Afghan Taliban commander expresses disassociation with TTP

[A.Rahman]

that is your version of story, not the afghans.

Taliban have their own government in 20 of the 34 provinces.

 

[S-2]

"But most people here don’t feel threatened by the Taliban in their daily lives. There are no bodies in the streets of Kabul. The Taliban mostly attacks international and Afghan security forces. They rarely carry out attacks in markets. If they kill civilians, they deny it. They are actively trying to win hearts and minds."

I have great respect, generally, for Richard Engel. I don't recall watching his report "Tip Of The Spear" but shall shortly.

That said, THERE are bodies from time to time in the streets of Kabul. More importantly, Afghans-like ISAF/America, are dying in greater numbers than ever before. Much of that is a function of the methods employed by the taliban to make war- primarily IEDs. Both reports that I've provided indicate the nature of those attacks upon civilians- 1.) targeted (self explanatory), 2.) Indiscriminate (any target in the kill-zone at the time of initiation) and 3.) Disproportionate (small ISAF target with a high likelihood of large collateral casualties as a byproduct).

"...A continuing trend seen through 2008 and into the first six months of 2009 is that AGE tactics have shifted, from frontal or ambush attacks on PGF, to insurgent or guerrilla type activities, including asymmetric attacks such as IEDs, VBIEDs, BBIEDs, (that remain responsible for the largest number of civilian deaths), and targeted assassinations.

10. Between January and June 2009, 595 civilian deaths were attributed to AGE activities; 400 of those deaths were the result of indiscriminate IED and suicide attacks. This represents 67% of all deaths attributable to AGEs, or 39.5% of the total 1013 civilians killed in the first half of 2009. AGE operations are frequently undertaken regardless of the impact on civilians in terms of deaths and injuries or destruction of civilian infrastructure. Based on investigation of specific incidents conducted by UNAMA Human Rights, information suggests that AGEs are basing themselves in civilian areas so as to deliberately blur the distinction between combatants and civilians..."
UNAMA Mid-Year Assessment July, 2009

Denial? Sure, why not? Who wishes to posture themselves as willing murderers of their brother and sister afghans? Do the TTP do so any longer with non-military attacks like Peshawar? No. It doesn't pay in the information war.

I don't know if Engel's experiences account for the UNAMA report or if it has and he's discounted it against his own perspectives. You'd have to ask him but the numbers posted by UNAMA speak loudest in terms of consistently and daily tracking such data and can't be discounted either.

We can leave. Many here wish we would. I WISH we would but I do so recognizing that the afghan taliban have no intent in engaging in any participatory politics. It's not a part of their ideology and they've made that clear. So the outcome of our departure doesn't indicate that power-sharing negotiations shall finally begin in earnest. They indicate the opposite-talking and fighting until combat, not negotiations, asserts its will.

THERE will be civil war again under that scenario-as sure as the sun rises in the east. My money is on the taliban to emerge the winner. The afghan people will again lose. They will adjust as they did before. That should make most Pakistanis happy finally.

What happens after all of that is anybody's guess but I suspect that matters will assert themselves quickly in the aforementioned situation and the aftermath will soon emerge.

I don't think too many people anywhere will be smiling then, least of all afghans and Pakistanis. JMHO, of course.

Thanks.

 

[Ahmad]

Taliban have their own government in 20 of the 34 provinces.

give me the name of those provinces which they have their own government.

 

[RameeX Xaved]

I cant believe Pakistanese here are so influenced by what BBC and CNN says. Who can have any complains from Americans or Indians anyway?
You guys expect us to believe a nation which is responsible for millions and millions of bloodshed in heroshima, nagasaki, veitnam, iraq, afghanistan, pakistan and the list will caryy on..
It was the same CNN and BBC who confirmed 'weapons of mass destruction' in iraq which resulted in hundreds of thousands of dead bodies by US hands and its the same CNN and BBC who claimed WTC were carried from Afghanistan. Do you think we are fools to believe their illoigcal theories to invade and conquer muslim countries?
With all my respect to my fellow Pakistanese, tell me what would you do if America or India or Israel invades Pakistan like it did with Afghanistan? wont you turn up against those invaders who have captured your house by force? doesnt Islam teach us self defence? What wrong are Talibans in Afghanistan doing if their house is captured by invaders like NATO and US? they are doing just what every nation would do.. But western media spreads rubbish about them and organistaions like TTP who work under US umbrella along Paf-Afghan border, funded by India are being potrayed as talibans which is NOT the reality. Afghan talibans have denied their association with them aswell..what more proof do you want to differentiate between the good and evil?
and you people talk about Afghan killings in Kabul, well mate, ever heard about collatral damage? US drones have killed more than 700 civilians with only 11 terrorists, so why dont you wage war against US army?

 

[Ahmad]

What wrong are Talibans in Afghanistan doing if their house is captured by invaders like NATO and US?

they havent done anything wrong, except they are the puppet of another foreign country other than the USA, and they are killing more innocent afghans than the americans.

 

[RameeX Xaved]

they havent done anything wrong, except they are the puppet of another foreign country other than the USA, and they are killing more innocent afghans than the americans.

have you got any statistics?
tell me how many afghanis were killed by afghan talibans before 9/11? the presence of US itself has brought immense chaos in both Pakistan and Afghanistan, there is no doubt in it. the hatred against US is extreme in both the countries, its their presence which results in suicide bombings hence they are responsible for it. talibans are wiping them out and it cant be done without collatrel and civilian casualties, just like the drones, ok?

 

[Ahmad]

have you got any statistics?
tell me how many afghanis were killed by afghan talibans before 9/11? the presence of US itself has brought immense chaos in both Pakistan and Afghanistan, there is no doubt in it. the hatred against US is extreme in both the countries, its their presence which results in suicide bombings hence they are responsible for it. talibans are wiping them out and it cant be done without collatrel and civilian casualties, just like the drones, ok?

let me answer your last part of the post first, they are not wiping out the americans, they are wiping out and masacaring the afghan people and to some extent pakistani people in pakistan. the statistics have been posted many times here and it shows that more than 60% of the civilians are killed directly by the taliiban. regarding 9/11 and before that, there were mass casualties and bloodshed in afghanistan and the taliban masacared alot of civilians, completely destroyed villages and cities. i dont say americans are good, but the taliban are worse than them.

 

[dabong1]

I didnt claim any specific number so it will be unfair to ask me to back it up. you claimed that specific number and here i am asking you to provide a back up for it, if you cant then where did you get the number from. all i can do is to give you the list of afghan provices with or against the taliban.

People of afghanistan do not support them, who says that they have got place in afghanistan?

Well it seems from the above post that you know for a fact that the people of afghanistan do not support the taliban......how did you come to that conclusion....can you back up your claim or is it your own opinion based.

 

[Ahmad]

Well it seems from the above post that you know for a fact that the people of afghanistan do not support the taliban......how did you come to that conclusion....can you back up your claim or is it your own opinion based.

I didnt give any specific number and dont ask me the question. i am asking you again, how did you give that number(70%)? where did you get that from? it is fine by me if you can not answer it, just admit. i can give you explanation on every provice and tell you how much or zero support the taliban have.

 

[dabong1]

I didnt give any specific number and dont ask me the question. i am asking you again, how did you give that number(70&#37? where did you get that from?

When did i say 70% of the afghans supported the taliban?........you are the one that said that majority do not support taliban and i asked where you got the info from.
If the taliban did not have the support of the people how is it that each year goes on they get stronger and stronger.

it is fine by me if you can not answer it, just admit.

I think it would be better if you could give me the link to my post where i say 70% of the people support the taliban......and if you cant admit that you are wrong.

i can give you explanation on every provice and tell you how much or zero support the taliban have.

So with zero support the taliban are getting stronger and the US has offered provinces to them?

 

[Comet]

Some see the Afghan Taliban as waging a just fight against occupation in Afghanistan, however they see the Pakistani Taliban as trying to destroy the democratic system in Pakistan and enforce their ideology through force and murder.

My question is, to those that do support the Afghan Taliban and oppose the TTP, would you agree that if given the opportunity of a free and fair electoral process, the Afghan Taliban should participate in that process and let the people of Afghanistan decide whether they should have a chance to govern?

Whatever the reason for the Taliban insurgency in Afghanistan (occupation etc.) if the UN or any other impartial entity can ensure free and fair elections, the Taliban should cease hostilities and participate in the political process. I would assume that Pakistanis would want the Afghans to have the same options we do.

It is another matter that the US presence in Afghanistan complicates issues in terms of political participation by the Taliban and a cessation of hostilities due to lack of trust, but shouldn't the Taliban at least express their intention of laying down arms and participation in the political process given the option of free and fair elections and no/reduced US presence?

If they have not expressed such, what is the Afghan Taliban end goal for Afghanistan? Will they rule Afghanistan like the barbaric and medieval way the TTP ruled in Swat and Waziristan? Some may argue that the Afghans are a Tribal and extremely conservative society and the Taliban system is one that is not too far from the conservative Afghan culture, but if that is the case then the Afghans would choose the Taliban to govern them at the polls.

So while it is clear that some support the Afghan Taliban as fighting a just war against an occupation, what end goal for Afghanistan do you support? Are you willing to let the Taliban impose their dictatorship over Afghans, or, as in Pakistan, you support a political process in Afghanistan (not necessarily a Western style democracy) in which the Taliban can participate and the Afghans can make their own decisions on who shall govern them?

You are Bang on Target!

But, I think the number of choices are limited and one has to think in terms of "what is available" instead of "what is desired".

The two key players in Afghanistan are Taliban and Coalition Forces( Karzai etc fall in this category). And the two are so against each other that any king of adjustment between the two seems to be impossible.

 

[Ahmad]

When did i say 70% of the afghans supported the taliban?........you are the one that said that majority do not support taliban and i asked where you got the info from.
If the taliban did not have the support of the people how is it that each year goes on they get stronger and stronger.

sorry mate, i mixed somebody else's post with you, you didnt mention any number. Yes, majority dont support the taliban, as i told you before i can give you information from each province, based on how peaceful the province is and how much control of the gov there is. the taliban have support from the local people, but it is not in entire afghanistan, it is limited to a few provinces.


I think it would be better if you could give me the link to my post where i say 70% of the people support the taliban......and if you cant admit that you are wrong.

please accept my appology for the mistake.

So with zero support the taliban are getting stronger and the US has offered provinces to them?

Again, i never said zero support for them in all afghanistan, because they have some support in specific areas, but i was refering to provinces which they have no support at all.

 

[S-2]

"have you got any statistics?"

HERE are the mid-year statistics from UNAMA (United Nations Assistance Mission Afghanistan).

They were posted only one page back. Why didn't you read them before posting your rant? Read the thread so that you don't waste people's time and you might reply in proper context. Anything less is rude.

"talibans are wiping them out..."

Don't be a fool. America has lost less than 900 troops in Afghanistan. That's slightly more than 100 per year on average.

"...and it cant be done without collatrel and civilian casualties, just like the drones, ok?"

Really? How do you explain that they are wiping out afghans at a far higher rate than Americans? Or intentionally targeting afghan civilians who constitute no military value whatsoever? Just in the first six months of this year, the afghan taliban have killed over 591 afghan civilians. The taliban killed 376 afghans last year, also MORE than ISAF. In those two years they've managed to kill more afghans than they've killed Americans in EIGHT years.

You are intellectually lazy. The data is here for you had you not piled in with your preconceived notions and, instead, taken the time to read before posting such vacant nonsense.

"tell me how many afghanis were killed by afghan talibans before 9/11?"

Tell me who was around to count the dead? Let me ask you ONE question- would you be happy to have your mother and sister live under taliban rule?

If you have problems imagining such because you are a child, then look to SWAT last spring. Do you remember what it was like in SWAT before the Pakistani Army took it back? Your answer should tell us everything we need to know about you.

Thanks.

 

[Developereo]

THERE will be civil war again under that scenario-as sure as the sun rises in the east. My money is on the taliban to emerge the winner. The afghan people will again lose. They will adjust as they did before. That should make most Pakistanis happy finally.

I disagree with this part.

Pakistanis, people or government, have no wish to rule Afghanistan by proxy. The previous engagement in the 90s was to deny India that same capability. Pakistan supported the Taliban only as a counter to the pro-India Northern Alliance.

If the Afghans get their act together and form a government which is not a puppet of either India or Pakistan, most countries in the region, including Pakistan, would be happy with that. Sure there may be individuals in GOI or GOP who would miss the old days of proxy rule, but they would be in a minority.

 

[S-2]

"Pakistanis, people or government, have no wish to rule Afghanistan by proxy."

Maybe, but firefighter-a Pakistani Canadian (I believe), might not agree. I don't think his below expressed sentiment is a lonely one among Pakistanis, either globally or in Pakistan.

"I might add that Pakistan cannot afford to allow Indian stooges to represent Afghanistan, even if Afghans decide to vote them in..."

"If the Afghans get their act together and form a government which is not a puppet of either India or Pakistan, most countries in the region, including Pakistan, would be happy with that. Sure there may be individuals in GOI or GOP who would miss the old days of proxy rule, but they would be in a minority."

Most countries everywhere would be VERY happy with that. Nonetheless, there's a lot at play and requires a level of altruism and sophistication that we've not yet seen from Afghanistan's most prominent leaders...and this we need.

I'd be happy with a government that we could get most Indians, Pakistanis, and (most of all ) afghans to agree represents a healthy mix of all ethnicities and perspectives at all stratas of governance. Better still would be the hiring and firing of professionals within that government based upon abilities and demonstrated performance.

Best yet would be a broad range of candidates who were elected in the same manner. We'll have achieved our goals (IMV everywhere in the third world) when debates center on tangible platforms of fiscal, agricultural, manufacturing, export/import, and security policies without regard to ethnic, tribal, or religious inputs.

There will, hopefully, come a day when tajik and pashtu farmers have more in common interests than in differences of which neither can do anything about.

Somehow, for Afghanistan to survive and eventually thrive, both India and Pakistan will play roles-and healthily large ones at that. It will simply be that way by the choice of Afghans-as it should. Clearly, neither have found a way yet that accomodates the other. It is a zero-sum calculation with "winner take all", and that won't work. I don't know how we get there from here but it'll take all of us to figure it out.

Nice comments.