into the last best hope to fulfill the generational change offered by his two brothers.

Kennedy, whether by choice of by necessity, sought to fulfill those expectations — with mixed results.

From 1968 until his death, his political career is best understood in two phases — the presidential years and the legislative years.

The first period — from 1968 until 1980 — was defined by the nearly unending speculation about whether and when Kennedy would run for what was widely seen as his birthright — the presidency of the United States.

He declined in 1968, had that decision all but made for him in 1972 thanks to the aftermath of the Chappaquidick incident three years earlier, and stepped aside again in 1976. Kennedy’s run against President Jimmy Carter in 1980 was abbreviated and disappointing.

The end of Kennedy’s presidential aspirations, however, seemed to come as a relief to the Massachusetts Senator — freeing him to pursue a legacy of his own rather than seek to carry the standard of his fallen brothers.

Starting in 1981, Kennedy kicked off nearly thirty years where he developed into a fascinating combination of liberal war horse and bipartisan deal maker.

Despite his decidedly liberal leanings — he was a liberal before that word became a political football — Kennedy’s relationships with other Senators (Democrats and Republicans), knowledge of the inner workings of the Senate and willingness to sit down at the bargaining table came to define the latter half of his political life.

Sen. John McCain (Ariz.), who sought to work with Kennedy earlier this decade on comprehensive immigration reform, detailed the Massachusetts Senator’s unique role during an interview last Sunday with ABC’s George Stephanopoulos.

“Ted Kennedy comes as close to being indispensable as any individual I’ve ever known in the Senate because he had a unique way of sitting down with the parties at a table and making the right concessions, which really are the essence of successful negotiations,” said McCain.

And yet, despite his deal-making nature, Kennedy was widely regarded by Democratic loyalists as the prime defender of liberal principles in the halls of Congress. Kennedy’s lasting influence over what it meant to be a Democrat was apparent in the game-changing endorsement he offered Obama during the 2008 presidential primary process. That endorsement, widely regarded in retrospect as one of the critical moments of the race, was seen by many Democrats as a passing of the progressive torch from the leader of one generation to the leader of the next.

Given what Kennedy meant to the Democratic party and the Senate, it’s easy to assume that his passing will shepherd in — at least temporarily — a new era of bipartisanship that will culminate with passage of some sort of health care reform legislation this fall.

That assumption is perhaps too facile, however, as it overlooks the fact that the Senate has fundamentally changed since the time Kennedy was elected — becoming far more partisan a body (more in line with the House of Representatives) with many younger Senators who served only briefly with Kennedy.

Kennedy’s recent effort to change state law to allow Gov. Deval Patrick to appoint a successor to his Senate seat in the five month interregnum period before a special election could be held is instructive in defining the breadth of his continued influence.

That plea, which was widely perceived to be Kennedy’s attempt to ensure his voice and vote would be there on health care if need be, fell on (largely) deaf ears among the Democratic-controlled legislature — many of whom were loath to change state law at the behest of one person even if that one person was the most famous politician in the Bay State.

It has also become clear in recent years that the power of the Kennedy name in politics has grown weaker. Losses by Kathleen Kennedy Townsend and Mark Shriver in Maryland, the odd candidacy of Caroline Kennedy in the New York Senate race and Merchandise Mart CEO Chris Kennedy’s decision not to run for the Senate in Illinois in 2010 reveal that as the Kennedy clan has grown larger — and further afield from the political roots laid by John, Bobby and Ted — the family’s hold on the body politics has weakened. (It remains to be seen whether Kennedy’s wife, Vicki, or his nephew, Joe, will put their names forward to succeed him in the Senate; if either does, it will be yet another test of the power of the Kennedy name.)

Despite all of that, it’s difficult to underestimate the power — both of a literal and a symbolic nature — that Ted Kennedy came to represent in American politics.

Last son of a blessed/cursed political family, a man brought low and raised up by personal tragedies both of his making and from without, and, ultimately, a politician who never achieved the nation’s highest office but instead carved a path all his own that led him to a record as one of the country’s great legislators.

Greece — With a wildfire contained after raging for days near Athens, the Greek government faced a different kind of firestorm Tuesday as media lambasted its response to the blaze as inadequate.

Firefighters patrolled smoldering areas north and east of the capital Tuesday, guarding against flareups while assessing the damage.

At least 150 homes have burned down, officials said, while tens of thousands of hectares (acres) of pine forest, olive grove, brush and farmland have been decimated. Experts warned it would take generations to replace the forests, and that many were burnt beyond the hope of natural regrowth.

It was the most destructive blaze ever in the Attica region, and the worst in Greece since the 2007 wildfires that burned for more than two months and killed 76 people while laying waste to 275,000 hectares (679,500 acres).

Greek volunteers were seen trying to beat back the flames with pine branches, buckets of water and limp garden hoses, while several local mayors were sharply critical of the help they received from the government.

Officials have not said how the fire was started Friday night. Hundreds of forest blazes plague Greece every summer and some are set intentionally — often by unscrupulous land developers or animal farmers seeking to expand their grazing land.

The conservative government defended its effort in fighting the fire, which involved water-dropping aircraft from Italy, Cyprus and France. Government spokesman Evangelos Antonaros said Tuesday the effort had been “well-coordinated,” but he did not comment on any specific criticisms. The Cabinet was meeting Tuesday to discuss possible relief measures for those whose homes were damaged.

Greek newspapers said, however, that the government had learned nothing from the 2007 wildfires, and had failed to improve fire protection measures and equipment from two years ago.

“Fatal errors and omissions,” the conservative daily Kathimerini said in a front-page headline. “The same mistakes were repeated all over … lack of coordination, a faulty assessment of the situation, delays and infighting.”

Opposition papers were even more critical. The daily Eleftherotypia headlined one story on the fires with “The Criminal State.” Another daily Ta Nea wrote “It’s the pine trees’ fault!” — a headline mocking Monday’s statement by Antonaros that said “Pine trees may be beautiful but they impede firefighting efforts.”

In a scathing editorial, Ta Nea faulted the government’s rejection of help from some countries such as Russia, and claimed that “Over the past five years … no new equipment has been purchased.”

Greek media had reported that a Russian offer of a plane and a helicopter to help the Greek firefighting effort was turned down, as was an offer from Austria to send six helicopters. The Greek government has not commented on these reports.

The fire broke out Friday night in a mountainous area near the town of Marathon — site of one of ancient history’s most famous battlegrounds.

For days a pall of smoke hung over Athens, cloaking capital in an eerie brown half-light. Most of Mount Penteli, which separates Athens from the Marathon plain, was scorched to its 1,109-meter (3,638-foot) peak.

Before firefighters managed to contain the flames Monday, some 21,000 hectares (51,890 acres) of pine forest, olive grove and farmland had been destroyed, according to the European Forest Fire Information System.

Some 500 firefighters, assisted by 300 soldiers, were patrolling the area Tuesday, a firefighting spokesman said. From the air, three planes and one helicopter were dropping water on the remaining flames, after 19 aircraft including involved Monday unleashed some 14,000 tons of water on the Athens blaze.

A fire was still burning Tuesday near villages on Evia island, east of the capital, and another to the northwest near the coastal town of Porto Germeno was under partial control, the spokesman said.

The main opposition Socialist Party planned to make a statement Tuesday, while Communist Party leader Aleka Papariga said the government had been “ineffective and disorganized” in responding to what she claimed was an organized move by land speculators.

“The government must account for … the lack of a master plan, the delay in acquiring adequate equipment to fight the fires from the air and the lack of trained personnel.”