Svoboda | Graniru | BBC Russia | Golosameriki | Facebook
 

Pro-Afghan War Officials Play Up Taliban-al Qaida Ties: Analysis

digg Share this on Facebook Huffpost - Pro-Afghan War Officials Play Up Taliban-al Qaida Ties: Analysis stumble reddit del.ico.us RSS


First Posted: 10-13-09 03:47 PM   |   Updated: 10-13-09 03:57 PM

What's Your Reaction?
Afghanistan

By Gareth Porter

WASHINGTON, Oct 13 (IPS) - U.S. national security officials, concerned that President Barack Obama might be abandoning the strategy of full-fledged counterinsurgency war in Afghanistan, are claiming new intelligence assessments suggesting that al Qaeda would be allowed to return to Afghanistan in the event of a Taliban victory.

But two former senior intelligence analysts who have long followed the issue of al Qaeda's involvement in Afghanistan question the alleged new intelligence assessments. They say that the Taliban leadership still blames Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda for their loss of power after 9/11 and that the Taliban-al Qaeda cooperation is much narrower today than it was during the period of Taliban rule.

The nature of the relationship between al Qaeda and the Taliban has been a central issue in the White House discussions on Afghanistan strategy that began last month, according to both White House spokesman Robert Gibbs and National Security Adviser Gen. James Jones.

One of the arguments for an alternative to the present counterinsurgency strategy by officials, including aides to Ambassador Richard Holbrooke, is that the Taliban wouldn't allow al Qaeda to reestablish bases inside Afghanistan, The Wall Street Journal reported Oct. 5. The reasoning behind the argument, according to the report, is that the Taliban realises that its previous alliance with al Qaeda had caused it to lose power after the Sep. 11 attacks.

Officials in national security organs that are committed to the counterinsurgency strategy have now pushed back against the officials who they see as undermining the war policy.

McClatchy newspapers reported Sunday that officials have cited what they call "recent U.S. intelligence assessments" that the Taliban and other Afghan insurgent groups have "much closer ties to al Qaida now than they did before 9/11" and would allow al Qaeda to re-establish bases in Afghanistan if they were to prevail.

Story continues below
advertisement

McClatchy reporters said 15 mid-level or senior intelligence, military and diplomatic officials they interviewed had agreed with the alleged intelligence assessments.

But John McCreary, formerly a senior analyst at the Defence Intelligence Agency, wrote last week on NightWatch, an online news analysis service, that the history of Taliban-al Qaeda relations suggests a very different conclusion. After being ousted from power in 2001, he wrote, the Taliban "openly derided the Arabs of al Qaida and blamed them for the Taliban's misfortunes".

The Taliban leaders "vowed never to allow the foreigners - especially the haughty, insensitive Arabs - back into Afghanistan," wrote McCreary. "In December 2001, [Mullah Mohammad] Omar was ridiculed in public by his own commanders for inviting the 'Arabs' and other foreigners, which led to their flight to Pakistan."

McCreary concluded, "The premise that Afghanistan would become an al Qaida safe haven under any future government is alarmist and bespeaks a lack of understanding of the Pashtuns on this issue and a superficial knowledge of recent Afghan history."

The Central Intelligence Agency's former national intelligence officer for the Middle East, Paul Pillar, expressed doubt that the Taliban's relations with al Qaeda are tighter now than before the Taliban regime was ousted.

"I don't see how you can say that," Pillar told IPS. "If you look at the pre-9/11 relationship between the Taliban and al Qaeda, in many ways it was far more extensive."

In the civil war between the Taliban regime and its Northern Alliance foes from 1996 through 2001, Pillar observed, "bin Laden's Arabs and money" represented a far bigger role in supporting the Taliban than the one al Qaeda is playing now.

"You can say that there are more groups which have relationships with al Qaeda now, but I don't see any as close as that which existed before 9/11," said Pillar.

The role played by Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda in the Taliban's struggle against its rival the Northern Alliance from 1996 to 2001 has been documented by journalist Roy Gutman, now foreign editor of McClatchy newspapers, and other sources.

As early as 1997, 300 Arab troops trained by bin Laden troops were fighting alongside the Taliban on the front line north of Kabul, according to Gutman's book, "How We Missed the Story", published in 2008. Later, they were reported to have taken over large sections of that front line.

Bin Laden's military and financial support became an even more important crutch for the Taliban regime in its final years in power. Gutman says the Taliban's mid-summer 1998 offensive in northern Pakistan was largely financed by bin Laden.

In the last stage of the conflict, Gutman writes, al Qaeda troops consisted of 1,500 to 2,500 Arabs and Central Asian "Frontline fighters", and Ahmed Shah Massoud, the commander of the Northern Alliance forces seeking to overthrow the Taliban, regarded them as his toughest and most committed opponents.

Gutman quotes Massoud telling CIA operative Gary Schroen, "Every time I fight the Taliban, the glue that holds them together is the Arab units."

Osama bin Laden also financed Taliban military equipment and operations, according to Gutman's account. A summer 1998 Taliban offensive was fought with hundreds of new Japanese pickup trucks - Massoud claimed a total of 1,200 vehicles - bought with bin Laden's money.

Today, however, al Qaeda is cash-strapped and has very few foreign fighters in Afghanistan, whereas the Taliban appear to be well-financed.

The U.S. Treasury Department's expert on terrorist financing, David Cohen, said al Qaeda is "in its weakest financial position in several years" and "its influence is waning", the BBC reported Tuesday.

Gen. Jones told CNN interviewer John King Oct. 4 the presence of al Qaeda in Afghanistan today is "minimal", adding the "maximum estimate" is 100 foreign fighters. One official critical of the White House position quoted in the McClatchy story suggested the number might be as high as 200 or 250.

Both figures appears to be consistent with the estimate by Western officials of a total of only 100 to 300 foreign fighters in Afghanistan cited in the New York Times Oct. 30, 2007.

Of that total, however, only "small numbers" were Arabs and Chechens, Uzbeks or other Central Asians, who are known to have links with al Qaeda, Seth Jones of the Rand Corporation told Voice of America the following month.

The bulk of the foreign fighters in Afghanistan are Pashtuns from across the border in Pakistan. Those Pashtun fighters are recruited from religious schools in Pakistan, but there is no evidence that they are affiliated with al Qaeda.

Just this month, U.S. intelligence has increased its estimate of Taliban armed insurgents to 17,000, compared with 10,000 in late 2007. Even if all foreign fighters were considered as al Qaeda, therefore, 250 of them would represent only 1.5 percent of the estimated total.

*Gareth Porter is an investigative historian and journalist specialising in U.S. national security policy. The paperback edition of his latest book, "Perils of Dominance: Imbalance of Power and the Road to War in Vietnam", was published in 2006.

Read more from Inter Press Service.



Get HuffPost World On Facebook and Twitter!

By Gareth Porter WASHINGTON, Oct 13 (IPS) - U.S. national security officials, concerned that President Barack Obama might be abandoning the strategy of full-fledged counterinsurgency war in Afghani...
By Gareth Porter WASHINGTON, Oct 13 (IPS) - U.S. national security officials, concerned that President Barack Obama might be abandoning the strategy of full-fledged counterinsurgency war in Afghani...
Filed by Hanna Ingber Win  |  Report Corrections
 
Comments
152
Pending Comments
0
iPhone App Promo
Post Comment

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

View Comments:
Page: 1 2 3 4 Next › Last » (4 pages total)
- Ron44 I'm a Fan of Ron44 11 fans permalink

Same warmongering crap that got us there to start with!!! BRING THE TEOOPS HOME!!!

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:09 PM on 10/15/2009
- nexxtep54 I'm a Fan of nexxtep54 16 fans permalink

" Pro-war officials. "
How sad that society has come to the point where an expression like this has a use.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:23 PM on 10/14/2009

Plus the Afghan military occupies towns were they aren't welcome, then rapes the little boys that come to them for handouts.

That's not cool.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:55 PM on 10/14/2009
- Durango I'm a Fan of Durango 110 fans permalink

Who writes these haedlines/

Yet another bungled one.

So we can reduce the debate within the Administration and the military as simply "Pro war" or "Anti war'?

That is a s bad as the ignorance displayed under george W Bush. Is it the "Long War" or the Global War on terror"?

Please get someone who can write headlines, because this one is ridiculous.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:24 AM on 10/14/2009
- jimmygee I'm a Fan of jimmygee 3 fans permalink
photo

this connection matters very much if it's true but I doubt it is. Anything will be said or written to perpetrate the war machine. There's too much money made on the backs of our military to have peace in the world. And most of that money is going to the perpetrators.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:04 AM on 10/14/2009
- sixchair I'm a Fan of sixchair 11 fans permalink
    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:03 AM on 10/14/2009
- sixchair I'm a Fan of sixchair 11 fans permalink

Don't know if anyone saw Frontline on PBS last night. I'm now convinced. As I see it:

1. A-stan is an ungovernable stone-age wasteland whose "government" is a corrupt cabal of drug runners, torturers and warlords. We cannot civilize them.
2. Pakistani intel agcy, ISI, created, funds and supports T-ban. As long as T-ban have safe haven there, we cannot prevail.

Stop sending billions to P-stan. Lord knows how much of that finds its way to the T-ban.

Let the T-ban have it. Tell them if we even get a whiff of AlQaeda we'll be back. For keeps.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:49 AM on 10/14/2009
- Durango I'm a Fan of Durango 110 fans permalink

Aside from watching Frontline have you been paying attention to what is happening in Pakistan these days?

Without question the Taliban were supported, if not created by the pakistani ISI. That is hardly news.

But the Pakistani military appears to be taking on the fundamentalists in Pakistan. Which is pat of a coordinated strategy with Afghanistan.

Even if it would politically incorrect to talk about it.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:30 AM on 10/14/2009
- StillAmused I'm a Fan of StillAmused 231 fans permalink

Of even greater concern is the likely resurgence of the Afghan Flat Earth Society.

If your only tool is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:19 AM on 10/14/2009
- Wisdo I'm a Fan of Wisdo 31 fans permalink

What is the point in remaining in Afghanistan?

you cant win a "war on terror" anymore than you can win a war on "general hostility" unless you kill every single person in the country.

The Taliban are the deposed government of Afghanistan, not a bunch of so called 'terrorists'.
They are the only faction that has been able to control that warlord infested country, albeit with harsh and inhumane methods. Nobody likes the taliban, but the US is not going to be able to babysit Hamid Karzi's government forever. and the Taliban are the only game in town as far as running afghanistan.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:14 AM on 10/14/2009
- Durango I'm a Fan of Durango 110 fans permalink

Where do you get the ideas wars can't be won?

Or at least settled?

it is not an either or proposition. There are many different scenarios available between "winning" and "losing."

As far as the support the Taliban had when they did govern Afghanistan. That has mostly vanished. (Incidently Karzai and his family originally supported them. Until they assasinated his father.)

I doubt the Tajiks or the Uzbecks want to see the return of the Taliban. I know for certain the Hazara's don't want any part of that. And i would bet competing Pashtun factions are as dead set against the return of the Taliban as any of the above.

It is a very complicated situation. Not prone to simple solutions.

I doubt there is any military solution. But believe there will be a political solution.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:38 AM on 10/14/2009

Only a s urrender m0nkey will say there is no link between P@kistan, TaIiban and AQ.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:08 AM on 10/14/2009
photo

There is no al Qaeda. George Bush even announced it to the chagrin of his handlers when pressured by the White House press corps about finding bin Laden. Al Qaeda has broken up into the separate groups that came together to form "the base." Al Zawahiri, bin Laden's second in command is now heading up the Muslim Brotherhood again. Bush even wondered in that now famous press conference if bin Ladin was still alive. Foreign intelligence sources report his demise by renal failure in December of 2001 in a Dubai (?) hospital.

Just when the world hoped we had a leader deserving of the Nobel.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:25 AM on 10/14/2009
- Wisdo I'm a Fan of Wisdo 31 fans permalink

only a war monkey would make one. btw, are you planning on joining the army?

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:58 AM on 10/14/2009

Only a surrender m0nkey will say there is no link between Pakistan, Taliban and AQ.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:07 AM on 10/14/2009
- marco01 I'm a Fan of marco01 175 fans permalink
photo

That's nothing more than a grade school taunt, typical of a right winger. That said, of course there are links and I don't need your childish insults to come to my own conclusions.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:06 AM on 10/14/2009
- sixchair I'm a Fan of sixchair 11 fans permalink

There is, and it's been funded and perpetuated by Bush's stupid policies. Only a tool who doesn't care about the lives of our soldiers would say different.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:55 AM on 10/14/2009
- ilse I'm a Fan of ilse 41 fans permalink

If there was a real threat to the United States, I would be fine with going to war, but the fact that this has been eight years long makes me wonder what we're really doing over there. 8 years should have been more than enough time to accomplish their mission on terrorism. If Bush wouldn't have started a war with iraq, who had nothing to do with 9 11 and instead focused on capturing Bin Laden in Afghanistan mission would have been accomplished by now. I don't believe we are in Afghanistan to fight terrorism and that's why I am upset. What's our real reason for being there? The republicans say we can't afford healthcare reform, yet they are willing to spend a lot more in Afghanistan and Iraq. Again, what's the real reason for being in Afghanistan?

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:50 AM on 10/14/2009
- ChelseaC I'm a Fan of ChelseaC 122 fans permalink
photo

Here we go again.....­..........­..........­..

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:12 AM on 10/14/2009
- S1m0n I'm a Fan of S1m0n 77 fans permalink
photo

Pashtuns from Pakistan don't think of themselves as foreign when they're fighting in Kandahar. They have relatives on either side of the border, speak the same language, and share a common culture. A Pashtun from Kandahar is more like a pashtun from Karachi than either is like an Uzbek or Azeri from northern Afghanistan.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:10 AM on 10/14/2009
- Durango I'm a Fan of Durango 110 fans permalink

Which is why the Pakistani military offensive is likely to succeed.

But in reality it is not that simple.

Pashtuns have a reputation for fighting amoung themselves as much or more than against outsiders.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:40 AM on 10/14/2009
- nexxtep54 I'm a Fan of nexxtep54 16 fans permalink

I have discovered that all of human evil comes from man's inability to sit still in a room.

Blaise Pascal 1623 - 1662

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:05 AM on 10/14/2009
Page: 1 2 3 4 Next › Last » (4 pages total)

 You must be logged in to comment. Log in  or connect with 

Connect