Plz Define the Mission in Afghanistan/Pakistan

[Puppycow]

What is the long-term goal of the NATO mission in Afghanistan/Pakistan, and is it achievable?

Is it worth achieving considering the cost?

[Texas]

What is the long-term goal of the NATO mission in Afghanistan/Pakistan, and is it achievable?

Is it worth achieving considering the cost?
With Bush it was nation building and was doomed to failure. If I understand Obama's goal it is simply to capture or kill Osama which is almost certain to fail and to use it as a way of pulling troops out of Iraq. That is why he is finding so little support fro NATO countries for more troops.I have predicted we will be out of Afghanistan very soon because there is really no strategic interest for us there. If the Taliban takes over again and starts trouble for us we can always bomb the crap out of them again.

[Puppycow]

Are the logistics of the misson feasible anymore? I heard that the bridge over which most of the supplies crossed was blown up and also Kyrgyzstan is kicking us out of its bases, which was another supply route.

The main economic activity is poppy growing, which we want to eradicate. How can you build a nation while suppressing its main bread-and-butter?

ETA: I would like to capture Osama, but that's it. I also don't want the Taliban to take over in either Afghanistan or Pakistan. I don't care about the poppies; let them grow all the poppies they want as far as I'm concerned.

[Texas]

Are the logistics of the misson feasible anymore? I heard that the bridge over which most of the supplies crossed was blown up and also Kyrgyzstan is kicking us out of its bases, which was another supply route.

The main economic activity is poppy growing, which we want to eradicate. How can you build a nation while suppressing its main bread-and-butter?

ETA: I would like to capture Osama, but that's it. I also don't want the Taliban to take over in either Afghanistan or Pakistan. I don't care about the poppies; let them grow all the poppies they want as far as I'm concerned.
I think the deciding issue will be how far the rest of NATO is willing to go. It appears right now that they are not willing to stay much longer.

[gdnp]

What is the long-term goal of the NATO mission in Afghanistan/Pakistan, and is it achievable?

Is it worth achieving considering the cost?

I'd say the long term goal is to avoid Afghanistan/Pakistan from again turning into a safe haven and training base for terrorists, and to avoid nuclear weapons from falling into the hands of a fundamentalist muslim regime.

[SteveGrenard]

Here is a report of interest.....


US supplies via Russia to start soon

By JIM HEINTZ – 1 day ago

MOSCOW (AP) — The shipment of U.S. military supplies for Afghanistan through Russia will begin soon, news agencies quoted Russia's foreign minister as saying Saturday.

"The transit will take place literally within days," Sergey Lavrov told TV Tsentr, according to the Interfax, ITAR-Tass and RIA-Novosti agencies.

Foreign Ministry officials could not be reached for comment late Saturday, and the reports did not say whether the supplies would transit Russia by land or air. However, Russia announced last week that it would allow U.S. shipments of non-lethal military supplies to Afghanistan.

Supply routes to Afghanistan for the U.S.-led international military operation have become an increasingly critical issue in recent months amid growing militant attacks on the land routes through Pakistan that carry about 75 percent of U.S. supplies.

The U.S. plans to send around 30,000 more troops to Afghanistan this year.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5j433uep2PZrSoonajNcqEyhScwFwD96BK3FO0

Russia may be having second thoughts about being complicit in the U.S. departure from Krgyzstan. Failure in Afghanistan could result in the spread of Islamic fundamentalism inside Russia and its former states.


MOSCOW - When the USSR ended its disastrous near decade-long occupation of Afghanistan – the last Soviet troops were extracted 20 years ago Sunday – war hero Gen. Makhmut Gareyev was left behind to advise the Kremlin's client regime on means of survival. He too fled three years later as waves of Islamist rebels, formerly armed by the US, hammered at the gates of Kabul.

General Gareyev, now president of the Russian Academy of Military Sciences, believes the perceived threats that originally induced the USSR to invade Afghanistan are still very much alive. The Kremlin leadership feared the spread of Iranian-style Islamist revolution to Soviet central Asia, a challenge that has only grown worse in the interim, and Gareyev says he doubts that the current NATO mission in that region has much chance to deliver long-term stability.

"Nothing can be done in Afghanistan using military means," he says. "If the Americans go on with the policy they have now, it will be useless."

Talks in recent days between US and Russian officials have brought a ray of hope that the two countries may finally begin cooperating on a much-needed transport corridor through former Soviet territory to resupply struggling NATO forces in Afghanistan. Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov even hinted that an accord on the supply line could signal a wider thaw in relations between Moscow and the Western alliance, which have been frozen since Russia's war with Georgia last summer. But most leading Russian experts, especially those burned by past experiences, like Gareyev, remain dubious about the prospects for eventual US success in Afghanistan and deeply fearful that the consequences of their ultimate failure may fall heavily upon Russia and former Soviet central Asia.

http://www.csmonitor.com/2009/0217/p25s01-wogn.html

[Texas]

I'd say the long term goal is to avoid Afghanistan/Pakistan from again turning into a safe haven and training base for terrorists, and to avoid nuclear weapons from falling into the hands of a fundamentalist muslim regime.
It may be too late for that unless we are willing to actually invade Pakistan:


http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/feb/15/pakistan-islamic-law

Sunday 15 February 2009 18.39 GMT Article history
Pakistan is to impose Islamic law in a vast region of the north-west called Malakand in an attempt to placate extremists, even as President Asif Zardari warns that they are "trying to take over the state".
Pakistani Taliban militants who are in control of the Swat valley in the region announced a ceasefire tonight, reacting to the government's agreement to bring in sharia courts.

Malakand is part of North West Frontier province, a regular part of Pakistan, not the wild tribal area, which runs along the Afghan border.

Critics warned that the new sharia regulations represented a capitulation to the extremists' demands, and that it would be difficult to stop hardliners elsewhere in the country from demanding that their areas also come under Islamic law.

"This is definitely a surrender," said Khadim Hussain of the Aryana Institute for Regional Research and Advocacy, a thinktank in Islamabad. "If you keep treating a community as something different from the rest of the country, it will isolate them."

[Puppycow]

I'd say the long term goal is to avoid Afghanistan/Pakistan from again turning into a safe haven and training base for terrorists, and to avoid nuclear weapons from falling into the hands of a fundamentalist muslim regime.

Sounds good, but:

1) Does our military presence in the region actually help to achieve that goal?
2) How much will it cost to achieve this goal?
3) Can it be achieved more indirectly?

[SteveGrenard]

Sounds good, but:

1) Does our military presence in the region actually help to achieve that goal?

No. It's probably stemming the tide but....


2) How much will it cost to achieve this goal?


How much would you be willing to pay in money and blood not to be ruled under religious or Sharia law? That's what this is really about. There is no problem believing whatever they want to religiously but there is a major problem when a religion's leaders also want to make and enforce laws, in effect supplanting secular authority. Sharia is a throwback to medieval times, 700 years, and is particularly brutal. There are no rules regarding physical evidence and all someone has to do is testify to cause one to be convicted and punished. Punishments are extremely harsh, even as to manner of carrying out a death sentence. And women are treated very unfairly.


3) Can it be achieved more indirectly?

No. I hate to say this but we and NATO are fighting a religious war in the region. Religion has caused more wars and more grief than it is worth. Its 2009 and we are still at it. I wouldn't be surprised if Russia joins in on our side.

A significant side issue:

Saudi Arabia's King Abdullah has decided to name a woman as deputy minister of education and is signalling a move away from religious fundamentalism and Sharia.


An expert on girls' education became Saudi Arabia's first woman minister on Saturday as part of a wide-ranging cabinet reshuffle by King Abdullah that swept aside several bastions of ultra-conservatism.

Nora bint Abdullah al-Fayez, a US-educated former teacher, was made deputy education minister in charge of a new department for female students, a significant breakthrough in a country where women are not allowed to drive.

"This is an honour not only for me but for all Saudi women. In the presence of a comprehensive operational team, I believe I'll be able to face challenges and create positive change," she told Arab News. Fayez said she would study the state of girls' education in Saudi Arabia before commenting on the task before her.

In his first reshuffle since assuming the throne in 2005, King Abdullah also replaced two powerful enemies of reform, the chief of the Saudi religious police, Sheikh Ibrahim al-Ghaith, and the country's most senior judge, Sheikh Salih Ibn al-Luhaydan. Ghaith, who runs the commission for the promotion of virtue and the prevention of vice, known as the mutawa, which enforces bans on alcohol and drugs, has gained a reputation for brutality. Luhaydan ruled last year that it was permissible to kill owners of satellite television channels broadcasting "immoral" programmes. Several other hardline judges were sacked as part of a challenge against the kingdom's hardline religious establishment.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/feb/16/saudi-cabinet-woman-minister

[gdnp]

Sounds good, but:

1) Does our military presence in the region actually help to achieve that goal?
2) How much will it cost to achieve this goal?
3) Can it be achieved more indirectly?

1) Don't know
2) Not a clue
3) I wish I knew.

That's why Petreus and Gates get paid the big bucks. To figure this stuff out.

[gumboot]

Pakistan is rapidly turning into a Radical Islamic state with nuclear weapons, and there's nothing we're willing to do to stop it. Once Pakistan falls Afghanistan will be close behind, and then our troubles really begin.

We are going to suffer the consequences of failing to address the problem of Radical Islam.

[Texas]

Pakistan is rapidly turning into a Radical Islamic state with nuclear weapons, and there's nothing we're willing to do to stop it. Once Pakistan falls Afghanistan will be close behind, and then our troubles really begin.

We are going to suffer the consequences of failing to address the problem of Radical Islam.
I think India would be the wild card should that happen.

[Puppycow]

Pakistan is rapidly turning into a Radical Islamic state with nuclear weapons, and there's nothing we're willing to do to stop it. Once Pakistan falls Afghanistan will be close behind, and then our troubles really begin.

We are going to suffer the consequences of failing to address the problem of Radical Islam.

Say we had the will, what would it actually take?

[lupus_in_fabula]

Pakistan is rapidly turning into a Radical Islamic state with nuclear weapons, and there's nothing we're willing to do to stop it. Once Pakistan falls Afghanistan will be close behind, and then our troubles really begin.

We are going to suffer the consequences of failing to address the problem of Radical Islam. Say we had the will, what would it actually take?


Maybe something along these lines:

First, engage in a dialog with the moderate Talibans, eventually trying to instigate a relative calm in critical areas. If necessary, spread some of that cash around.

Second, see to it that the military stays united, which might mean backing off from pressuring them to strike at their own people. So far they are united, at least at the higher echelons. Public opinion is however relevant if that is to remain the case. Time is not in their favor thou.

Third, and most importantly, massive economic and political incentives towards building a national education system and social development in general. The rate of illiteracy is staggering in Pakistan, and so is poor nutrition, which can be seen by the fact that over half of the children are stunted (failure to achieve expected height for age).

The Pakistani officials or military spokespersons may say they are under threat from extremists, thus they say they must protect their people. But in reality, they haven't done much for "their people" in the first place, and people are well aware of that.

Can we really blame the parents who send their sons to the infamous religious schools (madrassas); at least they learn to read and write there; they get at least some education where the other option is none; it means less mouths to feed for families who's already struggling. Give them some real options; a chance to have proper education on a large scale would be a good start, then follow up with other social reforms.

[gumboot]

Say we had the will, what would it actually take?

Honestly? I'm not sure there's anything we can do. We're too late to stop what looks to me to be increasingly inevitable. Perhaps the only viable solution is to determine the location of those nuclear weapons and secure them when everything goes pear shaped.

[SteveGrenard]

http://edition.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/asiapcf/02/16/pakistan.taliban.sharia.law/?iref=mpstoryview

Its naive to think NATO and the US can buy the Taliban. They have access to hundreds of millions of dollars in heroin monies.... NATO and the U.S. have done little or nothing with respect to the heroin. We are now sending back Amb. Richard Holbrooke who was infamous before for his hands off the heroin policies. Ditto for General Eikenberry. Maybe that's their plan? Addiction and HIV for all. That would work, eh?

"Outside Afghanistan, there are, regrettably, two other reasons we could not make inroads in Helmand and Kandahar: Ambassador Richard Holbrooke and Lieutenant-General Karl Eikenberry.

"U.S. President Barack Obama has just chosen Mr. Holbrooke, a former Clinton administration official, as his special representative in the region, and Lt.-Gen. Eikenberry as his ambassador to Afghanistan.

Tallyban wants schools but only religious schools they can run. They have already launched attacks and have detroyed government schools, particularly for girls.

Taliban blocks foreign aid groups from supplying food and services because they are afraid this would minimize their power in the eyes of the people. They prefer to be the sole source of such benefits ....if they decide they want to provide them.

Canada, Nato and Afghan-Pak Drug Trade:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20090214.wliveafghandrugs0217/BNStory/Front

Here’s an interesting piece of “fake fact” from an Islamic propaganda online site:

Cannabis is turned into heroin after having been transported to heroin plants in the Pak-Afghan tribal areas. Though the Karzai government has banned cannabis cultivation, the local warlords have allowed farmers to cultivate cannabis by levying taxes on them.
http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/Satellite?c=Article_C&cid=1233567839323&pagename=Zone-English-Muslim_Affairs%2FMAELayout

idiots. Do they actually believe cannabis is processed into heroin?

Here’s Russia’s take on the heroin situation:

http://uk.reuters.com/article/usTopNews/idUKTRE51B4RP20090212

And Russia’s not the only one suffering from an increase in addiction and HIV, so, apparently is
Iran. Yet Iran stubbornly refuses to do anything but support the Taliban.

[The Atheist]

No. I hate to say this but we and NATO are fighting a religious war in the region. Religion has caused more wars and more grief than it is worth. Its 2009 and we are still at it. I wouldn't be surprised if Russia joins in on our side.

Won't that be hilarious?

Pakistan is rapidly turning into a Radical Islamic state with nuclear weapons, and there's nothing we're willing to do to stop it. Once Pakistan falls Afghanistan will be close behind, and then our troubles really begin.

Nah, you're scaremongering.

There's another thread on this same subject which should probably be merged.

Zardari is strictly a temp and I imagine an army coup must be due very shortly. I just can't see the established ruling clique in Pak allowing the mullahs to take over, and the army has always tried to stay radical-free.

The very best thing we can do about Pakistan is leave it alone. Any offence would be disastrous.

We are going to suffer the consequences of failing to address the problem of Radical Islam.

That's funny. I would have said that our continued efforts to **** up the Middle East has enabled the growth of radical islam. Addressing it more is just going to make it worse.

[dudalb]

SO I guess letting the planners and origniators of 9/11 get away with it is acceptable in your book, then?
Well, not mine.

[The Atheist]

SO I guess letting the planners and origniators of 9/11 get away with it is acceptable in your book, then?
Well, not mine.

What does that have to do with what I said?

[SteveGrenard]

I think dudalb means since Pakistan/Afghan borderlands are being used as safe havens for AlQeda and the Taliban and it was suggested we leave Pakistan alone. We are not leaving them alone, however. We are attacking terrorist positions with drones/missiles. The Pakistani government complains but clearly is, off the record, happy we're doing this. You are right about Pakistan internally to having to come to terms with this.

Insofar as them getting away with the 9/11 and other attacks as well, they've already done that. They do have to be stopped from continuing their insane program to impose Sharia on the world.

I frankly don't agree that Sharia and radical Islam is prospering because of our involvement in the Middle-East. First of all this is not the middle-east we are talking about here, it's Pakistan and Afghanistan which are farther east. All of the middle east save for Israel is Muslim already although there are signs throughout the region of pulling away from the fundies. Saudi Arabia, see above. AbuDhabi and Dubai, for example. Proponents of fundamentalist Islam and Sharia would be following their own agenda whether we were there or not. We do make a handy propaganda tool for them to target. Creeping Islamic Fundamentalism is working its way through poorer nations such as India and those in southeast Asia. And don't forget the Islamization of Africa. There are outposts in Indonesia and even in the Phillippines. It sorta reminds one of the ideological conflicts between communism and capitalism that sparked Viet Nam. It's no longer about getting the 9-11 planners, its much much more that is at stake. I don't want to wake up tomorrow living under Sharia. I can deal with it but it is just too brutal and too scary in its application. I don't know how anybody else feels about that.

Finally I think a little scaremongering is justified.

[gumboot]

Nah, you're scaremongering.

There's another thread on this same subject which should probably be merged.

Zardari is strictly a temp and I imagine an army coup must be due very shortly. I just can't see the established ruling clique in Pak allowing the mullahs to take over, and the army has always tried to stay radical-free.

The very best thing we can do about Pakistan is leave it alone. Any offence would be disastrous.

Oh I agree that doing something would only make things worse, but I am not so confident that all is well. It's all well and good for the army to have tried to stay Radical free, but that doesn't mean it has. And even the Pakistani Army cannot rule against the will of the people. If the army decide to seize control and act rough-shod over the populous, you'll see a boom in the radicals, leading to an extremist insurgency.


That's funny. I would have said that our continued efforts to **** up the Middle East has enabled the growth of radical islam. Addressing it more is just going to make it worse.

Ah yes, the old "Radicals are just pissed at Western Imperialism" myth. Do some research into the origins of the Muslim Brotherhood, Wahhabism and Sayyid Qutb. It all has nothing to do with western imperialism. If there's any single primary cause it's Islamic modernisation.

Radical Islam has quietly been growing itself for about 200 years, and it started in the Hindustani regions of India, Pakistan and Afghanistan. That's why what's happening in Pakistan is inevitable; they've been following the same slow progression for two centuries. Countless armies and regimes and campaigns have tried to stamp them out, and every single one has failed. If you think a Pakistani army coup is going to stop that kind of momentum you're dreaming.

[The Painter]

What is the long-term goal of the NATO mission in Afghanistan/Pakistan

NATO, yeah. OK, can someone please remind me which part of Afghanistan and Pakistan come in contact with the North Atlantic? Or who they attack along the North Atlantic? Maybe they changed the NA part to New Alliance.

[The Atheist]

Finally I think a little scaremongering is justified.

If only it were a little, I'd probably agree with you. Hardly any "muslims are teh evilzz" threads around here, are there?

Oh I agree that doing something would only make things worse, but I am not so confident that all is well. It's all well and good for the army to have tried to stay Radical free, but that doesn't mean it has. And even the Pakistani Army cannot rule against the will of the people. If the army decide to seize control and act rough-shod over the populous, you'll see a boom in the radicals, leading to an extremist insurgency.

Pak is a little different from some of the other spots, though. There is an established female power base - Benazir would have been Pres, I'm 100% certain - the radicals are a minority and will stay that way.

Maybe I have misplaced confidence in the Pakis, but I think that there are enough sensible people close to power that they will ultimately remain on "our" side.

Ah yes, the old "Radicals are just pissed at Western Imperialism" myth.

No, actually. More the modern, "bomb their villages and turn people to terrorism" truth.

I'm not worried about the history of the movement; the insane ragheads we have today are a product of my generation, not Atilla the Hun's. You may as well point to the Inquisition for radical christianity.

Countless armies and regimes and campaigns have tried to stamp them out, and every single one has failed. If you think a Pakistani army coup is going to stop that kind of momentum you're dreaming.

Well, if you have a better idea than letting them sort it out and hoping to christ the moderates remain in power, so the people can quietly decide for themselves whether they want to be in the 21st century or the 11th, let me know.

I think you're overestimating the real power and support radical islam has inside Pakistan. Noisy, yes; violent, very, but not supported by the overhwelming majority.

[SteveGrenard]

NATO, yeah. OK, can someone please remind me which part of Afghanistan and Pakistan come in contact with the North Atlantic? Or who they attack along the North Atlantic? Maybe they changed the NA part to New Alliance.

enjoy:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/RL33627.pdf

https://www.glgroup.com/News/NATO-in-Afghanistan--A-New-Approach-Needed--(www.iandavisconsultancy.com)-27437.html

[gumboot]

No, actually. More the modern, "bomb their villages and turn people to terrorism" truth.

I'm not worried about the history of the movement; the insane ragheads we have today are a product of my generation, not Atilla the Hun's.



Sure, you get your localised "cause-effect" terrorists who respond to specific actions and get all fired up, but they're a fraction of a fraction of a percent of the problem. In fact, I've argued that terrorism full stop is nothing more than a distraction. It's the teaching of Radical Islam that's the real problem. Those people adopt ideologies that remain the guiding force in their lives.

And Radical Islam - the philosophy - has nothing to do with western foreign policy in the last 50 years.

You may as well point to the Inquisition for radical christianity.

You mean like how you might as well point to Ancient Greek philosophy and the enlightenment for democracy?

Oh wait.

Ideologies aren't born out of a single incident, or even a few years of incidents. They have deep roots.


Well, if you have a better idea than letting them sort it out and hoping to christ the moderates remain in power, so the people can quietly decide for themselves whether they want to be in the 21st century or the 11th, let me know.

Like I said, I have no solutions.


I think you're overestimating the real power and support radical islam has inside Pakistan. Noisy, yes; violent, very, but not supported by the overhwelming majority.

My consistent experience with Radical Islam is that the west has grossly underestimated it. I can't think of any reason why Pakistan would be different.

[dudalb]

Perhaps the only viable solution is to determine the location of those nuclear weapons and secure them when everything goes pear shaped.

We might not have the time to do that. India will beat us to the punch, since they feel..and with damn good reason as Mumbai shows...they would be #1 on a Pakistani Jihadi Hit List.

[Bikewer]

Diane Rehm had an hour on the situation last week:

http://wamu.org/programs/dr/09/02/16.php#23624

Fairly interesting. The panelists felt that "we" had to be in Afghanistan if only because of the looming problems with Pakistan, which two of them thought was a real powder keg.
However, everyone agreed that the present course of action was ineffective, and it was only by building up the Afghani military and especially police forces that any headway could be gained.

(shows are available on streaming audio)

[SteveGrenard]

Here is a message from a woman on the ground in the Swat Valley or she "was" in the Swat Valley:


ISLAMABAD, Pakistan (CNN) -- Gul Bibi and her three children fled the Taliban's bloody interpretation of Islamic law in Pakistan's Swat Valley, hoping one day to return.A pro-Taliban delegation attends a meeting with government officials in Peshawar, Pakistan, on Monday.

But now that the Pakistani government has recognized Taliban rule in the region in exchange for a temporary cease-fire, she said those hopes have been dashed.

She warned that the government's deal with the Taliban will have worldwide implications.

"The whole point is, if it's not contained to Swat, it's going to spill all over in Pakistan and the West also doesn't realize the seriousness of the situation," Bibi said. "Probably your next 9/11 is going to be from Swat."

Watch Gul Bibi talk about Taliban threat »go to url for link to video

The chief minister of North West Frontier Province announced on Monday that the Pakistani government will recognize the Taliban's interpretation of strict Islamic law, or sharia. The Taliban's interpretation of sharia has included banning girls from school, forcing women inside and outlawing forms of entertainment.

http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/asiapcf/02/17/pakistan.taliban/

[dudalb]

With friends like Pakistan the US sure as hell does not need any enemies.
A huge victory for the Jihadists.
Look for India to start getting nervous, very nervous.

[OneShotKi11]

With Bush it was nation building and was doomed to failure. If I understand Obama's goal it is simply to capture or kill Osama which is almost certain to fail and to use it as a way of pulling troops out of Iraq. That is why he is finding so little support fro NATO countries for more troops.I have predicted we will be out of Afghanistan very soon because there is really no strategic interest for us there. If the Taliban takes over again and starts trouble for us we can always bomb the crap out of them again.

From what i understand the Marine Corps is doing a new initiative towards
Afghanistan. The Taliban as well as Al'queda have been increasing their funding
through drug money (herion poppy) and rising in numbers since we've
been in Iraq.

That seems like strategic reason to go back.

[SteveGrenard]

On topic, re strategy in Afghanistan and new today:

http://www.voanews.com/english/2009-02-17-voa72.cfm


The heroin problem in Afghanistan has long been ignored by Bush and company but seems is being addressed. It is the prime source of funding for terrorists attacking US and NATO forces and may well be financing terrorism worldwide.

Many experts have written recently that the former administration's strategy for allowing the heroin trade to flourish was the belief that much of it ends up in the arms of Iranians and Russians ... along with blood borne diseases such as hepatitis and HIV. A short sighted and self defeating strategy.

[SteveGrenard]

From what i understand the Marine Corps is doing a new initiative towards
Afghanistan. The Taliban as well as Al'queda have been increasing their funding
through drug money (herion poppy) and rising in numbers since we've
been in Iraq.


It’s the Royal Marines by the way:


British, Afghan troops in Taliban drugs swoop
Posted: 18 February 2009 0955 hrs


LONDON: Millions of pounds worth of drugs were seized in southern Afghanistan as more than 700 British and Afghan troops staged a major operation against Taliban fighters, officials said Wednesday.

Troops raided four drug factories in Sangin Valley, Helmand Province, capturing opium, chemicals and equipment capable of producing heroin worth over 50 million pounds (70 million dollars), London's Ministry of Defence said.

Royal Marines and commandos backed by helicopters led Operation Diesel, which took place between February 6 and 11 and left 20 Taliban fighters dead. A further four were captured, a ministry spokesman said.

Afghanistan supplies 90 per cent of the world's heroin, much of which emanates from Helmand, a Taliban stronghold.


http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/afp_asiapacific/view/409748/1/.html

Here’s another commentary on the problem:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20090214.wliveafghandrugs0217/BNStory/specialComment/?page=rss&id=RTGAM.20090214.wliveafghandrugs0217


February 17, 2009 at 12:21 PM EST
"Earlier this month, the United Nations released a report predicting a decline in opium cultivation in Afghanistan for the second year in a row," international drug expert Thomas Schwiech wrote Saturday in his Globe essay Obama's men in Afghanistan
"Because Afghan heroin funds the insurgency, corrupts the government and interferes with legitimate agricultural programs, this was good news for everyone.
"Four years ago, farmers grew poppies in all 34 of Afghanistan's provinces. Three years ago, there were six poppy-free provinces. Two years ago, there were 13. Last year, there were 18 and experts predict that 22 of the 34 will likely be poppy-free this year.
"Nationwide, poppy cultivation was down 19 per cent last year, and it will likely fall even more this year, prompting the top UN diplomat in Afghanistan to say a few days ago: 'This year could be a turning point' in the war against Afghan heroin.


Here’s a recent report on the situation with Russia and the Afghan drug trade:


MOSCOW (Reuters) - Russia on Thursday blamed NATO's failure to stamp out heroin production in Afghanistan for a rise in domestic drugs use.
U.S.-led forces entered Afghanistan to chase out Taliban Islamists after the al Qaeda attacks on the United States in 2001, but NATO members only agreed last year they could carry out direct strikes on drug traffickers.

This was too late to prevent drug addiction becoming a serious problem in Russia, Viktor Ivanov, head of Russia's Federal Drug Control Agency, told a news briefing.
http://uk.reuters.com/article/usTopNews/idUKTRE51B4RP20090212

[SteveGrenard]

Iran I believe has about 3 million addicts on Afghan heroin and a very large number of users with Hepatitis and HIV. Here is a recent report from the Wall Street Journal:


By JAY SOLOMON and YOCHI J. DREAZEN
MUNICH -- Richard Holbrooke, the Obama administration's new point man on Afghanistan and Pakistan, is expected to engage Iran as part of a broad effort to stabilize Afghanistan and combat the country's growing drug trade, according to officials briefed on the special representative's plans.
Richard Holbrooke, right, at the Munich Security Conference on Sunday with Wolfgang Ischinger, the conference chairman.
Many in the Obama administration believe that Iran and the U.S. share common interests when it comes to Afghanistan, these officials said. Tehran has been among the largest suppliers of financial and economic aid to Kabul since the overthrow of the Taliban in 2001, and these officials said they believe Iran may be willing to work with the U.S. to strengthen the fragile government of Afghan President Hamid Karzai.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123413060680861197.html

Frankly its a disgrace the way the U.S. dealt with the drug problem in Afghanistan under Bush. There are even reports of traffickers using Iraq for their operations and no doubt well connected people there are also profiting from this trade in addition to outright terrorists or narco-terrorists.

[gdnp]

Any idea what proportion of the Afghan economy is accounted for by the Heroin trade?

[SteveGrenard]

Any idea what proportion of the Afghan economy is accounted for by the Heroin trade?


Again, the hawala system in Afghanistan is controlled by poppy-generated illegal money. One finds that the hawala centers and drug routes are the same. Ninety-three percent of the world’s illegal opium is grown in Afghanistan. The world's intelligence agencies and drug lords have their meeting point in the small but prosperous town of Baramcha in Helmand, which grows 70% of Afghanistan’s poppy. The GDP of Afghanistan is US$7.8 billion, while the illegal opium trade is worth more than US$5 billion!!! Now one can understand how important drug trade is to Afghanistan, to the jihadis, to ISI and to the United States, where the illegal street trade is worth US$200 billion! The Taliban are able to completely ignore or reduce taxes on non-opium trade in the areas they control, as long as one pays 10% tax on the opium produced, thereby winning the hearts and minds of ordinary Afghan farmers.

http://www.upiasia.com/Blogosphere/captainJohann/20090209/obamas_surge_and_the_afghan_heroin_trade/

FOR MORE INFORMATION ON THIS SUBJECT SUGGEST READING THE FOLLOWING:

http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/CHO404A.html

[Puppycow]

Many experts have written recently that the former administration's strategy for allowing the heroin trade to flourish was the belief that much of it ends up in the arms of Iranians and Russians ... along with blood borne diseases such as hepatitis and HIV. A short sighted and self defeating strategy.

No way. It just wasn't a top priority. It's not a "strategy" to get the Russians and Iranians addicted to drugs and infected with diseases. :rolleyes:

Personally, I'm not sure if fighting opium production helps the counterinsurgency or works at cross-purposes.

Since this is over half of the GDP, it undercuts people's livlihoods. The Afghan farmer who is not a Jihadi but who does want to make a good living might resent having his livlihood taken away.

[Undesired Walrus]

Honestly? I'm not sure there's anything we can do. We're too late to stop what looks to me to be increasingly inevitable. Perhaps the only viable solution is to determine the location of those nuclear weapons and secure them when everything goes pear shaped.

I'm somewhat confused about the immediate link between control of a government and the acquisition of the previous one's nuclear weapons. I presume there isn't some button underneath the desk of the Presidential palace.

[gumboot]

I'm somewhat confused about the immediate link between control of a government and the acquisition of the previous one's nuclear weapons. I presume there isn't some button underneath the desk of the Presidential palace.


If they control the country they can gain access to the nuclear weapons.

[SteveGrenard]

No way. It just wasn't a top priority. It's not a "strategy" to get the Russians and Iranians addicted to drugs and infected with diseases.

If you or I gave a hundred dollars to an Islamic charity at the very least we’d be questioned. I am not saying this would be wrong, but given the fervor such donations attract by the FBI, why is it not a top priority for the U.S. to allow the Taliban to benefit to the tune of a half a billion dollars a year from the drug trade emanating from Afghanistan? There is something wrong with this picture.

And if you or I got caught in possession of a kilo or less of heroin or opium we’d be arrested, charged, convicted and jailed. I am not saying this is wrong but why then is it okay for the Bush administration to look the other way, even protect, a trade in opium and heroin amounting to tens of thousands of kilos annually worth billions of dollars? There is something wrong with this picture. We have laws that says giving "material aid and support" to the enemy, e.g., the Taliban, AlQeda etc etc is a criminal act worthy of a vacation at Gitmo. But it is okay for the government under Bush policy to let the Taliban make hundreds of millions of dollars...? This is truly sick.

Personally, I'm not sure if fighting opium production helps the counterinsurgency or works at cross-purposes.

We have known since day one, and in fact before we went into Afghanistan, that the heroin trade there benefitted the Taliban and AlQAeda. This is not news anymore. Fighting it counters the insurgency, it cuts off their lucrative source of income which was supposed to be part of the plan to fight these people. Why then is this not a priority?

Since this is over half of the GDP, it undercuts people's livlihoods. The Afghan farmer who is not a Jihadi but who does want to make a good living might resent having his livlihood taken away.

Afghan farmers have been offered alternative crops, some just as valuable as opium, such as saffron but they have rejected them because if they switched from opium poppies to spices or other valuable cash crops the Taliban and AlQeda would simply kill them or their families. The kingpins and the Taliban would be made redundent by such a move. Why is this not a priority if we are so interested in the welfare of the farmers? Do you really think the farmers get half the GDP of the country? Not likely. They earn a pittance for their flower crops and get taxed on them by Taliban thugs.

This situation has gotten way out of hand but experts have known this for the last 6 or 7 years but were ignored by the Bush White House. The head of the DEA was fired by Bush and showed up in some minor position at Homeland after he publicly complained about the situation with heroin in Afghanistan and how it was fueling the insurgency. Bush, in public, has consistently refused to discuss this. The orders coming from the Pentagon to the troops has always been hands off the dope. It is naïve to believe this policy wasn’t promulgated by the White House.

When the White House looked at the chief victims of the local heroin trade they found millions of Russians, former Soviet state and Iranians addicted and diseased through needle sharing. It is naïve to not believe that the White House could care less about these particular addicts. They were not their problem but then Russia and Iran became our enemies instead of our allies. This is now being turned around by the new administration that wants to enlist the help of Russia and Iran in disposing of the jihadist Taliban as it is clear this would benefit them as well. There are at least three million heroin addicts in Iran and it is clear Iran blames the U.S. for this since that trade is protected by U.S. forces and has grown exponentially since we invaded Afghanistan.

Not being a top priority was a serious, serious mistake if not a criminal act.

[gumboot]

For what it's worth, destroying Heroine production is a component of the New Zealand PRTs job. I imagine it's much the same for the other PRTs.

[SteveGrenard]

http://merln.ndu.edu/archivepdf/afghanistan/WH/20080313-4.pdf

Yes, it is part if the entire PRT effort since last year after 6 or 7 years of completely ignoring the problem.

[gumboot]

http://merln.ndu.edu/archivepdf/afghanistan/WH/20080313-4.pdf

Yes, it is part if the entire PRT effort since last year after 6 or 7 years of completely ignoring the problem.

O'RLY?

So this photo from 2006 (http://www.nzdf.mil.nz/nr/exeres/920504e7-f320-4393-843a-aaf4709c7374.htm) doesn't show over a tonne of Opium being destroyed by the NZDF in Afghanistan then?

[SteveGrenard]

This is a very nice picture but in the larger scheme of things it is meaningless for a variety of reasons since we don’t know where and when it was taken, and even if recent and accurate, because a ton of resin is a teeny fraction of the 7000 to 8000 tonnes of heroin produced annually. It is nice PR and good for the NZDF. On the other hand here are a sampling of reports just from the last two days on the problem. You can ignore the data if you want to and say hey look the NZDF burned a ton of opium and this is a good thing. But it doesn’t amount to much when placed against the tens of thousands of tons produced over the past 7+ years. Anyway thanks for this and letting me know the good work being done by the NZDF.


By Peter Griffiths
LONDON (Reuters) - Afghanistan's opium harvest fell in 2008 after international efforts to persuade farmers to switch crops but was still the second biggest on record, a United Nations body said on Thursday.
While the area under cultivation was reduced by a fifth, better yields meant production dropped only 6 percent to 7,700 tons, after a record 8,200 tons in 2007, the U.N.'s International Narcotics Control Board said in its annual report.
More than seven years after the U.S.-led invasion, Afghanistan still grows more than 90 percent of the world's illegal opium poppies, the source of heroin.
Five more of the country's 34 provinces ended opium farming in 2008, taking the opium-free total to 18. Output is focused on seven provinces in southern Afghanistan where U.S. and NATO troops are fighting an increasingly bold Taliban insurgency.
"Insecurity and drug production and trafficking...are very much inter-related," INCB President Hamid Ghodse told a news conference in London. "It is very difficult to say which is the cause and which is the effect."

http://uk.reuters.com/article/usPoliticsNews/idUKTRE51I2II20090219


By Matthew Hickley
Last updated at 1:24 AM on 19th February 2009
The failure to stamp out Afghanistan's massive heroin trade is costing 'thousands of lives' in Britain and around the world, the UN's anti-drugs chief has warned.
A damning official report reveals that the Taliban is earning as much as £200million a year by controlling and taxing Afghanistan's massive opium industry - which produces more than nine tenths of the world's heroin - helping to buy weapons and explosives which kill British troops.
Efforts by the U.S-led coalition and the Afghan government to curb the huge trade are being 'severely hampered by lack of security, poor planning and inadequate equipment and funding', it is claimed.
The findings are an embarrassment for Britain and her coalition partners, as they show that almost eight years of military operations in Afghanistan have had little impact on the deadly trade in heroin.
The report highlights the fact that in Helmand Province - Afghanistan's main opium-growing region, where thousands of British troops are currently operating - there are no border police to halt the flow of drugs into neighbouring Pakistan.
And while Afghan officials have boasted that less land is being planted with opium poppies, the UN study warns that increasing numbers of farmers are simply switching to growing cannabis for export, and Afghanistan is now becoming a major producer.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1149163/Failure-end-Afghan-heroin-trade-killing-thousands-Britons.html



Before the Soviet Afghan war, opium production in Pakistan and Afghanistan was mainly of local character with almost no production of heroin. But things changed rapidly within two years of the CIA operations with the mujahideen. In the words of Alfred McCoy, an acclaimed expert on the subject, the picture looked like this:
The Pakistan-Afghanistan borderland became the world’s top heroin producer, supplying 60 per cent of US demand. In Pakistan, the heroin addicted population went from near zero in 1979….. to 1.2 million by 1985 ……a much steeper rise than in any other nation.(*Iran allegedly has 3 million addicts and Russia and former Soviet states has numbers up in the millions)
Thus a new element was introduced in the socio-political life of the Pak-Afghan border region under the active patronage of the ISI and CIA. Mujahideen warlords ordered peasants in Afghanistan to cultivate opium on a mass scale and drug syndicates in Pakistan ran hundreds of heroin laboratories. CIA finance and weapon supply for the Afghan mujahideen continued but arrangements for contraband trade were made to pump extra money in the scenario.
In this way an almost umbilical relationship was developed between the ISI and CIA. US drug enforcement agencies located in Pakistan turned a blind eye as the CIA had a bigger plan which extended well beyond the defeat of the Soviet forces in Afghanistan or even the break-up of the Soviet Union. Obviously the CIA was preparing for a post-Soviet break-up scenario and it needed active cooperation of the ISI in it.
Continuance of this cooperation serves America’s interests and it will be interesting to watch whether Obama would put a complete stop to it. Although Russia now expects easing of tensions between Washington and Moscow, the time has not yet come to pronounce that the former has given up its aggressive policies in Central Asia, Caucasus and the Balkans or is prepared to jettison Saudi Arabia so far as its foreign policy formulations are concerned. Although Russia has successfully dealt with the Chechen separatist movement, the American, Pakistani, Saudi Arabian and Somalian involvement behind indoctrination and training of the Chechen separatists and then massive arms supplies to these militants has left a bitter legacy in South Asia.
http://www.mainstreamweekly.net/article1175.html


"Sixty-two intelligence agencies are active in Afghanistan, and we still cannot find the bad people! They are not doing their job very well," he said.
Afghanistan's poppy fields produce most of the world's opium, but Afghan officials say drug traffickers are increasingly using chemicals to convert it into heroin before it is shipped abroad, producing even greater profits for Afghan drug traffickers.
None of the chemicals, such as acetic anhydride, hydrochloric acid and acetone, are produced in Afghanistan and so must be obtained by the Taliban from foreign sources.
http://in.reuters.com/article/southAsiaNews/idINIndia-38090720090219

[SteveGrenard]

duplicate

[gumboot]

This is a very nice picture but in the larger scheme of things it is meaningless for a variety of reasons since we don’t know where and when it was taken

It was taken on Thursday 9th November, 2006, at Kiwi Base in Bamyan Province, Afghanistan.

They also destroyed almost 2 tonnes of opium resin in late January 2006.


and even if recent and accurate, because a ton of resin is a teeny fraction of the 7000 to 8000 tonnes of heroin produced annually. It is nice PR and good for the NZDF. On the other hand here are a sampling of reports just from the last two days on the problem. You can ignore the data if you want to and say hey look the NZDF burned a ton of opium and this is a good thing. But it doesn’t amount to much when placed against the tens of thousands of tons produced over the past 7+ years. Anyway thanks for this and letting me know the good work being done by the NZDF.


I was questioning your claim that for 6 or 7 years the PRTs have been "completely ignoring the problem". This is quite obviously false, as evidence by two instances in 2006 by one of the PRTs. I doubt this is some sort of spontaneous thing that the NZDF decided to do off their own back, so it's probably safe to assume others have been doing similar things (and more than likely the NZDF PRT has done it other times also).

[Darth Rotor]

Say we had the will, what would it actually take?
Since nobody is willing to allow the loose RoE that answers that question, your question is wasted time.

[SteveGrenard]

I was questioning your claim that for 6 or 7 years the PRTs have been "completely ignoring the problem".

Seriously incorrect assumption and probable misinterpretation on your part my friend. I said, based on the record, that the problem was not only completly ignored by our last President of the U.S. and key members of his administration, the drug business was/is also protected by the government of Afghanistan and the U.S. Forces/Coalition probably at the request of the CIA who has been in the heroin business before (see Viet Nam era). This is how Afghanistan became the world's largest supplier of heroin. It may interest you to know that our first alliance in Afghanistan prior to going in was with the Northern Alliance, a notorious band of drug smugglers.


You steadfastly refuse to acknowledge this because you cannot explain that in spite of all this good work by the NZDF it doesn't add up to anything given the magnitude of the problem. The NZDF would have to burn a ton of this garbage every day for the next 20 years to make even a dent.

[JihadJane]

The Mission:

- Control of the narcotics industry.

- To maintain the flow of drug money into to the corrupt Western banking system.

- Permanent military bases on the borders of Russia and China.

- Control of energy supply routes.

- Encirclement of Iran and control of Middle Eastern energy resources.

- Income for the war industry and related profiteers (including "reconstruction" and "War on Drugs" enterprises).

- Test and demonstrate new weapons on live targets (related to previous motive) .

etc.

[gumboot]

Seriously incorrect assumption and probable misinterpretation on your part my friend.


Nonsense. I pointed out that the PRT are involved in anti-drug work. I made no claim to its effectiveness, nor to its priority rating in terms of their missions. You responded that the PRTs were only doing this as a new thing after they had totally ignored the problem for the previous years. There's no wiggle room for misinterpretation. You're just back peddling.

[gumboot]

- Permanent military bases on the borders of Russia and China.


Given that Afghanistan shares no borders with Russia, and its border with China is at the end of a 10 mile wide and 250km long strip of some of the most inhospitable terrain on the planet, I can't see Afghanistan being an overly useful place for permanent military bases on the borders of Russia and China.

This is further undermined by the fact that the USA is now arranging to supply those bases from Russia.

[JihadJane]

Given that Afghanistan shares no borders with Russia, and its border with China is at the end of a 10 mile wide and 250km long strip of some of the most inhospitable terrain on the planet, I can't see Afghanistan being an overly useful place for permanent military bases on the borders of Russia and China.

This is further undermined by the fact that the USA is now arranging to supply those bases from Russia.


The USSR was drawn into Afghanistan partly because of the threat posed by US-nurtured Islamic militancy on its borders. Russia regards Afghanistan as its backyard and is presumably happy to let US get bogged down in the Empires' graveyard. It is extracting concessions from a weakened US in exchange for letting the US do the dirty work.

I'm not an expert on military hardware but aren't airplanes able to fly over "inhospitable terrain"?

[gumboot]

I'm not an expert on military hardware but aren't airplanes able to fly over "inhospitable terrain"?

Yes, but airplanes are generally not considered to make very good "permanent bases" on account of them being rather small, and having a tendency to need to land at some point.

The NAOC is probably about as close as it gets to a "base" in an airplane, and I believe that can only remain airborne for about 72 hours (after that the oil in the engines needs changing) which doesn't really qualify as "permanent" in my book.

[SteveGrenard]

While Afghanistan doesn't currently share any border with Russia it does share considerable borders with former soviet Russian states and states under the Russian sphere of influence. When Russia attacked and occupied Afghanistan she considered the country a bordering state.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/william-bradley/afghanistan-russia-to-the_b_166789.html

See below: the drugs coming from Afghanistan have managed to impact many in these former Soviet states as well as Russia creating millions of new (needle sharing) addicts.


MOSCOW (Reuters) - Russia on Thursday blamed NATO's failure to stamp out heroin production in Afghanistan for a rise in domestic drugs use.
U.S.-led forces entered Afghanistan to chase out Taliban Islamists after the al Qaeda attacks on the United States in 2001, but NATO members only agreed last year they could carry out direct strikes on drug traffickers.
This was too late to prevent drug addiction becoming a serious problem in Russia, Viktor Ivanov, head of Russia's Federal Drug Control Agency, told a news briefing.
Afghanistan supplies 90 percent of the world's heroin.
"The growth of narcotics from abroad has continued since the appearance of troops (in Afghanistan) in 2001," Ivanov said.
"This organization (NATO) had a remit to combat terrorism and not to combat drugs."
Ivanov said 80 people died in Russia every day from drugs and another 250 people became addicts.
About 80 percent of people with the HIV virus in Russia are drug users injecting themselves with infected needles, U.N. officials said at a conference in Moscow last year.
http://uk.reuters.com/article/usTopNews/idUKTRE51B4RP20090212

[gumboot]

When Russia attacked and occupied Afghanistan she considered the country a bordering state.



When the Soviet Union attacked and occupied Afghanistan, it was a bordering state.

[SteveGrenard]

....its border with China is at the end of a 10 mile wide and 250km long strip of some of the most inhospitable terrain on the planet, I can't see Afghanistan being an overly useful place for permanent military bases on the borders of Russia and China.


I didn't realize there was a mandate military operations should only place their bases on hospitable landscapes such as Miami Beach or Honolulu and forgo the less hospitable terrain the world has to offer. Such terrain is probably not overly useful for recreational activities. We know that from Korea.
Yes, but airplanes are generally not considered to make very good "permanent bases" on account of them being rather small, and having a tendency to need to land at some point.

And landing strips on land 250 kms long and 10 miles wide are not possible?

[SteveGrenard]

When the Soviet Union attacked and occupied Afghanistan, it was a bordering state.

Yup. And these states are still under the Russian sphere of influence.......and Russia, given the drug trade, has a legitimate concern over the impact drugs being smuggled over the borders of its former states is having on their country. Which, if you read the Huffington Post article cited above is why Russia is going to help US/NATO Forces in the transit of supplies. Failure in Afghanistan is not something the Russians want. I speculated that Russia may even ramp up its assistance in helping to rid Afghanistan of the insurgent Islamic radicals and jihadists such as the Taliban and AlQeda. Besides its drug problem Russia clearly doesn't want sharia either.

Russia, which sees a common enemy in jihadism, helped the US quickly oust the Taliban regime and disrupt Al Qaeda in the immediate aftermath of 9/11, but parted ways with the US over the invasion of Iraq.

Russia has an additional motive in helping again beyond stopping the US from encroaching in its traditional neighborhood and beyond its dislike of Islamic radicalism. That motive is drugs. Afghanistan supplies 90% of the world's heroin, but it was only last year that US and NATO forces began to carry out strikes against drug traffickers. Bill Bradley in the Huffington Post quoted/cited in Post#53

[gumboot]

I didn't realize there was a mandate military operations should only place their bases on hospitable landscapes such as Miami Beach or Honolulu and forgo the less hospitable terrain the world has to offer.

When I describe the terrain as inhospitable I don't mean "a long way from the nearest mall". There were concerns the Wakhan Corridor might be utilised by drug traffickers trying to smuggle drugs into China, however an assessment of the region concluded the climate was so inhospitable that actually maintaining a drug smuggling operation through the area would be virtually impossible.

The Pass into China is at nearly 5,000m - and remember that's the pass - i.e. the low point.

[SteveGrenard]

BEIJING (Reuters) - Drug traffickers in China's far west are smuggling heroin into the country woven into carpets imported from Afghanistan
and Pakistan, state media said on Tuesday. Customs officials in Xinjiang, which borders both countries, have seized more than 30 carpets containing some 50 kg (110 lb) of heroin in the last several months, the official China Daily said.

"The traffickers have become more sophisticated and are using new techniques," it paraphrased Wang Zhi, deputy director the General Administration of Customs' anti-smuggling bureau, as saying.

http://uk.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idUKPEK3905520080624

They'll always find a way. However I don't think the proposed base on the Chinese Afghan border is solely to stop drug smuggling. China also has a problem with a muslim insurgency that could be exacerbated by jihadists using such rough borderlands as safe havens.

September 30, 2005

U.S. Warns of Islamic Terror Threat in China

Now what was all that talk about no terrorism in China? The Jawa Report has been warning readers of the low-level Islamist insurgency in China's western Xinjiang province for some time. Called East Turkistan by its own people, Islamic militants in the area have ties to Osama bin Laden's al Qaeda network and are working to oust the communist Han Chinese and restore the brief lived Islamic Republic of East Turkistan--an Islamist state that predates Iran by over forty years.
In fact, after China's Strike Hard campaign of the early 1990s, aimed at wiping out the Islamic insurgency, many jihadi leaders fled to a neighboring country where they found safe haven and a network of like minded individuals willing and eager to supply them with arms and cash. Can you guess which country the fled to? Drumroll please.

http://mypetjawa.mu.nu/archives/123641.php

answer: Afghanistan.

[SteveGrenard]

I'm not an expert on military hardware but aren't airplanes able to fly over "inhospitable terrain"?

Yes they can and do fly over inhospitable terrain and then can land somewhere that is less inhospitable to that process (e.g. landing).

[SteveGrenard]

And in the meantime things go from bad to worse in the NW Swat valley of Pakistan:

Taliban fighters have taken over the Swat valley, in the lawless north-west of Pakistan, and have forced the government to impose sharia law in the region (caption)

Taliban fighters and Pakistani government officials today agreed a controversial deal that will lead to a "permanent ceasefire" in the troubled north-western Swat valley, potentially creating a haven for terrorists 100 miles from the capital, Islamabad.

The agreement, between the militant commander Maulana Fazlullah and local administrators, builds on a previous temporary deal. "They have made commitment that they will observe a permanent ceasefire and we'll do the same," Syed Mohammad Javed, the commissioner of Malakand and the local representative of the Pakistani government, told reporters.

Around 1,200 people have been killed and between 250,000 and 500,000 people have fled Swat in 18 months of fierce fighting over the beautiful valley, once a tourist centre. Three thousand militants have been battling up to 12,000 troops.

More at:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/feb/21/pakistan-afghanistan

[SteveGrenard]

Rescuing Pakistan from the Taliban

In its 60-plus turbulent years as an independent country, Pakistan has been held together by its music, poetry, films, literature and sports. Pakistan is an overwhelmingly Muslim nation, but culture -- not religion -- is the glue that binds people in this critical U.S.-allied country.
But now the Taliban are grafting an alien form of Islam onto Pakistan, with dire consequences for Pakistanis, the region and possibly the world. Earlier this month the Pakistani government and army made a deal with the Taliban and gave them control of the Swat valley. The government ceded this region near the Afghan border after countless suicide attacks resulted in the loss of many military and civilian lives.
President Asif Ali Zardari's ill-conceived appeasement will only embolden the Taliban and may squelch more of Pakistan's voices of peace just when Pakistanis and the world need to hear them most.
In Swat and elsewhere in the North-West Frontier Province, arts and culture are under attack, as are women's rights. The city of Swat used to be a haven for arts, music and tourism. There is now eerie silence. The Taliban have shut down girls' schools, imposed sharia law and destroyed music shops. Cinemas are being locked down. The fanatics' idea is simple: to asphyxiate Pakistan's rich and vibrant culture and replace it with their own.

http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/salman_ahmad/2009/02/rescuing_pakistan_from_the_tal.html

[JihadJane]

Rescuing Pakistan from the Taliban



http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/salman_ahmad/2009/02/rescuing_pakistan_from_the_tal.html

The heroic, selfless USA comes to the rescue once more... continuing its global charity mission.

God bless US drones and bombs.

[gumboot]

Rescuing Pakistan from the Taliban

http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/salman_ahmad/2009/02/rescuing_pakistan_from_the_tal.html


One part of that quote leapt out at me as truly bizarre:

"But now the Taliban are grafting an alien form of Islam onto Pakistan"

If we look at a bit of history regarding this "alien form of Islam" we'll see that not only is it native to Pakistan, but it was very much responsible for the creation of Pakistan.

The Deobandi strain of Islam, which teaches Wahhabism, arose in India, and was vitally important in the creation of a separate Muslim state in the British Raj.

Because it teaches Wahhabi, the Deoband Madrassahs were a major benefactor of Saudi funding, resulting in some 30,000 thousand of them around the world. As of 2002, at least 7,000 of these Madrassahs were located in Pakistan, constituting over 70% of all Madrassahs in the country. In all, 1.25 million students are taught the Deobandi strain of Islam every year in Pakistan.

And the real kicker? Some of those 1.25 million students every year included the Afghan Taliban. They trained in Pakistani Madrassahs. So to call the Taliban's strain of Islam "alien" to Pakistan is so completely utterly wrong. If there's anywhere in the world that it's not alien, that place is Pakistan.

And this trend is something that has been continuing ever since Pakistan was created.

In 1947 there were about 200 Madrassahs in Pakistan, very few of them Deoband.

In 1972 40% of Pakistan's Madrassahs were Deoband. By the late 80's it had grown to about 65%, and by 2002 it was over 70%.

[SteveGrenard]

Because it teaches Wahhabi, the Deoband Madrassahs were a major benefactor of Saudi funding...

You mean beneficiary?



The Taliban's extremely strict and "anti-modern" ideology has been described as an "innovative form of sharia combining Pashtun tribal codes,"[25] or Pashtunwali, with radical Deobandi interpretations of Islam favored by members of the Pakistani fundamentalist Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam (JUI) organization and its splinter groups. Also contributing to the admixture was the Wahhabism of their Saudi financial benefactors, and the jihadism and pan-Islamism of sometime comrade-in-arms Osama bin Laden.[26] Their ideology was a departure from the Islamism of the anti-Soviet mujahideen rulers they replaced who tended to be mystical Sufis, traditionalists, or radical Islamicists inspired by the Ikhwan.[27]


I don’t think it is as simple as you make it out to be. . For an unusually extensive discussion of Taliban ideology, especially for a wiki article, see:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taliban

What you say about Deobrandis is confirmed in the following reference save for the lack of any mention of the Taliban:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deobandi

[gumboot]

You mean beneficiary?

Yes.


I don’t think it is as simple as you make it out to be. . For an unusually extensive discussion of Taliban ideology, especially for a wiki article, see:

Your quote really just reinforces my point. The Taliban's code was a merger of numerous parallel strands, and the Maddrassahs of Pakistan are the only place where all of those strands came together. Thus arguing that the Taliban's form of Islam is foreign to Pakistan is nonsensical - Pakistan exported it to Afghanistan.

Let's look at your quote in more detail to get a handle on what I'm saying:

The Taliban's extremely strict and "anti-modern" ideology has been described as an "innovative form of sharia combining Pashtun tribal codes," or Pashtunwali, with radical Deobandi interpretations of Islam favored by members of the Pakistani fundamentalist Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam (JUI) organization and its splinter groups. Also contributing to the admixture was the Wahhabism of their Saudi financial benefactors, and the jihadism and pan-Islamism of sometime comrade-in-arms Osama bin Laden. Their ideology was a departure from the Islamism of the anti-Soviet mujahideen rulers they replaced who tended to be mystical Sufis, traditionalists, or radical Islamicists inspired by the Ikhwan.

"innovative form of Sharia combining Pashtun tribal codes"

Yes, that's true enough, but what the article fails to mention is that "innovation" occurred about 200 years ago in the tribal regions of Pakistan. Wahhabism in Arabia was a merger of Sharia with the harsh tribal codes of the Bedouin. Syed Ahmad brought Wahhabi back to India and found it fitted well with the similar harsh tribal codes of the frontier tribes.

"with radical Deobandi interpretations of Islam favored by members of the Pakistani fundamentalist Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam (JUI)"

They've got things a little backwards here - the Deobandi interpretation of Islam was a result of the "innovative form of Sharia".

Simply put:

Sharia + tribal codes = Deobandi

Again, all of this happened long before the Taliban existed - the Deobandi branch of teaching was established after the Sepoy Mutiny.

It reinforces my point because JUI and friends, who did indeed promote Deobandi, were originally an Indian political party, and responsible for the creation of Pakistan.

"Also contributing to the admixture was the Wahhabism of their Saudi financial benefactors"

Again, true, but again they have things somewhat mixed up. The Wahhabi influence came from Saudi backing of the Deobandi Madrassahs which the Taliban attended. The very reason the Saudis supported these Madrassahs was because Deobandi Islam and Wahhabi Islam are essentially the same thing.

"and the jihadism and pan-Islamism of sometime comrade-in-arms Osama bin Laden"

Well they're again getting things muddled. Osama Bin Laden and the Taliban formed a happy alliance precisely because they had the same ideology. Osama Bin Laden was taught the same teachings as the Taliban. However, while the Taliban supported Jihad (it's fundamental to Deobandi Islam) they are not Pan-Islamic, but quite locally-focused. The reason Al Qaeda came about was precisely because of a clash between the various factions in Afghanistan whether to focus on making Afghanistan an Islamic state, or whether to carry the Jihad to the world.

The Pan-Islamists went the Al Qaeda route, and those focused on Afghanistan went the Taliban route.

"Their ideology was a departure from the Islamism of the anti-Soviet mujahideen rulers they replaced who tended to be mystical Sufis, traditionalists, or radical Islamicists inspired by the Ikhwan."

All quite accurate except for that last point. The Ikhwan, which means "Brotherhood" were the Wahhabi Bedouin fighters that helped create Saudi Arabia. Their ideology is very much in keeping with the Taliban - in fact the Taliban are the only government outside Saudi Arabia that has managed to successfully impose such stringent Fundamentalist Sharia on a whole country.

This name was later adopted by another global Islamist movement started in Egypt called the Muslim Brotherhood, and which has very similar ideology. Sayyed Qutb - a key founder of the Muslim Brotherhood - initiated a style of Islam that's very much the same as the Deobandi/Wahhabi style of Islam - hence why Osama Bin Laden adopted both.

The article gets the influences more or less right, but is way off base in trying to argue these distinct factors all came together in Afghanistan to create the unique Taliban brand of Islam. More accurately the distinct factors came together in Pakistan, were then exported to Afghanistan, and are now coming back home.

[SteveGrenard]

Sharia + tribal codes = Deobandi

Again, all of this happened long before the Taliban existed - the Deobandi branch of teaching was established after the Sepoy Mutiny.

Yup, the references and the above speaks for itself. The Taliban is an alien admixture of these various islamic ideologies.

[gumboot]

Yup, the references and the above speaks for itself. The Taliban is an alien admixture of these various islamic ideologies.

Translation = "I didn't read anything you wrote"