And meanwhile, in Afghanistan.

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
From Salon:

Taliban reviving structure in Afghanistan

By KATHY GANNON

April 7, 2003 | KANDAHAR, Afghanistan (AP) -- Before executing the International Red Cross worker, the Taliban gunmen made a satellite telephone call to their superior for instructions: Kill him?

Kill him, the order came back, and Ricardo Munguia, whose body was found with 20 bullet wounds last month, became the first foreign aid worker to die in Afghanistan since the Taliban's ouster from power 18 months ago.

The manner of his death suggests the Taliban is not only determined to remain a force in this country, but is reorganizing and reviving its command structure.

There is little to stop them. The soldiers and police who were supposed to be the bedrock of a stable postwar Afghanistan have gone unpaid for months and are drifting away.

At a time when the United States is promising a reconstructed democratic postwar Iraq, many Afghans are remembering hearing similar promises not long ago.

Instead, what they see is thieving warlords, murder on the roads, and a resurgence of Taliban vigilantism.

"It's like I am seeing the same movie twice and no one is trying to fix the problem," said Ahmed Wali Karzai, the brother of Afghanistan's president and his representative in southern Kandahar. "What was promised to Afghans with the collapse of the Taliban was a new life of hope and change. But what was delivered? Nothing. Everyone is back in business."

Karzai said reconstruction has been painfully slow - a canal repaired, a piece of city road paved, a small school rebuilt.

"There have been no significant changes for people," he said. "People are tired of seeing small, small projects. I don't know what to say to people anymore."

When the Taliban ruled they forcibly conscripted young men. "Today I can say 'we don't take your sons away by force to fight at the front line,'" Karzai remarked. "But that's about all I can say."

From safe havens in neighboring Pakistan, aided by militant Muslim groups there, the Taliban launched their revival to coincide with the war in Iraq and capitalize on Muslim anger over the U.S. invasion, say Afghan officials.

Karzai said the Taliban are allied with rebel commander Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, supported by Pakistan and financed by militant Arabs.

The attacks have targeted foreigners and the threats have been directed toward Afghans working for international organizations.

Abdul Salam is a military commander for the government. Last month he was stopped at a Taliban checkpoint in the Shah Wali Kot district of Kandahar and became a witness to the killing of Munguia, a 39-year-old water engineer from El Salvador.

After stopping Munguia and his three-vehicle convoy, gunmen made a phone call to Mullah Dadullah, a powerful former Taliban commander who happens to have an artificial leg provided by the Red Cross.

Mimicking a telephone receiver by cupping a hand on his ear, Salam recalled the gunmen's side of the conversation.

"I heard him say Mullah Dadullah," he said. "I heard him ask for instructions."

When the conversation ended the Taliban moved quickly, Salam said. They shoved Munguia behind one of the vehicles, siphoned gasoline from the tanks and used it to set the vehicles on fire.

Munguia was standing nearby. One Taliban raised his Kalashnikov rifle and fired at Manguia.

Then they told the others: "You are working with kafirs (unbelievers). You are slaves of Karzai and Karzai is a slave to America."

"This time we will let you go because you are Afghan," Salam remembered them saying, "but if we find you again and you are still working for the government we will kill you."

In the latest killing in southern Afghanistan, gunmen on Thursday shot to death Haji Gilani, a close Karzai ally, in southern Uruzgan province. Gilani was one of the first people to shelter Karzai when he secretly entered Afghanistan to foment a rebellion against the Taliban in late 2001.

International workers in Kandahar don't feel safe anymore and some have been moved from the Kandahar region to safer areas, said John Oerum, southwest security officer for the United Nations. But Oerum is trying to find a way to stay in southern Afghanistan. To abandon it would be to let the rebel forces win, he says.

The Red Cross, with 150 foreign workers in Afghanistan, have suspended operations indefinitely.

Today most Afghans say their National Army seems a distant dream while the U.S.-led coalition continues to feed and finance warlords for their help in hunting for Taliban and al-Qaida fighters.

Karzai, the president's brother, says: "We have to pay more attention at the district level, build the administration. We know who these Taliban are, but we don't have the people to report them when they return."

Khan Mohammed, commander of Kandahar's 2nd Corps, says his soldiers haven't been paid in seven months, and his fighting force has dwindled. The Kandahar police chief, Mohammed Akram, said he wants 50 extra police in each district where the Taliban have a stronghold. But he says his police haven't been paid in months and hundreds have just gone home.

"There is no real administration all over Afghanistan, no army, no police," said Mohammed. "The people do not want the Taliban, but we have to unite and build, but we are not."

Amateurist (amateurist), Monday, 7 April 2003 15:59 (twenty-two years ago)

What's more to blame here: American indifference/ineptitude or international indifference? And can someone convince me that this doesn't bode badly for postwar developments in Iraq?

Amateurist (amateurist), Monday, 7 April 2003 16:18 (twenty-two years ago)


What's more to blame here: American indifference/ineptitude or international indifference?

How about the Pakistani ISI, who have an incestuous relationship with the CIA, and is based in an Islamicist nation with confirmed WMD and a dictator we've bought off for over 2 years now, a dictator whose name Dubya couldn't recall in a late 1999 campaign debate? I think it was the one in which he said the sole international role for the US would be to support democracy...

Vic, Monday, 7 April 2003 16:23 (twenty-two years ago)

I blame the Taliban.

lawrence kansas (lawrence kansas), Monday, 7 April 2003 16:27 (twenty-two years ago)

I'm not sure you can really blame the Taliban for not going away. I mean, you can, but that's like saying "Crime rates are up: I blame the criminals" -- it's singularly unhelpful cause the whole point is that they don't share your whole getting-rid-of-them objective.

nabisco (nabisco), Monday, 7 April 2003 16:32 (twenty-two years ago)

Err, sorry for rather obvious point concerning what may well have been a joke in the first place. But I worry that a number of Americans would look at something like this and actually say "Well who cares, it's a lost cause, the Afghans are just terrible and there's nothing we can do about it."

nabisco (nabisco), Monday, 7 April 2003 16:34 (twenty-two years ago)

They were originally funded and organized by members of the ISI in '96-'97, do a search on this. The ISI is meanwhile allegedly helping the US search for members of the terrorist groups that caused 9/11... how much cross-breeding is going on around here? That's why sentences like this are so disturbing: Today most Afghans say their National Army seems a distant dream while the U.S.-led coalition continues to feed and finance warlords for their help in hunting for Taliban and al-Qaida fighters.

Oh another forgotten question: why hasn't the US been able to locate Mullah Omar?

Vic, Monday, 7 April 2003 16:40 (twenty-two years ago)

but it will never be a situation as before if the Taliban do manage to re-establish some sort of power...because you would figure the US/Uk coalition would just attack and oust them again. also, surely establishing a regime of fear takes a very long time as you need enough of the people on your side. rather than seeing a return to the hardline Islamic regime it seems more likely Afghanistan will just descend further into anarchy until at least the Iraq situation is neutralised as that would appear to be priority.

how about someone places these global problems in order of priority?

Saddam's regime/unstability in the Gulf
Palestine
North Korea
Kashmir
Afghanistan
Chechnya (the recent terrorist siege in Russia proves this is still a critical and resolved issue)
Nigeria and other African countries where a combination of epidemic and Christian/Muslim conflicts threaten to engulf much of the continent
thriving of Al-Qaeda and other terrorist factions


have i missed anything out?

stevem (blueski), Monday, 7 April 2003 16:43 (twenty-two years ago)

of course you can't just put those in order of 'importance' - they all have to be tackled immediately. almost half those issues would seem to be more problematic for the world in general than Saddam from what i can see.

stevem (blueski), Monday, 7 April 2003 16:46 (twenty-two years ago)

Off the top of my head, you can add:

Indonesia... one of the largest Muslim populations in the world and home to some of the biggest anti-American protests since the war started. See Bali bombing.

Colombia... on-going death & violence/"drug war" in which the U.S. is explicitly involved.

Aaron W (Aaron W), Monday, 7 April 2003 16:47 (twenty-two years ago)

you would figure the US/Uk coalition would just attack and oust them again

Actually, Steve, I wouldn't assume this in the least!

nabisco (nabisco), Monday, 7 April 2003 16:55 (twenty-two years ago)

I might assume it. If the question is "Hey, wasn't that where they were based in the first place?" then there's a question of preventing that from reoccuring through force if needed. You could argue that there's a decision been made in the administration that it WON'T reoccur, but I'd find that pretty short sighted (if in keeping with a lot of other decisions).

Ned Raggett (Ned), Monday, 7 April 2003 19:36 (twenty-two years ago)

Yes, but the American public remains at least something of a leash on this administration and any to follow. I'm hesitant to assume anything about an Afghan re-invasion because I think the US will be able to conveniently ignore developments in Afghanistan for some time to come, and that following that period any given administration -- second-term Bush or otherwise -- is going to have a difficult time convincing the public that we need to go to war yet again simply to repeat a Taliban shut-down we'd already supposedly effected and which didn't, in this scenario, work.

Even many supporters of the Iraq war have some reservations about Bush, some sense that he might in fact be a bit invasion-happy. Now imagine him popping up a few years into his second term and suggesting that we need another one: "Because the last time we did this, we failed to accomplish anything."

nabisco (nabisco), Monday, 7 April 2003 20:37 (twenty-two years ago)

(The only non-ridiculous argument in favor of it involves a complete mea culpa, as has sort of been necessary with Iraq: "We admit, we failed before -- this time we'll get it right." Give Americans a few years out of an actual war-type thing and I think we'll grow apathetic enough not to be swayed by that. "Bush," we'll say. "He always wants to invade something. We couldn't fix it last time, why bother now?")

nabisco (nabisco), Monday, 7 April 2003 20:40 (twenty-two years ago)

(Where's Stuart on THIS thread?)

Colin Meeder (Mert), Tuesday, 8 April 2003 09:21 (twenty-two years ago)

I'm not sure you can really compare post-war Afghanistan and post-war Iraq. The US has a HUGE vested interest in staying in Iraq (oilwells, strategic ports, big fuckoff military presence, buffer for Israel, lucrative reconstruction contracts) etc. Likewise, I think Blair will make some kind of real push for nation-building in Iraq, bearing in mind that he's stuck his neck on the line for this one... I really don't think the US has any intention of taking its eye off Iraq for a long time yet.

Matt DC (Matt DC), Tuesday, 8 April 2003 09:28 (twenty-two years ago)

yeah but isnt( or wasnt) the vested interest in Afganistan Al-Quaeda? (sp?). thats what it was all about - arent they interested in sep 11th any more? surely they dont believe that bin ladens moved to baghdad?????????

ambrose (ambrose), Tuesday, 8 April 2003 09:59 (twenty-two years ago)

The US is still fighting a war low level war in Afghanistan, it never really ended. Just last week saw the heaviest fighting since the war supposedly finished. They are fighting it the same as before, using mostly Afghan mercenaries on the ground and giving them air support. Until the Afghanistan gets a government better than a collection of local warlords, the Taliban will rise again every six months or so. But since the US are making local warlords more powerful by paying them to fight for them, that won't happen. I really pity the Afghan people.

Afghanistan is being ignored because once the oil pipeline projects were scrapped because they turned out to be unprofitable, no one had any interest in a happy stable Afghanistan.

fletrejet, Tuesday, 8 April 2003 10:29 (twenty-two years ago)

http://usinfo.state.gov/regional/nea/sasia/afghan/text2003/0401rkr.htm

Stuart (Stuart), Tuesday, 8 April 2003 10:58 (twenty-two years ago)

The US may be fighting a low level war, and the state department may be 'concerned' about the security situation in Afghanistan.

It still remains that very little support is being given to the Afghan interim administration. Its disgraceful that the us haven't got involved in the peacekeeping/making and that the UK pulled out after such a short time. As its stands kabul is protected by a rag bag of 3rd world armies and there is no law beyond the city limits. We owe it to the afgahn people build them a nation after two hundred years of using Afghanistan as a battle ground and proxy fighter.

The blood is on the hands of the UK, Russia and the US, with help from Pakistan and Iran.

If the Taliban regain control the the people of Afghanistan are going to be more reticent about being 'liberated' by the US again.

A plan along the lines of that implemented in Sierra Leone should be implemented. The US/UK should have troops in all major population centres training and paying for the establishment of afghan security services and the other tools of government and state required for Afghansitan to function.

Ed (dali), Tuesday, 8 April 2003 12:08 (twenty-two years ago)

KABUL (AFX) - Afghan authorities have intercepted at least four fuel tankers with bombs attached to them emtering Kabul, the commander of Kabul-based international peacekeepers said.
"We know that our Afghan friends, especially at the checkpoints, look very, very carefully on this issue and... have discovered a handful of explosive devices and made some arrests", International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) German commander Lieutenant General Norbert van Heyst told reporters.
Four or five trucks with explosives have been discovered to date, van Heyst said, without stating exactly when.
"We were informed about the danger of IEDs, improvised explosive devices, in close connection with fuel trucks... some fuel trucks which arrive in Kabul have these IEDs with them."
ISAF was tipped off about the explosives-laden trucks "due to the experience of the last few weeks," he added.
On March 30 the ISAF headquarters was attacked with rockets.
newsdesk@afxnews.com
bc/hw/ims/ For more information and to contact AFX: www.afxnews.com and www.afxpress.com

Matt DC (Matt DC), Tuesday, 8 April 2003 12:40 (twenty-two years ago)

Sneaky Pakistan...

Stuart (Stuart), Tuesday, 8 April 2003 13:07 (twenty-two years ago)

Aphex Twin is doing news coverage on Kabul?

Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Tuesday, 8 April 2003 21:37 (twenty-two years ago)

"Come to KABUL! COME COME TO KABUL!"

Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 8 April 2003 21:37 (twenty-two years ago)

one year passes...
massive anti-anti-bush screed at http://www.commentarymagazine.com/special/A11902025_1.html, denouncing the liberals and hypocritical realists for (amongst their many, many sins) downplaying the 'miracle' of democracy in afghanistan, by pettily focusing on 'poppy seeds' (which sounds a lot sillier a preoccupation than 'heroin production') and overestimating the potential post-imposed freedom threats. my question: might american actions in afghanistan be broadly described as foreseeably successful/worthy?

m. (mitchlnw), Sunday, 23 January 2005 23:05 (twenty-one years ago)

to put it another way, if we characterize afghanistan as the first 'test' of the viability of bush doctrine's longterm goal of imposing democracy (as commentary guy does, tho not unreasonably, if you minus the tone of slavish patriotism and wilful iraq-blindness), how squint-eyed would we have to be to say that it passed?

m. (mitchlnw), Sunday, 23 January 2005 23:13 (twenty-one years ago)

five months pass...
The whole Chinook thing seems to have been a bit more serious than it already was. Balloon Juice notes "the Pentagon has been real hesitant releasing information on this one."

Ned Raggett (Ned), Friday, 1 July 2005 14:22 (twenty years ago)

nine months pass...
And so it drags on.

Ned Raggett (Ned), Monday, 10 April 2006 18:30 (nineteen years ago)

Well that can't lead to anything good.

Thermo Thinwall (Thermo Thinwall), Monday, 10 April 2006 18:36 (nineteen years ago)

three years pass...

this op-ed is infuriating

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/18/opinion/18dadkhah.html

("lara m. dadkhah" appears to exist in only one other place on the internet - an article for small wars journal about a year ago where he/she argued basically the same thing)

Tracer Hand, Thursday, 18 February 2010 10:20 (sixteen years ago)

this article's pretty great though. c.j. chivers is the new dexter filkins!

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/18/world/asia/18marja.html

Tracer Hand, Thursday, 18 February 2010 10:24 (sixteen years ago)

Some would argue that more combat troops will always mean more combat troop deaths. That holds true, however, only if you believe that our soldiers should fight fair.

Little bit, yeah.

Lara M. Dadkhah is an intelligence analyst. fucking nutjob

what kind of present your naked body (Upt0eleven), Thursday, 18 February 2010 10:41 (sixteen years ago)

I do love the argument that, well, civilians are being killed anyway, so we might as well be the ones to kill them.

what kind of present your naked body (Upt0eleven), Thursday, 18 February 2010 10:44 (sixteen years ago)

hasn't airpower in afghanistan been pretty conclusively determined to ineffective at best and counterproductive at worst??

i sort of have to wonder if lara m. dadakh actually exists - just sayin

that fucking illustration of the airplane with one wing "tied behind its back" is just... GAH

Tracer Hand, Thursday, 18 February 2010 10:51 (sixteen years ago)

It's been a while since I've read an actual studies on the effectiveness of airpower in afghanistan so I'm not entirely sure. Most of the articles I have read seem to treat it as a given that all Afghanistan can ever be is a long, slow, dirty ground war, giving no time over to a discussion of air strikes.

An anagram for Lara M. Dadakh is Dark Mad Ah La. Pretty telling.

what kind of present your naked body (Upt0eleven), Thursday, 18 February 2010 11:06 (sixteen years ago)

here's what the smart people are saying on TV:

- ultimately we need a political solution in afghanistan, not a military one
- the afghans have to take the lead
- .....
- ?????
- PROFIT!

Tracer Hand, Thursday, 18 February 2010 23:19 (sixteen years ago)

five months pass...

So the biggest intelligence leak in history, from Wikileaks about the Afghanistan war? I just found out about this and am about to do a solid hour or so of reading all this morning's article's about it. Here's one:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/jul/25/afghanistan-war-logs-military-leaks

Beach Pomade (Adam Bruneau), Monday, 26 July 2010 15:17 (fifteen years ago)

http://www.independentcritics.com/images/jfkSPLASH.jpg

We're through the looking glass here, people???

Beach Pomade (Adam Bruneau), Monday, 26 July 2010 15:18 (fifteen years ago)

some discussion here:

Um, I Think It's Time for a Thread on WikiLeaks

joe, Monday, 26 July 2010 15:23 (fifteen years ago)


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.