Afghan Taliban Less Reliant On Pakistan

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Afghan Taliban Less Reliant On Pakistan New Intel Suggests​

By Frank James

U.S. intelligence officials have apparently detected something in Afghanistan that goes against the conventional wisdom.

Many analysts have thought that the Taliban were using Pakistan as a safe haven, swinging across the border into Afghanistan to attack U.S. and NATO troops, then retreating across the border into Pakistan where Western troops can't follow them.

But intelligence officials, according to Reuters, are seeing something different. First, Afghanistan's homegrown Taliban have nearly quadrupled in the last three years. And they don't seem to be using Pakistan as a safe haven as much as was previously thought.

A Reuters excerpt:

WASHINGTON, Oct 9 (Reuters) - The White House has been presented intelligence estimating Taliban-led forces battling U.S. troops in Afghanistan have nearly quadrupled since 2006 and are increasingly independent of leaders in Pakistan, officials said on Friday.

A U.S. intelligence assessment, showing the number of fighters in the insurgency has reached an estimated 25,000 from 7,000 in 2006, spotlights Taliban gains and the tough choices facing President Barack Obama in trying to reverse the trend.

Some of Obama's advisers see a more concerted crackdown by Pakistan on militants on its side of the border as key to turning the tide in Afghanistan, but U.S. intelligence agencies see little correlation, citing the Afghan insurgency's autonomy and increasing home-grown sophistication, officials said...

...Searching for ways to improve U.S. fortunes, White House national security adviser James Jones has seized on the importance of Pakistan eliminating all militant "safe havens" on its territory. "If that happens, that's a strategic shift that will spill over into Afghanistan," he said.

But when U.S. intelligence analysts tested that assumption during Pakistan's recent crackdown in the Bajaur region near the Afghan border, they found no corresponding drop in militant infiltrations and attacks on U.S. forces across the border, a defense official said.

"It goes to the idea that Afghanistan is a very resilient and a very flexible insurgency. And by the very nature of insurgency, you do not need a lot of insurgents to inflict a lot of damage, because they are able to choose the time and the place to engage," the defense official said.

If U.S. intelligence officials are right about this, then here are a few reasons why it could matter.

It would make it harder for U.S. officials to pressure the Pakistani government to stop Taliban from crossing into Afghanistan from Pakistan. The Pakistanis have long said that the U.S. overstated the problem of the Afghan Taliban using Pakistan as a refuge.

Also, if the intelligence is right, it would increase the strength of the argument made by some administration officials that the U.S. should focus its efforts on hiving off the nominal Taliban from the hardcore ones, creating alliances between the soft Taliban and the Afghan government.

The intelligence is troubling however because the trend is clearly towards an Afghan Taliban that is growing rapidly. And its growth could accelerate if the insertion of more U.S. troops into the country that Obama is now considering among his options increases Afghan resentment over a growing U.S. occupation.

So in the end it could be just as challenging for the Obama Administration if it's true that the Taliban in Afghanistan is really more of an indigenous insurgency than was previously believed.

Afghan Taliban Less Reliant On Pakistan New Intel Suggests - The Two-Way - Breaking News, Analysis Blog : NPR

 

[fatman17]

funny none of our american and indian friends have commented on this post - reality does hurt !!!
anyway the afghan talibs have a US$ 100m / year income from the narco trade and strong connections to the afghan war-lords who are happy to sell them russian weapons which are plentiful in all of afghanistan.

 

[S-2]

Forgive me, sir, for failing to maintain full diligence and respond immediately to such information. I've been remiss or pointedly avoiding such out of sheer embarassment. Take your pick but I'm certain you mean me, foremost, by your comments so here I am.

It's fair to say that some make specific raids and retreat back into Pakistan. If so, I'd suggest that a 24 hour journey for such would limitt the insurgency along a very narrow strip of border running the length of Afghanistan.

I believe that this is so...

...however, I ALSO believe that only constitutes a small portion of the overall tactical operations being conducted.

For the most part, afghan insurgents are using in-country sanctuary that's been carved out over time-certainly since 2006 when the insurgency really has taken off.

Most fighters in Helmand, Kandahar, and the north east of Afghanistan are home-grown or refugees that have returned semi-permanently to their traditional home lands. As the insurgency has grown I believe that the taliban have added to their forces as much or more from within Afghanistan as from refugees and Pakistani sympathizers inside Pakistan.

Clearly, for operations being conducted, as example in provinces southwest and west of Kabul, one would need home sanctuary to operate lest these guerillas might face very long walks to and from the battlefield.

So, yes, no doubt the afghan insurgency is gaining traction within Afghanistan daily. Does that help you? The ABC/BBC/ARD poll so ignored here by so many indicates the growing frustration and dissatisfaction among afghans for their government and the ineffectual performance of ISAF/U.S forces to secure their livlihoods.

Still, FATMAN 17, I've just posted the Rohde article that you've somehow missed commenting upon. It makes clear that large tracts of Pakistan exist under Haqqani control for their operations in Afghanistan and that insurgent forces operating outside Kabul where Rohde was kidnapped have no problems moving back into Pakistan where, evidently, their relationships with the Haqqanis is comfortable. I suppose they do so only to transport kidnap victims?

Command and control exists from your lands. Financial, logistical, and medical support likely exists there too if it can't be found inside Afghanistan. Further, while the afghan insurgency increasingly finds domestic support among its own, that insurgency has had the external support of its leaders living on your lands since day 1.

Keep this war up successfully long enough and I suppose there might come a day when the afghan insurgency will have no need of external assistance. After all, isn't that the final objective? Therefore, as their success has grown, is it any surprise that increasingly it takes on an Afghan face?

I've noted nobody here admitting, yes, Haqqani is on OUR lands in Pakistan. Yes, we do know that both Gul Bahadur and Maulvi Nazir profess open sympathy with and a desire to support the afghan insurgency and, yes, it is quite likely that the Quetta shura exists in some form in Baluchistan to support the insurgency inside Kandahar and Helmand.

So if you wish to make the case that this is an afghan insurgency, utterly and totally, I'd disagree. However much it is moving in THAT direction, it doesn't yet absolve the evident ongoing complicity generated from your side of the border.

Finally, it was interesting to note that despite the Bajaur op and despite the movement of insurgents back into Pakistan to combat your forces during that op that combat didn't diminish on our side of the border. I'd presume that those who believe it did haven't watch closely the battles we've fought over the last year in Konar and Nuristan.

I can envision that if we leave the afghan insurgency will become a taliban victory in Afghanistan. Then it will be Pakistan that will face an insurgency that is externally directed-utterly and without question.

The last point, fatman sir- what is interesting most of all to me is the tribal areas are the source of all insurgencies, both Afghan and, increasingly, Pakistan.

JMHO, of course.

Thanks.

 

[S-2]

I had a good friend who spent 18 weeks with the mujahideen in Afghanistan between late 1984 and mid-1986 on three separate occasions.

Each journey into Afghanistan entailed trips of approx six weeks. Supplies and weaponry were secured prior to crossing the border. Water, food, and occasionally shelter was found among afghan villages along their ingress and egress routes while in Afghanistan.

The muj didn't shelter often in afghan villages at the time. They didn't wish to make matters worse for those villages as the Soviet approach differed dramatically from ours. Mujahideen were attacked with all the force the Soviets could muster, as a rule, WHEREVER they were found so leveling a village to kill 15-30 mujahideen didn't really affect the Soviet calculus.

Still, parties were sent into villages to obtain food on a regular basis. When immediate medical support was necessary casualties would be either transported to a village or a doctor would be brought from such. He eventually found himself operating just outside the eastern outskirts of Kabul where plenty of local assistance was available.

Nonetheless, these groups returned on a regular basis. In so doing they'd pass other groups heading to the war.

I personally don't think matters have changed too dramatically with one exception- increasingly I fear that we've supplied the ANA with weaponry of which much has eventually ended up with the taliban. That will be a continuing source of weapons until young ANA soldiers believe that they've more to fight for against the insurgency than with it.

To date, I don't see that happening.

Karzai's abdication to new elections is, possibly, the first HINT of hope in some time as it finally acknowledges that he has zero leverage without addressing his issues of corruption and malgovernance. This insurgency and the consequent erosion of ISAF/U.S. support is a direct function of that corruption.

It is NOT a direct function of an intense desire among afghans to see the taliban to victory. 27,000 fighters is an extremely modest overall percentage of afghan males of fighting age. Further, support for the taliban has not grown even as support for the Americans and ISAF has diminished.

These souls are simply, IMV, making the hard choices of survival. I believe that were there to be a pathway to better governance and less corruption, the taliban would find that their internal support would erode like sand under their feet.

Thanks.

 

[Patriot]

I have no doubt Afghan National Clowns are selling their weapons to highest bidder.

 

[kidwaibhai]

what ever the situation in Afghanistan is we should clean up our own house and get rid of the militants as soon as possible.

 

[S-2]

"I have no doubt Afghan National Clowns are selling their weapons to highest bidder."

They aren't the only "Clowns" engaged in corruption. Nor is it restricted to Afghanistan.

Tossing bricks from a glass house seems a preoccupation here among some.

 

[H2O3C4Nitrogen]

I can envision that if we leave the afghan insurgency will become a taliban victory in Afghanistan. Then it will be Pakistan that will face an insurgency that is externally directed-utterly and without question.

That is the fear many strategists in our establishment are predicting . Virtually If the Americans leave the country Everything should go to normal . But the Confidance which the taliban would atttaine from such a scenario might change their thoughts .
Infact these talibans have been hijacked by some Anti American forces which would certinly not hesitate to target more of the US interests both in the reagion as well as throughout the Globe .
However theres a sloution that inorder to get away from this Wrath ISAF could Establish a Muslim Peace Keeping Force comprising of Forces From Saudia Arabia and other allied MiddleEastren Counteries and Pakistan with some of their own limited prsence .
Further one could engage the Good Talibans(Acceptable to WEST) for a dialogue which can be involved in the power sharing in Government and other Afghan Institutions .
One Last thing is if you guys leave Afghanistan then who Exactly would direct these Talibans against the state of Pakistan ? I want the name from you ...