Five years after their ouster, the Taliban have returned in significant numbers to Afghanistan. McClatchy Newspapers reports that the Taliban's ranks are filled with "a new generation of die-hards," and that violence, opium trafficking, ethnic tensions, official corruption, and political anarchy are at worse levels than at any time since the 2003 US-led invasion.
By failing to stop Taliban leaders and Osama bin Laden from escaping into Pakistan, then diverting troops and resources to Iraq before finishing the job in Afghanistan, the Bush administration left the door open to a Taliban comeback. Compounding the problem, reconstruction efforts have been slow and limited, and the US and NATO didn't anticipate the extent and ferocity of the Taliban resurgence or the alliances the insurgents have formed with other Islamic extremists and with the world's leading opium traffickers.
There are only 42,000 US and NATO-led troops to secure a country that's half again the size of Iraq, where 150,000 US-led coalition troops are deployed. Suicide bombings have soared from two in all of 2002 to about one every five days. Civilian casualties are mounting. President Hamid Karzai and his US backers have become hugely unpopular.
Most Afghans oppose the Taliban, McClatchy also reports, because of their practices when they ruled the country. But most Afghans have also grown disillusioned with Mr. Karzai, and while the Taliban's resurgence is most felt in their homeland in the south, "their reach and that of allied Islamic groups and criminal gangs now extends to more than half the country."
"The insurgency is developing all over," warned Zia Mojaddedi, a senior member of Karzai's national security council. "It is still not lost. They are not strong. But we are weak. We are corrupt."
 |
|
|
|
|
Subscribe via RSS Feed:
    |
Wednesday, Karzai will meet with President Bush and with Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf. CNN reports that the meeting is designed to be a "showcase" of the success of Washington's war on terror, but comes at a time when Afghanistan is increasingly unstable, and Karzai's authority is limited to Kabul and its immediate surroundings.
"The Taliban's tenacity in the face of massive losses has been a surprise," admitted Britain's Defense Secretary Des Browne in a recent speech to the Royal United Services Institute in London, "Absorbing more of our effort than predicted and consequently slowing progress on reconstruction."
"At this stage the insurgency isn't a direct threat to Karzai's administration," says Joanna Nathan of the International Crisis Group's Kabul office. "It is, however, getting ever closer to Kabul and deflecting a huge amount of energy, time and resources during what should be a period of hope and rebuilding. The fighting has got noticeably worse over the last twelve months, both qualitatively and quantitatively. Violence is unquestionably on an upward trend.
CNN also reports that the Taliban aren't the only problem Karzai faces; warlords and private militias control most of the country; crime and corruption are rife; and opium production, which had plummeted under the Taliban, has rocketed again.
In an interview with the German magazine Der Spiegel, US ambassador to Afghanistan Ronald Neumann said that while things were bad, they weren't anywhere near as dangerous as in Baghdad. He also said he believes the Taliban remain a weak force, and that their resurgence has been lacks the jihadist fervor found elsewhere.
There are a lot of places in this country where people are going about their business with only occasionally a bit of violence. That is much more a testimony to Taliban weakness than to government strength. There is also not a lot of ideological support for the Taliban, even if local people are fighting for them ... We learn from interrogation of prisoners that it is more a matter of local grievances, tribal differences, things that can be dealt with – not necessarily the deep ideological commitment of a suicide bomber.
Ambassador Neumann also said he believes the Taliban insurgency could continue for the next decade, but will decline after enough Afghan police and military are trained, which could take about two years.
Although almost every security expert says that it is vital for the future of Afghanistan as a democracy that it works with Pakistan to control the flow of Taliban fighters across the border between the two countries, Karzai and Mr. Musharraf have recently engaged in some very public name-calling and finger-pointing about who is responsible for the Taliban's resurgence. Media Line reports that just this past week, Karzai expressed skepticism over the recent peace accord signed between the Pakistani government and local tribesman on the border with Afghanistan.
"Attacks have actually increased along the border region of North Waziristan since the pact was signed," Karzai said.
Karzai added he initially thought Pakistan had signed the deal directly with the Taliban. He was disappointed last week upon hearing [Musharraf], who said the deal was struck with local tribal leaders who are hosting the Taliban.
The pact with the Taliban has come under fire from many sources. The Daily Telegraph reported Sunday that Taliban leader Mullah Omar has emerged as the key player in the agreement, signing a letter "explicitly endorsing the truce announced this month."
While officially a US ally in the war on terror, Pakistan has been repeatedly accused by Afghanistan of not doing enough to clear Taliban militants out of its border regions, allegations it denies. However, Mullah Omar clearly felt that the deal benefited the Taliban, adding force to criticisms that it was in effect a cave-in. Tribal elders in south Waziristan said that Mullah Omar had sent one of his most trusted and feared commanders, Mullah Dadullah, to ask local militants to sign the truce. Dadullah, a one-legged fighter known for his fondness for beheading his enemies, is believed to be the man leading the campaign in southern Afghanistan in which 18 British troops have been killed.
"Had they been not asked by Mullah Omar, none of them were willing to sign an agreement," said Lateef Afridi, a tribal elder and former national assembly member. "This is no peace agreement, it is accepting Taliban rule in Pakistan's territory."
For its part, Media Line also reports that Pakistan denies any of the Taliban or Al Qaeda leadership is in within its borders. "We believe that Taliban's leadership is inside Afghanistan and much of the insurgency is located deep inside Afghanistan, far away from the Pakistan border," said Tasnim Aslam, a spokeswoman at the Pakistani Foreign Office on Monday.
- Losing Afghanistan: The Rise of Jihadistan (Newsweek)
- Two Afghan deaths were a 'clue that something's wrong' (Los Angeles Times)
- Parties trading blame on bin Laden (Boston Globe)
- Detainee measure to have fewer restrictions (Washington Post)
- Threat of unexploded Israeli bombs paralyzes the south of Lebanon (Washington Post)
- Guantanamo's uneasy Ramadan (Los Angeles Times)
- Musharraf: CIA paid Pakistan for hundreds of Al Qaeda suspects (Voice of America)
- Army holds Pentagon to ransom over Iraq (Independent)
Feedback appreciated. E-mail Tom Regan.
RSS feed