‘Taliban’s participation necessary for peace’

[EagleEyes]

‘Taliban’s participation necessary for peace’

* Former Afghan president says Karzai govt should include all parties in peace process
* Foreign forces adding to people’s problems

By Zakir Hassnain

PESHAWAR: Peace cannot be restored in the war-ravaged Afghanistan unless the Karzai government includes the Taliban in the peace process and in the government, former Afghan president Prof Burhanuddin Rabbani told Daily Times on Sunday after a seminar on improvement of bilateral relations between Pakistan and Afghanistan. The seminar was arranged by the Forum for Area Studies and Information Centre (FASIC), a private non-profit organisation.

“Besides the Taliban, the government should also include other anti-government factions in the ongoing peace dialogue,” he said, adding that the Afghan war would continue if the Taliban were not made part of the peace negotiations and included in the government. He said efforts to include the Taliban in the peace dialogue were continuing as they could play an important role in the ongoing peace negotiations and that the government would soon contact the Taliban.

“The recently held Loya Jirga is a good step and it is necessary to continue it,” he said, hoping that the Jirga would produce good results. The former president said the foreign forces were adding to the problems of the Afghan people. “War is not a solution to problems,” he said.

Rabbani said Pakistan and Afghanistan had close religious ties and ‘some elements’ had been trying to damage these relations. “Whatever happens in Afghanistan, it has a direct impact on Pakistan,” he said, adding that durable peace in Afghanistan is a necessity for the region. Rabbani said the war in the name of terrorism was a conspiracy against Muslims. “We have to unite and work against it,” he added.

Speaking at the seminar, former director general of Inter Services Intelligence (ISI) Lt Gen (r) Asad Durrani said there was no need to raise the Durand Line issue at this moment as it had already been recognised by the two countries.

He said both the Pakistan and Afghanistan governments did not coordinate enough in the aftermath of 9/11 and mainly focused on saving their own countries.

He said some ‘unwise people’ talked of fencing the Pak-Afghan border but these people were ignorant about people living on both sides of the border. He said the same people claimed nine Indian consulates were operating in Afghanistan’s border areas but that was not true. India had only two consulates in these areas, he added.

The former ISI chief said the Loya Jirga had its own importance and was making efforts for peace and stability in the area, but both the governments should strengthen bilateral ties on their part to resolve the existing issues among them.

He urged both the governments to stop military operations against their people and said that the Pakistan Army did not want to fight against their own countrymen. The former Afghan president said the international forces were pursuing their own interests in Afghanistan, instead of solving its problems. He said Islam opposes terrorism. Dr Masooda Jalal, former Afghan presidential candidate, said Pakistan and Afghanistan were two brotherly countries sharing the same religion and culture. She said Pakistan was playing a great role in the reconstruction and rehabilitation of Afghanistan.

Ahmed Shah Ahmedzai, an Afghan warlord, quoted a verse from the holy Quran as saying that “Jews and Christians could not be friends of Muslims”. Ahmedzai said the US was an enemy of the Islamic world and warned the US to stop creating problems for Muslims in the name of Al Qaeda or Taliban. He urged the people of both countries to compel their governments to work for peace and stability in the region.

He demanded the inclusion of the Taliban and other opponents in the peace process, saying that without them peace could not be established in Afghanistan. He said no system except Islam could be enforced in Afghanistan. Former ambassador to Afghanistan Rustum Shah Mohmand underlined the need for people-to-people contact, trade, exchange of students and investment between the two countries.

Former FATA secretary Brig (r) Mehmud Shah opposed the military operation in the tribal areas, saying that there was no justification for continued military operations in FATA. He said the political administration in the tribal agencies be strengthened to withdraw the army. “The Frontier Corps is enough for the tribal areas,” he added.

Daily Times - Leading News Resource of Pakistan

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

These people who talk about the "participation of the Taliban", should perhaps initiate contacts with the Taliban leadership to declare a ceasefire and come to an agreement to join the political process and work for change peacefully. We all know that these words of "inclusiveness and participation of all concerned parties" have been rendered hollow and meaningless in the light of recent Taliban activities against the civilian population - Bombings and threats of bombings against barbershops, video stores, market places where women are seen shopping, buses that play music - This is how they are treating innocent civilians that belong to their own tribes - their own people!

How can these people talk about "engaging the Taliban" with a straight face? The masses, and some twisted intellectuals and public figures, continue to harp about Israeli oppression, the U.S occupation (And pretty soon Harry Potter and his "blasphemous" wizardry) - anything but our own acquiescence of these extremists in the name of "Al Islam" and "Al Jihad".

We wail about "Mussalman mussalman ko maar raha hai" when the government acts against these obscurantists, conveniently looking the other way when a child or other innocent is murdered in a bomb blast - where are the cries against the injustice of "Muslim killing Muslim" then? Our religious leaders refuse to explicitly declare our solders killed while battling those who would kill innocents as "martyrs". As a society we have handicapped our government, we have chained and demoralized the defenders of our freedom, and emboldened the forces of darkness and intolerance.

 

[roadrunner]

These people who talk about the "participation of the Taliban", should perhaps initiate contacts with the Taliban leadership to declare a ceasefire and come to an agreement to join the political process and work for change peacefully. We all know that these words of "inclusiveness and participation of all concerned parties" have been rendered hollow and meaningless in the light of recent Taliban activities against the civilian population - Bombings and threats of bombings against barbershops, video stores, market places where women are seen shopping, buses that play music - This is how they are treating innocent civilians that belong to their own tribes - their own people!

How can these people talk about "engaging the Taliban" with a straight face? The masses, and some twisted intellectuals and public figures, continue to harp about Israeli oppression, the U.S occupation (And pretty soon Harry Potter and his "blasphemous" wizardry) - anything but our own acquiescence of these extremists in the name of "Al Islam" and "Al Jihad".

We wail about "Mussalman mussalman ko maar raha hai" when the government acts against these obscurantists, conveniently looking the other way when a child or other innocent is murdered in a bomb blast - where are the cries against the injustice of "Muslim killing Muslim" then? Our religious leaders refuse to explicitly declare our solders killed while battling those who would kill innocents as "martyrs". As a society we have handicapped our government, we have chained and demoralized the defenders of our freedom, and emboldened the forces of darkness and intolerance.

My opinion is I agree with him (even though Rabbani is just as much a genocidal maniac as any Taliban)..it would be the only way to put an end to it. I do agree with you about the suicide bombings killing innocent people - but this isn't much different to any war where "collateral damage" is the politically correct term for public consumption. The suicide bombings are a foreigner influence on the Taliban, during the Soviet Afghan war there weren't so many apparently.

I think the differnence in the Afghan mindset here is that they see the coalition as an occupation forces, foreigners if you like. They see the Taliban as one of them, fighting against an occupation force. In this instance, their trust would lie more with their own people, than with the occupation force. When some Taliban kills some civilians, their trust is more that they were acting against the occupiers, than against the civilians, whereas when a coalition troop kills an Afghan, they don't give them the benefit of the doubt. I don't really blame them in some ways, it's a difficult situation to be in. The Northern Alliance are just another group of assholes like the Taliban, only difference, Northern Alliance have sided with an occupation force. Perhaps the locals put more trust in the Taliban for this reason alone. It's a difficult situation, I can't really say I like any of the characters in the Afghan conflict bar the civilians. The government, Taliban, militias, anti Taliban, all the same.

When you say the government has been handicapped by the people, that's true. I can't believe Bhutto is even considering going back to Pakistan, after what she did, nor NS. Whereas, Mush, the guy who's made Pakistan into a forward looking country today, is being told to get out of power, by a reasonably large minority imo! There's foolishness if ever I saw it.

 

[dabong1]

These people who talk about the "participation of the Taliban", should perhaps initiate contacts with the Taliban leadership to declare a ceasefire and come to an agreement to join the political process and work for change peacefully. We all know that these words of "inclusiveness and participation of all concerned parties" have been rendered hollow and meaningless in the light of recent Taliban activities against the civilian population - Bombings and threats of bombings against barbershops, video stores, market places where women are seen shopping, buses that play music - This is how they are treating innocent civilians that belong to their own tribes - their own people!

How can these people talk about "engaging the Taliban" with a straight face? The masses, and some twisted intellectuals and public figures, continue to harp about Israeli oppression, the U.S occupation (And pretty soon Harry Potter and his "blasphemous" wizardry) - anything but our own acquiescence of these extremists in the name of "Al Islam" and "Al Jihad".

We wail about "Mussalman mussalman ko maar raha hai" when the government acts against these obscurantists, conveniently looking the other way when a child or other innocent is murdered in a bomb blast - where are the cries against the injustice of "Muslim killing Muslim" then? Our religious leaders refuse to explicitly declare our solders killed while battling those who would kill innocents as "martyrs". As a society we have handicapped our government, we have chained and demoralized the defenders of our freedom, and emboldened the forces of darkness and intolerance.

As normal quoting anti taliban propaganda you have read in the western media,have you for one moment compared the amount of civilians killed by NATO/US bombing to the ones the taliban have killed ?
Go check the stats and then tell us who us who is killing innocent civilians.
It is people like you that "emboldened the forces of darkness and intolerance" with your acceptance of western/NATO ruling a muslim country.
The taliban are true freedom fighters that are on a jihad for peace

 

[roadrunner]

The taliban are true freedom fighters that are on a jihad for peace

The Taliban rule was an extremist rule. They're not fit to rule Afghanistan..Neither are the Northern Alliance Tajiks, Uzbeks, Hazaras. A non radically minded, educated leader, like the old King, would be fit ti rule a multi ethnic country. Karzai is too weak and doesn't realize he's nothing more than a puppet. But Taliban participating in a part Shia, part Northern Alliance government would be about right. If it's done correctly, it could work though i wouldnt be too optimistic.

 

[dabong1]

The Taliban rule was an extremist rule. They're not fit to rule Afghanistan..Neither are the Northern Alliance Tajiks, Uzbeks, Hazaras. A non radically minded, educated leader, like the old King, would be fit ti rule a multi ethnic country. Karzai is too weak and doesn't realize he's nothing more than a puppet. But Taliban participating in a part Shia, part Northern Alliance government would be about right. If it's done correctly, it could work though i wouldnt be too optimistic.

I would like to point out that the taliban when it was in power had Tajiks, Uzbeks, Hazaras and shia commanders.
Extreme condtions require extreme measures,that is what the taliban did.... brought law and order to the country.
Without the taliban in power just look at the amount of hassle pakistan is going through.It is in our national intrest to reinstall the taliban back into power.

 

[su-47]

The taliban were oppressive and backward. Afghan govt is not able to do much today bcoz taliban is fighting them.

If the taliban truly care about afghanistan, then they would stop the war and co-operate with the govt

 

[roadrunner]

I would like to point out that the taliban when it was in power had Tajiks, Uzbeks, Hazaras and shia commanders.
Extreme condtions require extreme measures,that is what the taliban did.... brought law and order to the country.
Without the taliban in power just look at the amount of hassle pakistan is going through.It is in our national intrest to reinstall the taliban back into power.

No, it was in the national interest of Pakistan to have the Taliban in power. The national interest has changed, another Pashtun movement is needed, not one as rigid as the Taliban.

There were Uzbeks and Tajiks in the Taliban, that bit is correct. But there were never Hazara and Shi'ite commanders AFAIK. Name some Shi'ite commanders of the Taliban if you can. That's not to say the Shi'ites are not responsible for some of the most radicalized genocidal bloodshed in Afghanistan, but they were not Taliban commanders.

 

[roadrunner]

The taliban were oppressive and backward. Afghan govt is not able to do much today bcoz taliban is fighting them.

If the taliban truly care about afghanistan, then they would stop the war and co-operate with the govt

The Taliban would argue that the government is a foreign stooge. And they have a point. The Americans usually cooperate and give something back to the country they occupy after taking some resources. That's bearable. Indian interference is quite another. Any government in the region that sides with India is taking their people for a ride because the Indian government won't give anything back to the people if it can help it..you only have to look at the state of half of its population to know this.

One could argue that the Taliban were Pakistan's stooges..they have a point. Bring back the monarchy, I would say a Pashtun monarch, since it's a majority Pashtun country. I wouldnt give the minorities this much power - has it ever happened in the West, a black man heading the state?

Also don't talk about Afghanistan like you know it, when you havent got a clue. The Taliban were backward, and uneducated, as are most of the warlords, the Tajiks, the Northern Alliance, everyone. The whole of Afghanistan is the same, not just the Taliban.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

My opinion is I agree with him (even though Rabbani is just as much a genocidal maniac as any Taliban)..it would be the only way to put an end to it. I do agree with you about the suicide bombings killing innocent people - but this isn't much different to any war where "collateral damage" is the politically correct term for public consumption. The suicide bombings are a foreigner influence on the Taliban, during the Soviet Afghan war there weren't so many apparently.

I think the differnence in the Afghan mindset here is that they see the coalition as an occupation forces, foreigners if you like. They see the Taliban as one of them, fighting against an occupation force. In this instance, their trust would lie more with their own people, than with the occupation force. When some Taliban kills some civilians, their trust is more that they were acting against the occupiers, than against the civilians, whereas when a coalition troop kills an Afghan, they don't give them the benefit of the doubt. I don't really blame them in some ways, it's a difficult situation to be in. The Northern Alliance are just another group of assholes like the Taliban, only difference, Northern Alliance have sided with an occupation force. Perhaps the locals put more trust in the Taliban for this reason alone. It's a difficult situation, I can't really say I like any of the characters in the Afghan conflict bar the civilians. The government, Taliban, militias, anti Taliban, all the same.

When you say the government has been handicapped by the people, that's true. I can't believe Bhutto is even considering going back to Pakistan, after what she did, nor NS. Whereas, Mush, the guy who's made Pakistan into a forward looking country today, is being told to get out of power, by a reasonably large minority imo! There's foolishness if ever I saw it.

I was venting my frustration in that post. The rational part of me agrees with your opinion that the possibility of dialog should always be left open for the Taliban. In the long run peace will only be sustainable when the ideology of every party is allowed to be expressed, but in a peaceful manner that allows every individual to adopt or reject, without fear of repercussion, whatever they see fit. But dialog cannot be held while they bomb and maim both civilians and the Pakistan military.

As normal quoting anti taliban propaganda you have read in the western media,have you for one moment compared the amount of civilians killed by NATO/US bombing to the ones the taliban have killed ?
Go check the stats and then tell us who us who is killing innocent civilians.
It is people like you that "emboldened the forces of darkness and intolerance" with your acceptance of western/NATO ruling a muslim country.
The taliban are true freedom fighters that are on a jihad for peace

Actually everything I attributed to the Taliban has been reported in Pakistani Newspapers, but you probably skip those parts since they cannot possibly fit in with your "Western Propoganda" conspiracy theories.

Taliban vigilantes on the prowl in Swat: Public transporters asked to stop music

Staff Report

MINGORA: Public transporters in Swat district on Saturday received threatening letters by unidentified people, believed to be Taliban militants, asking them to remove “obscene” photographs and stop playing music in their vehicles or their vehicles would be blown up.

The threatening pamphlets were delivered at the Matta Bus Stand here and the short warning for the transporters stated: “Stop playing music and remove obscene photos from your vehicles or face bomb attacks.” Unidentified militants on Wednesday blew up six music shops in Ishaq Market and partially damaged 20 nearby shops and three houses after distribution of threatening letters in the area warning the shop owners to stop the “un-Islamic” business.

Non-government organisations (NGOs) have already shut their offices in the region after receiving threatening letters, while representatives of pharmaceutical companies have stopped wearing trousers in the Swat Valley after the militants warned them to wear local dresses.

Barbers have displayed big posters in front of their shops stating, “Un-Islamic activities like shaving and western hair fashion are forbidden.” Unidentified militants had warned the barbers a few weeks ago to stop shaving customers otherwise their shops would be bombed.

Meanwhile, unidentified people have also distributed letters in Khawaza Khela Bazaar in Swat warning women not to shop in the market because it was against Pashtun and Islamic norms. The letter said that the bazaar was located near a shrine and business activity by men and women would amount to its desecration. They warned that the bazaar would be bombed if women were not stopped from coming there.

Daily Times - Leading News Resource of Pakistan

 

[alamgir]

i see this article may be helpfull for our ultra moderate members

US war crime in Afghanistan: Hundreds of prisoners of war slaughtered at Mazar-i-Sharif
By the Editorial Board
27 November 2001


The killing of as many as 800 captured Taliban prisoners Sunday in Mazar-i-Sharif is a war crime for which the American government and military, right up to Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and President Bush, are politically responsible. This massacre reveals the real nature of the US attack on Afghanistan. The terrorist attacks of September 11 are but a pretext for a colonial-style war of pillage and mass murder.

In both the savage methods used, and the lies employed to cover up the crime, the butchery at the Qala-i-Janghi fortress recalls the atrocities of the Vietnam War period: the My Lai massacre, the murder of 20,000 Vietnamese in the Phoenix assassination program, the saturation bombing and aerial defoliation with chemical poisons like Agent Orange, the obliteration of the town of Ben Suc, where an American officer declared it was necessary “to destroy the village in order to save it.”

According to both press and US government accounts, US Special Forces and CIA personnel were on the spot in Mazar-i-Sharif, calling in air strikes by helicopter gunships and fighter-bombers and directing the actions of Northern Alliance soldiers as they shot down hundreds of prisoners. German television broadcast footage of Northern Alliance soldiers shooting down from the walls of the fortress-prison into a mass of prisoners below.

Most of those killed, however, were annihilated by US air strikes. Warplanes dropped bombs on the fort and AC-130 helicopter gunships, which can fire 1,800 rounds a minute, were called in by Special Forces spotters in the fortress. Tanks and 2,000 Northern Alliance ground troops were also brought in to complete the destructive work. Throughout the one-sided battle, according to Time journalist Alex Perry, who was on the scene, the 40 or so American Special Forces and British SAS operatives were “running the show,” directing both the air and ground operations.

The barbarous character of the repression was calculated, as indicated by the comments of Northern Alliance spokesmen on Monday. “They were all killed and very few arrested,” said Zaher Wahadat, who confirmed that as many as 800 may have died. Alim Razim, an adviser to Gen. Rashid Dostum, the regional warlord, said that any prisoners still alive wouldn’t be alive for long. “Those who are left over will be dead,” he said. “None of them can escape.”

Northern Alliance and Pentagon officials claimed that the Taliban prisoners had smuggled weapons into the prison under their tunics, then opened fire on the guards and sought to make their escape. But journalists inside the prison at the time said that the prisoners had begun the rebellion by overpowering several guards and seizing their weapons.

It is not even clear that any organized rebellion actually took place. As the British newspaper the Guardian observed, “‘Shot while trying to escape’ is, after all, one of the oldest fibs in the book.” Northern Alliance troops may simply have opened fire on the prisoners, provoking a revolt in self-defense.

The anti-Taliban grouping has a long record of human rights violations, especially at Mazar-i-Sharif, the scene of massacres by both sides during the decade-long civil war in Afghanistan. The International Committee of the Red Cross reported last week that it had found 400 to 600 bodies in Mazar-i-Sharif, apparent victims of summary execution after the Northern Alliance captured the city on November 9.

By Alex Perry’s account, the revolt began when the prisoners, Islamic fundamentalists from Pakistan, Chechnya and various Arab countries, encountered a journalist who began to question them. “Actually, I think it was probably the British journalist,” he wrote on Time’s web site. “It’s merely the sight of a Western face. They’re here to fight a jihad; they see a Western face; they assume that’s who they’ve come to get.”

The prisoners had ample reason to react to the presence of Western personnel in the prison. American CIA interrogators were in the facility to sort out the prisoners, separating from the rank-and-file Taliban volunteers the alleged Al Qaeda leaders, who would be subjected to more intensive interrogation, i.e., torture, followed by execution.

The Taliban prisoners unexpectedly surrendered Sunday in the besieged city of Kunduz. They gave themselves up to General Dostum, whose Uzbek-based force was approaching Kunduz from the west, rather than to General Khan Daoud, the head of the largely Tajik force attacking from the east, possibly because Dostum gave them assurances that they would be repatriated to Pakistan.

There were press reports over the weekend that Dostum had made such a deal, and he was denounced by rival Northern Alliance commanders who wanted the so-called “foreign Taliban” to be placed on trial in Islamic courts or killed on the spot. It is quite likely that the appearance of the Americans at Qala-i-Janghi was the first indication to the Taliban prisoners that they had been double-crossed, and they reacted accordingly.


A massacre on Rumsfeld’s orders

If the exact chain of events that led up to the slaughter at Qala-i-Janghi is still uncertain, the moral and political responsibility for the bloodbath is not. In the days leading up to the massacre, officials of the UN and humanitarian organizations were warning of an impending bloodbath. US officials, on the contrary, made it clear that they wanted as many of the foreign Taliban killed as possible. Their repeated public statements were undoubtedly accompanied by even more bloodthirsty private directives to the Northern Alliance leaders, who hardly needed any encouragement.

There is far stronger evidence that the US government ordered the massacre at Mazar-i-Sharif than any proof that has been produced to substantiate the charge that Osama bin Laden ordered the September 11 terrorist attacks on New York and Washington. The chronology is as follows:

November 19: Northern Alliance General Khan Daoud suggested that he would be willing to grant foreign Taliban fighters safe passage out of Afghanistan if they would surrender Kunduz, and was negotiating with the Taliban on this proposal.

November 20: US Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld vetoed this proposal, declaring, “It would be most unfortunate if the foreigners in Afghanistan—the Al Qaeda and the Chechens and others who have been there working with the Taliban—if those folks were set free and in any way allowed to go to another country and cause the same kind of terrorist acts.” Rumsfeld was repeatedly quoted in subsequent days to the effect that all foreign Taliban should be killed or imprisoned.

November 20: The official spokesman for the US and British forces attacking Afghanistan, Kenton Keith, said the US opposed any negotiated settlement at Kunduz, declaring, “As far as we’re concerned, the only option is surrender.” In a thinly disguised justification for the coming massacre, he claimed, “The coalition has used its best persuasive effort to urge upon the commanders of the Northern Alliance restraint and proper treatment of prisoners,” but, he added, “We are not in a position to guarantee anything.”

November 21: Rumsfeld, in an interview with the CBS program “60 Minutes II,” said he would prefer that Osama bin Laden be killed rather than taken alive. “You bet your life,” he said.

November 22: Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf met with British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw in Islamabad, calling for UN intervention to avert a bloodbath. Straw and UN officials issued verbal appeals for both sides to observe “the laws of war”, which include the prohibition against killing of prisoners.

November 23: The New York Times cited statements by “a senior Pentagon official” opposing any release of captured foreign Taliban fighters. “What we care about is that Al Qaeda and Taliban are not capable of continuing to do what they’ve been doing,” the official said.

November 23: The Washington Post reported widespread concern in the Middle Eastern press that Rumsfeld’s comments amounted to “a ‘green light’ from the United States to kill so-called Afghan Arabs.” One commentator wrote that the Northern Alliance was being “encouraged and incited by the Americans” to wreak vengeance on captured Taliban prisoners.

November 24: The Times cited statements by “an American official” that the US Central Command wanted to interrogate non-Afghans taken prisoner at Kunduz and other locations, to gather intelligence on Al Qaeda. “It’s safe to say that CentCom is involved in a lot of aspects, including what they might do if scores of prisoners come out,” said the official, referring to the Central Command. “But we’re looking for as limited a role as possible, with as much access to the prisoners as we can.” This last report indicates that top US military officers were closely monitoring the treatment of the Taliban prisoners. The events in Mazar-i-Sharif did not take them unawares.


The role of the media

The response by the American government and media to Sunday’s bloodbath in Afghanistan has been brazen lying and defense of mass murder in a manner that recalls the worst crimes of Nazism.

US military spokesman Kenton Keith denied Monday that Alliance troops had carried out a massacre, saying the “status” of the prisoners as POWs covered by the Geneva Convention had changed once they “engaged in offensive action” (i.e., once they resisted their own execution).

While press reports have described the beating to death of Taliban prisoners in Kunduz, in addition to the Qala-i-Janghi slaughter, Keith claimed that Northern Alliance troops “have been behaving with restraint. We do not know of any atrocities as part of any widespread pattern.”

This version of events has gone virtually unchallenged in the American press. At Bush’s latest press conference, on Monday morning, the day after the slaughter, there was not a single question on the prison massacre. At Rumsfeld’s press conference later the same day, the question came up only tangentially, and no reporter pursued the issue.

One expression of the cynicism in the American press came four days before the massacre, when the Washington Post published a lengthy front-page review of the military situation. The Post likened American actions in Afghanistan to the US role in the civil war in El Salvador in the 1980s, when “US Special Forces advisers worked with local forces on the ground to hunt down and kill Marxist guerrillas.”

The comparison of Afghanistan to El Salvador, made with evident approval, is perhaps unintentionally instructive, confirming that the US intervention in Central Asia has nothing to do with defending “human rights” and little to do with fighting terrorism. The US counterinsurgency campaign in El Salvador was one of the great crimes of the 20th century. At least 50,000 people were murdered by US-backed death squads. Among the best known victims of these fascist terrorists were the Catholic Archbishop of San Salvador, Oscar Romero, and four American Maryknoll nuns.

As for the New York Times, its own report on the Mazar-i-Sharif killings not only suggested that the Taliban victims were to blame for their own deaths, but justified future massacres in advance. The Times wrote: “The incident seems certain to deepen the distrust the Northern Alliance feels as it takes control of hundreds, and potentially thousands, of Taliban soldiers.”

The American media functions as a direct and willing instrument of the government’s campaign of military aggression and political provocation. The television networks and daily newspapers are prepared to cover up and justify any crime committed by US forces anywhere in the world.


Who are the terrorists?Outside the United States, even some leading establishment newspapers have been compelled to take note of the bloodstained character of the American intervention in Afghanistan. The British-based Guardian published a column November 26 by Brian Whitaker that raised the question of whether Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld was guilty of war crimes.

Whitaker compared the slaughter of Afghan prisoners to another imperialist atrocity, the massacre of Palestinian refugees at the Sabra and Shatila camps in September 1982, when Lebanese fascist militia entered the camps under the protection of Israeli forces and murdered more than 1,000 men, women and children.

Whitaker wrote: “The link between Sabra/Shatila and many of the killings in Afghanistan is that both are examples of ‘green light’ warfare, where the main protagonists try to escape responsibility by allowing surrogates to do the unspeakable (and politically unacceptable) dirty work while providing discreet encouragement and assistance.”

Ariel Sharon, Israeli defense minister at the time of Sabra and Shatila, was the subject of a parliamentary inquiry and ultimately forced to resign. Several European countries have sought to bring war crimes charges against Sharon, now Israeli Prime Minister, over the 1982 events.

Whitaker writes: “Whether the American defence secretary, Donald Rumsfeld, will face a similar inquiry remains to be seen, but his recent statements have given the green light for a killing spree. Of the non-Afghan fighters in Afghanistan, he said: ‘My hope is that they will either be killed or taken prisoner.’ It does not appear to matter which.”

Even while using stooge UN tribunals to prosecute particular enemies like former Yugoslav President Milosevic, the US government has intransigently opposed the establishment an International Criminal Court with jurisdiction over war crimes committed by the government officials of any nation. This is not simply the defense of US sovereignty as a point of abstract doctrine. The top officials of the US government are engaged, day by day, in planning, authorizing and executing actions which, by any objective standard, would put them in the dock as war criminals like Hitler, Göring and Goebbels.

The suicide hijackings that killed nearly 4,000 people at the World Trade Center and the Pentagon were a monstrous crime, although the US government has failed to provide any significant evidence of the direct responsibility of Osama bin Laden, let alone the Taliban regime. The September 11 attacks, however, in no way justify the crimes being committed by American imperialism against the people of Afghanistan, and the new crimes already being planned in the Pentagon and CIA against other nations in the Middle East, Central Asia and elsewhere.

After the events at Qala-i-Janghi, it is preposterous to claim that the American intervention in Afghanistan has as its purpose the defense of human rights, or the punishment of terrorists. The US government, with its vast military arsenal and ruthless determination to work its will by force, is the world’s biggest terrorist.

It is the responsibility of the working people, both internationally and within the United States, to build an independent political mass movement to put an end to the imperialist war machine and the profit system that it defends.

See Also:
Afghanistan: US sets stage for a massacre in Kunduz
[22 November 2001]
America's "killing hour": a revealing comment in the Wall Street Journal
[21 November 2001]
US planned war in Afghanistan long before September 11
[20 November 2001]

World Socialist Web Site

 

[roadrunner]

alamgir, i could show you references to thousands of reports where Taliban militias also did the same in the name of religion. Why take sides in this? Taliban were bad, Tajiks were bad (worse in my opinion), Uzbeks were bad, most of the leaders in Afghanistan in the last 20 years have been genocidal fools, Taliban included.

To say Taliban bad, Afghan government good is also wrong. Members of the Afghan government have blood on their hands, it's just been overlooked. Dostum is a prime example, a seasonal foe or friend. It's the norm for Afghanistan. So bring back a fresh Pashtun monarch.

 

[dabong1]

No, it was in the national interest of Pakistan to have the Taliban in power. The national interest has changed, another Pashtun movement is needed, not one as rigid as the Taliban.

There were Uzbeks and Tajiks in the Taliban, that bit is correct. But there were never Hazara and Shi'ite commanders AFAIK. Name some Shi'ite commanders of the Taliban if you can. That's not to say the Shi'ites are not responsible for some of the most radicalized genocidal bloodshed in Afghanistan, but they were not Taliban commanders.

You said to name a shia commander in the taliban.......abdul ali mazari of Hizb-i Wahdat.
Yeah we all love to accuse the taliban of all sorts of crimes but when it has to be backed up with hard facts it always fizzles out .
Do not forget it was the shia's that in May 1997 captured 3,000 Taliban soldiers which where summarily executed in and around Mazar-i Sharif by shia/hazara forces,the taliban only started killing the hazaras/shia in revenge when they took power after this massacre.

 

[dabong1]

I was venting my frustration in that post. The rational part of me agrees with your opinion that the possibility of dialog should always be left open for the Taliban. In the long run peace will only be sustainable when the ideology of every party is allowed to be expressed, but in a peaceful manner that allows every individual to adopt or reject, without fear of repercussion, whatever they see fit. But dialog cannot be held while they bomb and maim both civilians and the Pakistan military.

But for some strange reason we can bomb the taliban with NATO and then expect the taliban to have a peaceful dialogue with us...

Actually everything I attributed to the Taliban has been reported in Pakistani Newspapers, but you probably skip those parts since they cannot possibly fit in with your "Western Propoganda" conspiracy theories..

I love the way you did not answer the point you made about the taliban killing civilians and comparing it to the number of civilians NATO/US/AFGHAN ARMY has killed.....
Wow a few people in swat are saying do not listen music and do not shave and its a takeover of pakistan by the taliban somehow......the only one coming up with conspiracy theories is yourself.

 

[Scorpius]

As normal quoting anti taliban propaganda you have read in the western media,have you for one moment compared the amount of civilians killed by NATO/US bombing to the ones the taliban have killed ?
Go check the stats and then tell us who us who is killing innocent civilians.
It is people like you that "emboldened the forces of darkness and intolerance" with your acceptance of western/NATO ruling a muslim country.
The taliban are true freedom fighters that are on a jihad for peace

You see the difference between the Taliban and the western armies is that when Nato bombs kill innocents you will always see an apology afterwards and often on the ground talks are held with members of the deceased family's where money is given.

When the Taliban kill innocents you rarely hear of such an apology, instead you often see justifications for it.

I mean these people have kidnapped and murdered aid workers, let children behead men, etc.

Honestly m8, look at reality and take off those pro caliphate glasses.