In a land bordering Eurasia, a pivotal region that can guarantee stability or create serious instability, the specter of its entry into a hostile orbit, close to the West, has prompted the Kremlin to intervene militarily to restore the status quo. It is not a war or an invasion, because Moscow’s leadership calls it an “operation”.

Penetrate to the capital, take control of geostrategic areas and critical infrastructure, then bring pressure to bear on the incumbent government and topple it. The idea is to conduct a fast-and-furious operation, which would not weigh on the already troubled state budget and remind the American-led First World that Moscow is willing to defend its sphere of influence militarily.

But what the Kremlin ignores, or perhaps knows but underestimates, is that a deadly snare has been prepared in that theater of war. An international brigade was ready in the wings waiting for the misstep to rush to the place. The Western arms industry was waiting for the invasion to supply the resistance with military supplies. And a gruelling proxy war was about to begin. A description of Ukraine 2022. A description of Afghanistan 1979-1989.

The whole world in Kabul

The differences between the wars in Ukraine and Afghanistan are manifold, starting from the casus belli and their lawfulness: an aggression in the first case, an intervention requested by the country’s government that degenerated into war in the second. But it is important to focus on the similarities. Because the White House, in both cases, took advantage of the Kremlin’s misstep to start a proxy war of attrition with the goal of bringing about, or at least facilitating, a regime change.

The anti-Soviet international set up by the United States as part of the most expensive covert operation in its history, codenamed Cyclone, played an instrumental role in catalysing the economic and practical collapse of the Soviet Union. For nine years, from 1979 to 1989, the Kremlin found itself fighting in an inaccessible, largely unknown territory against a well-trained enemy, supplied with Western-made advanced weaponry, supported by regional powers’ intelligence and capable of making up for the losses overnight.

Operation Cyclone, “the greatest legacy to any Third World insurrection”, turned Afghanistan into the “Vietnam of the Soviets”. A war lost from the start for the Kremlin. Some 20,000 foreign fighters (mujāhidīn) attracted annually by the echo of Jihad coming from the Hindu Kush and relaunched by mosques throughout the Middle East. More than 10 billion dollars were invested in the Afghan theater by the United States and its partners. The arsenal that was made available to the insurgents is unquantified and unquantifiable.

A proxy war and a laboratory

The United States saw the Politburo’s miscalculation as a historic and unrepeatable opportunity to turn Afghanistan into a Soviet Vietnam. A tremendous but fair revenge for the ignominious defeat suffered in Southeast Asia a few years earlier. And they mustered an unlikely coalition of the willing united by a common denominator: anti-Soviet hate.

The Reagan presidency persuaded many nations to join the proxy war, some by providing weapons, some by supplying intelligence and some by exporting fighters. The most important members, however, were undoubtedly Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, West Germany, Iran, Israel, Pakistan, the United Kingdom and the People’s Republic of China. The Soviets, by contrast, could only count on the (limited) support of Cuba and East Germany.

This all-against-one was aggravated by the way of fighting, the armaments and the organisational structure of the two sides. The Red Army was numerically hegemonic, accustomed to massive bombardments and had a predilection for open and regular clashes, but possessed a poor knowledge of the battlefield and suffered from problems in terms of interdepartmental communication and intelligence gathering. The mujahideen, on the other hand, could boast familiarity with the terrain, useful when conducting asymmetrical Thermopylae-style battles, infinite liquidity supplied by a series of shadowy circuits, such as the Haqqani network, the possession of 24/7 intelligence and the most technologically advanced arsenal on the planet to shatter the Red Army’s air superiority.

The red line of the Soviet Union became the red line of the United States. Afghanistan was to become the terminus of Soviet expansion in Asia. And for the curse of the Tomb of Empires to be renewed, mortally bogging down the Russian soldiers, the United States made Afghanistan more than just a theater of proxy warfare: they made it a laboratory.

The mujahideen bore the burden of crushing the Red Army, the military-industrial complex of the United States had the honour of arming them with the latest inventions from the Pentagon’s macroscopic research and development sector. Afghanistan as a laboratory in which to battle-test the effectiveness of new weapons – like the FIM-92 Stinger surface-to-air missiles to be used against Mil Mi-24 helicopters.

The consequences

The war in Afghanistan, together with the Polish revolution led by Solidarity, was the blade that bled dry the already dying Soviet Union, accelerating its decline and inevitable implosion. An epoch-making victory, because it was the last chapter in the Cold War. A half-way victory for others, because of the nefarious blowback generated in the subsequent years by that Frankenstein that was the jihadist international.

It is not easy to determine who is wrong and who is right, since history, (un)objective by definition, is a matter of perspectives. And, in fact, if it is true that to defeat the Soviet Empire the United States inadvertently created Al-Qaeda and Osama bin Laden, it is equally true that the mujahideen would soon prove useful in Yugoslavia, where they were recycled against the Serbs. And as it is true that the Al-Qaeda threat, symbolized by 9/11, was later capitalised to remake the face of the Middle East in the name of the Project for a New American Century and to prolong the Unipolar Moment, from whose breast came the milk of contemporary Afghanistans: from Syria to Ukraine. Tomorrow, perhaps, a new Afghanistan could appear somewhere between Eurasia and the Indo-Pacific, in one or more of those lands affected by the US-China competition.

L'articolo The ghost of Afghanistan looms over Ukraine proviene da InsideOver.

On 9 September, Rahimullah Yusufzai, the Pakistani journalist considered by his colleagues in the international press as one of the most authoritative voices reporting on Central and South Asia, passed away on the eve of his 67^th birthday. He was an expert analyst of geopolitical and security developments as well as having a profound understanding of the social, human and cultural factors underpinning all the issues.

Based in the city of Peshawar, Yusufzai spent the last forty years devoting particular attention to covering Afghanistan. He started reporting on it during the 1979 Soviet invasion, which ushered in a cycle of wars that lasted until a few weeks ago. His work, VOA’s senior editor Nafees Takar told Dawn, opened “a window onto Afghanistan for four decades,” for both journalists and the public of the Western world as well as local journalists. In the testimony recorded for the Pakistani newspaper by Ijaz Ali, his colleagues agreed in praising Yusufzai’s professional abilities, but what emerged above all was the sense of his outstanding human stature. According to Ali, this was bound up mainly with the “sagacity” of the journalist, capable of projecting himself into the human situations he recounted and giving a voice to the marginalised, the most profound part of society in his own country and neighbouring Afghanistan.

This was Yusufzai, a keen and tireless professional in his powers of expression, a reporter in the tradition of the great masters of journalism, capable of combining analytic depth and the ability to recount the reality on the ground. In  this respect he belonged to a small group of journalists, such as Ryszard Kapuściński, Robert Fisk and a few others. Talking to Fisk in an interview published in the Independent in 2010, Yusufzai stressed that his professional work, which had seen him present in the field during the first offensive by the Afghan Taliban in 1989 and often in their “spiritual capital” Kandahar, was mainly conducted in the  existential peripheries of countries accustomed to living with wars and suffering. He declared that each single person could tell a unique, unrepeatable story of adaptation and survival. “I have only visited Kabul once,” Yusufzai said then, hardened by more than thirty years of field service. His vocation was to tell the forgotten stories of those who live where history is being made. “Whenever we write about families who have suffered – civilians or soldiers – we find these stories profoundly engaging. You cannot detach yourself from their suffering,” he declared, stressing his experience in regions such as Peshawar, Wazirstan or the refugee camps on the porous Afghanistan-Pakistan border.

Strong in his knowledge of the world around him, Yusufzai was free from prejudices or preconceptions of any sort. He knew how to analyse even the most problematic situations with professional insight. He would express his opinion, conduct analysis and criticism, but he never simplified or demonised. We see this in Yusufzai’s account of two unique professional experiences he had in the years when Afghan was in chaos: his interviews with Osama bin Laden and Mullah Omar. In 2001, writing in the Guardian about these meetings a few weeks after 9/11, Yusufzai spoke not only of his face-to-face encounters with the figures considered the supreme representatives of terrorism in the West, but also of the social, political and human motives that had driven Al Qaeda and the Taliban to gain a support base among the peoples of Afghanistan and Pakistan. Prophetically, he stressed that a war of aggression in reaction to the attacks would result in “an enormous provocation” to Afghanistan and its people, who could hardly all be identified with extremist groups, and it would ultimately led to disaster. An analysis confirmed by the facts twenty years later.

A personal memory unites us directly to Yusufzai as man and journalist. In May 2019, in the magazine that marked the transition from The Eyes of War to Inside Over, we had the honour of publishing his analysis of the future of Afghanistan, then divided between the central government, the resurgent Taliban and the new threat of ISIS. At that time we had the opportunity to inaugurate a new journalistic adventure with the voice of a professional with few equals in our time. A man who taught how to look beyond every barrier to make information capable of creating awareness, a civil conscience and freedom of thought. The very qualities that the press needs to steadily foster and develop. Rahimullah Yusufzai’s example, thanks to his teaching, will never fail. And we will always be grateful to him for that.

L'articolo Remembering Rahimullah Yusufzai, a master of journalism proviene da InsideOver.

The announcement of the interim government by the Afghan Taliban on September 7 has reinforced the international community’s concerns about the country’s return to become a terrorist safe haven. The interim government consists of 14 members who are blacklisted by the United Nations (UN) as terrorists. These include Mullah Mohammad Hassan Akhund (acting Prime Minister), his two deputies, Abdul Ghani Baradar and Mawlawi Abdul Salam Hanafi and Sirajuddin Haqqani (Interior Minister) among others.

This interim government and the statement from Taliban supreme leader, Hibatullah Akhundzada about upholding the Islamic rules and Sharia, send a firm signal from the Afghan Taliban to the international community that it retains its hardliner, conservative world view and it will be at the cost of Afghanistan’s governance. Many of the opposition parties have already criticised the Taliban for the non inclusiveness and lack of diversity in the cabinet.

Of particular concern is the prominent role given to the Haqqani Network, described as the veritable arm of the Pakistan Army’s Inter Services Intelligence (ISI). The group is notorious for its sophisticated, mass-casualty attacks and has in the past targeted American, Western and Indian interests. This violent past notwithstanding, the group with the blessings of the Pakistan Army is now firmly entrenched in the new cabinet with Sirajuddin Haqqani heading the interior ministry and his uncle, Khalil Haqqani heading the Refugees portfolio. Together, they carry a total of $15 million bounty from the United States. The Taliban has already called Pakistan their “second home”. It was not surprising to see ISI Chief Lt. General Faiz Hameed rushing to Kabul even as hectic negotiations were on for the formation of the Taliban government.

But resilient Afghans are not taking the interference of Pakistan in Afghanistan’s affairs lying down. Kabul and many other Afghan cities have witnessed anti-Pakistan protests in recent days. The same day of the Taliban’s announcement of the new cabinet, brave Afghans gathered in Kabul protesting against the Taliban and Pakistan’s interference. Many chanted slogans of “freedom”, “Allahu Akbar”, “death to Pakistan” and “we do not want captivity”, indicating the extent of their anger. Similar scenes have been witnessed from Balkh and Daikundi provinces too. No wonder, Taliban fighters scrambled to squelch the protests, lest it angered their masters sitting in Rawalpindi.

This resurgence of the Taliban and the Haqqani Network will certainly lead to the comeback of the most loathsome terrorist groups, who had been lying low for many years. The most infamous of them is the Al-Qaeda, which has waited in the shadows for a decade since the killing of Osama bin Laden in 2011 in Abbottabad, Pakistan – a stone’s throw away from the Pak Army garrison. A crucial part of the now in tatters of the February 2020 U.S.-Taliban Doha agreement had required the Taliban to disallow al-Qaeda from using Afghan territory for its operations and sever its relationship with al-Qaeda. But such a possibility remains unlikely as noted by the UN’s Analytical Support and Sanctions Monitoring Team. The symbiotic relationship between the two groups is evident by the fact that many al-Qaeda leaders killed in U.S. drone strikes are always located in the Taliban-held areas.

With these groups back in business, understandably Afghanistan’s governance has become the first casualty. The UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs has warned that basic services in Afghanistan were on the verge of collapse and food and other aid was beginning to run out, following the Taliban takeover. This dire situation has come on top of the internal displacement of more than half a million people internally as many Afghans ran to escape the Taliban’s repression.

And yet, the Taliban has continued business as normal, pressing ahead with its violent ways. According to Reporters Without Borders, violence against journalists has spiked in weeks since the Taliban’s takeover. In one specific instance, reporters covering the anti- Pakistan protests in Kabul were detained and some of them beaten up. Some reports had also noted Taliban fighters doing a door to door search in Kabul for people who had worked for the earlier government or the Western forces. Such instances will increase the fears of not just journalists but also civilians of blowback from the Taliban and understandably have a ‘chilling effect’.

All these developments indicate that the Taliban is determined to implement its conservative agenda, contrary to what Mullah Baradar and his team in Doha had been arguing that the Taliban is now a reformed movement. It will not be wrong to say that the United States and the international community were hoodwinked for all these years by the myth of a transformed Taliban, which paved the way for the movement’s takeover of Afghanistan. After working for years to neutralise groups like the Haqqani Network, it is no less than a slap on the face of the U.S. and the West that the group is now calling the shots in Kabul.

However, it is also true that with the expected international opprobrium over this all-male hardliner terrorist government in Kabul, the Taliban will quickly realise that fighting with and terminating opponents is not the same as administering a country. Two decades since 9/11, Afghanistan is not the same country as it was during the Taliban’s earlier rule. Its people have seen the benefits of international engagement, stability and development. They have become assertive as evident from the anti-Pakistan protests, despite the Taliban’s threat of violence. So sooner or later, the challenges of Afghanistan’s governance are bound to arise, which will be no less than a nightmare for the Taliban to manage, lest it mends its ways and curtails dependence on the failed state of Pakistan.

L'articolo Taliban’s new cabinet will face challenges in governing Afghanistan proviene da InsideOver.

In horrific developments, the Taliban has taken control of almost entire Afghanistan in just a week, putting the country in imminent humanitarian crisis. The last fortress, Kabul was expected to give a tough fight to the Talibani offensive. However, it too gave in without any resistance. Afghan President Ashraf Ghani has fled the country and Taliban militants have taken over the presidential palace in Kabul. There is chaos across the country, Afghan people are running for their lives as civilians are being harassed, tortured and killed indiscriminately. Women and children are the most affected as there are no forces present now to protect them from Talibani brutalities. Now, the Taliban group is going to declare the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan, which means return of old draconian rule.

Soon after Ghani left Afghanistan, the Taliban group announced its victory. “We have reached what we were seeking, the freedom of our country and the independence of our people,” said a spokesman for the Taliban. Ghani tried to justify his decision to let the Taliban take over the power smoothly saying he did not want bloodshed and destruction of Kabul. Abdullah Abdullah, the head of the Afghan National Reconciliation Council, however slammed Ghani for leaving the country “in this difficult situation”.

There are reasonable fears that Afghanistan will witness the horrors of Talibani rule of 1996-2001. There will be harsh and inhumane punishment for violating the medieval rules formulated by the Taliban regime. Women will not be able to wear anything but burqa, will not be able to work while being subjected to barbarous punishments such as stoning, whipping and hanging. There will not freedom to pursue sports or listen to music. It has led to chaos. Afghani people as well as foreign nationals are trying to seek shelter in safe places. And airport appears to be the only option. “I had never seen such a rush at the airport before,” said Afghan businessman Farid Ahmad Younusi. He said he abandoned a contracting firm worth USD 1 million and fled Kandahar as he was on the target list of the Taliban.

L'articolo Fears of draconian Taliban rules become imminent as Afghanistan government gives in proviene da InsideOver.

New US Acting Secretary of Defense Christopher Miller has announced that US troop strength will be reduced in Afghanistan and Iraq. The decision from President Donald Trump has been met with criticism and concern — even among some Republicans.

How Many Troops are Being Pulled from Afghanistan and Iraq?

On Trump’s orders, the US will reduce its troop strength in Afghanistan from around 4,500 soldiers to 2,500 soldiers by mid-January, while the number of soldiers in Iraq is set to be reduced by around 500 to 2,500 by January 15. Miller announced the reductions on Tuesday evening.

The decision marks an accelerated partial withdrawal of US troops before the inauguration of President-elect Joe Biden on January 20.

Over the past few days, several media had reported about ongoing preparations for withdrawals. The Pentagon has  kept a low profile on the number of troops currently stationed in Afghanistan and Iraq. However, according to CNN, there are currently 4,500 American military members still in Afghanistan and 3,000 in Iraq.

Trump’s Firing of Sec Def Esper and Appointment of High-Ranking Loyalists

The partial withdrawal follows Trump’s electoral defeat against Biden. Shortly thereafter, Trump released Secretary of Defense Mark Esper of his duties, which initiated the replacement of several high-ranking positions in the Pentagon with Trump supporters.

For example, former Army officer Douglas MacGregor was appointed senior advisor to Miller. MacGregor is known as a critic of the operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. Esper, however, had insisted on maintaining a troop strength of 4,500 soldiers in Afghanistan.

Trump’s Promises to Bring the Troops Home

Trump had already promised to bring troops home in the 2016 election campaign. In particular, he pushed for the withdrawal from Afghanistan.The plans had led to criticism and concern from NATO and even among Trump’s Republican colleagues. It is feared that the extremist Islamic Taliban — who are currently holding peace talks with the Afghan government — will regain strength as a result of the troop reduction. According to US media reports, the President was recently increasingly frustrated with the pace of the withdrawal. 

NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg said he expected all allies to keep their pledge to leave Afghanistan in a coordinated and orderly manner only when the time is right.

“We have been in Afghanistan for almost 20 years, and no NATO ally wants to stay longer than necessary,” stressed Stoltenberg. The price for leaving the country too quickly or in an uncoordinated manner could be very high, he added.

The Danger of Afghanistan Regaining its Role as a Terrorist Haven

Afghanistan threatens to become a haven for international terrorists planning attacks on NATO countries. In addition, the Islamic State (ISIS) group may be able to establish territory for their terror caliphate in the country to make up for what it lost in Syria and Iraq.

Leading Republicans in Congress have also warned against a premature withdrawal from the country.

“There is no American who does not wish that the war in Afghanistan against terrorists and their helpers had already been finally won,” said Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell.  “But that does not change the actual decision that lies ahead of us.” A swift withdrawal of US forces “would harm our allies and please those who wish us harm,” McConnell added.

The Longest War in American History

The war in Afghanistan is the longest in US history. American soldiers have been deployed in the country since 2001. After the September 11 of that year, US-led troops were sent to the Asian nation as part of Operation Enduring Freedom, with operations beginning in October.

At the end of February 2020, Washington signed an agreement with the Taliban which promises the gradual withdrawal of all US and NATO armed forces by the end of April 2021. The Taliban went on to commit to peace talks with the government in Kabul, which began in September. However, the process stalled because of a dispute over procedural issues.

Iraqi Rocket Attacks Greet Withdrawal Announcement

Shortly after the announcement of the withdrawal of troops, several rocket attacks near the US embassy were reported from the Iraqi capital Baghdad. The four rockets were reportedly fired from the east of the capital. The rockets reportedly hit the Green Zone, a highly secure government district which also houses the embassy of the United States and various other nations in Iraq.

Since October last year, almost 90 deadly rocket and bomb attacks have been carried out on foreign embassies, troops, and facilities in Iraq.

L'articolo US Announces Further Withdrawal from Afghanistan and Iraq proviene da InsideOver.

The Afghan government and the Taliban met for the first time since 2001 recently in Doha to officially speak and negotiate directly with one another. There are hopes that the meeting could be a historic turning point.

The First Step of a Long Journey

It is a historic day in Afghanistan’s history, but also only the first step on a long and presumably difficult journey. Talks between the Afghan government and the Taliban began in Doha and are intended to bring about peace in the country after decades of war.

The latter is long overdue as Afghans seek an end to violence and a permanent ceasefire to finally live in dignity and peace. Many Afghans and the international community hope that the talks started today will enable a paradigm shift.

The First Intra-Afghan Talks

After all, it is the first time since the US liberated Afghanistan from the Taliban regime in 2001 that the government in Kabul and the Taliban have officially spoken directly to one another. Up to this point, the Taliban had refused and called Kabul’s government a “puppet” of the Americans.

Therefore, the symbolic value of the meeting in Doha should not be underestimated: on the one hand, the government delegation headed by Abdullah Abdullah, the chairman of the “High Council for National Reconciliation.” On the other, the Taliban emissaries around their deputy chief, Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar. The host was the Qatari Foreign Minister Muhammad bin Abd al Rahman Bin Jassim Al Thani, together with Secretary of State Mike Pompeo.

Priority: “Humanitarian Ceasefire”

Abdullah Abdullah made it clear in his opening statement the most urgent demand of the Afghan government and the international community: a “humanitarian ceasefire”. The agreement that the Islamists and the USA concluded in Doha on February 29th fueled Afghans’ hopes for peace. However, there was still violence, which has now resulted in 12,000 deaths, said Abdullah.

That is why the violence must end, said Abdullah, who at the same time thanked the Taliban for their willingness to negotiate and was convinced that the beginning of the negotiations would go down in history as the end of the war and the suffering of the Afghan people.

Taliban Claim They Will Conduct Peace Talks With ‘Full Sincerity’

Abdul Ghani Baradar, who, as the former right-hand man of the Taliban founder Mullah Omar, has significant influence among the Islamists, did not respond to Abdullah’s request in his speech. The Taliban have consistently refused to accept calls for a lengthier ceasefire. Still, Baradar emphasized that the Taliban would conduct the peace negotiations “with full sincerity.” Baradar said he wants Afghanistan to have a positive relationship based on mutual respect in the region and other countries worldwide.

Taliban Demands: All US Troops Gone and a Strict Islamic System

At the same time, he repeated the two most important demands of his Islamists: the reintroduction of a strict Islamic system in Afghanistan and a complete withdrawal of US troops. The latter has already been agreed and should be completed by 2021. This demand could be easiest to meet if Donald Trump remains President. Because Trump has been saying for years that there must be an end to American participation in “endless wars.”

And he has also taken steps there: only on Thursday did the President announce in the White House that the number of American soldiers in Afghanistan would be reduced to 4,000 “in a very short time”. Most recently, there were about 8,600 soldiers there. Shortly before the talks began in Doha, Pompeo emphasized that the American troop withdrawal progress would depend on whether the Taliban kept their promises.

Pompeo did not want to comment on whether Washington would make the final troop withdrawal dependent on the peace negotiations that have now begun.

However, the upcoming US election may influence Washington’s modus operandi in Afghanistan moving forward if Joe Biden became president.

L'articolo Intra-Afghan Peace Talks with Taliban Begin in Doha proviene da InsideOver.

The final obstacle prior to peace talks within Afghanistan has been the release of 400 Taliban prisoners classified as particularly dangerous. This obstacle has now been overcome – for better or for worse.

The Prisoner Release is Approved

In Afghanistan, a large council assembly approved the controversial release of imprisoned Taliban members, thereby fulfilling the essential prerequisite for intra-Afghan peace talks. The process is now on the precipice of finalizing peace negotiations, said the chairman of the Council for Reconciliation and leader of the assembly, Abdullah, after reading the final declaration. 

The release of 400 Taliban, classified as particularly dangerous, is considered the last demand made by the militant Islamists before peace negotiations can be initiated.

Afghanistan’s President Ashraf Ghani convened the Loya Jirga council meeting a week ago after the Taliban and government agreed on a three-day ceasefire for Eid al-Adha or the Muslim Feast of Sacrifice. Around 3,400 political and religious representatives discussed the central issue of the release of prisoners over the weekend. Speaking to the delegates, Ghani stated that the Afghan Loya Jirga had made history. He will now sign the decree to release the 400 prisoners. The Taliban have not yet issued a statement.

Is This Peace Process Morally Right?

The conflict in the country has continued brutally despite ceasefire negotiations. Although the Taliban had not killed any NATO soldiers since their agreement with the US, they intensified terror against the Afghan armed forces. As a result, thousands of Afghan soldiers and civilians have been killed in the bitter conflict since the end of February.

The general legacy of the Taliban in Afghanistan has resulted in more than 100,000 fatalities, which is why the decision to release the prisoners was also criticized by some civilians and rights groups, who questioned the morality of the peace process.

The Release Includes 156 Death Row Inmates

In the past, Ghani emphasized that the prisoners could not be released due to legal reasons and the correlating serious crimes they are responsible for. Among them are 156 prisoners sentenced to death, according to a list from the National Security Council. Suspected masterminds of attacks such as the one on the German embassy in 2017 are also said to be among the dangerous criminals, according to Afghan security source statements made in April.

The convening of the council meeting was not without controversy. There is reason to believe that President Ghani did not want to make the unpopular decision to release prisoners himself and attach his political career to a potentially grave mistake. Afghanistan’s parliamentary speaker Rahman Rahmani even criticized that the convening of a Loya Jirga was not covered by Afghan law. Many parliamentarians felt betrayed and also described the meeting as illegal.

The US-Taliban Deal

Sunday’s decision caps almost half a year of talks after Washington and the Taliban agreed on the release of the Taliban prisoners as a condition for the talks with the Afghan government. The United States signed an agreement with the Taliban in Doha on February 29 that provides for the withdrawal of international troops. In return, the Taliban promised to end their relations with other terrorist organizations. At the same time, the agreement is intended to pave the way for intra-Afghan peace talks: an exchange of prisoners was agreed on as a confidence-building measure. Up to 5,000 imprisoned Taliban were to be released in exchange for 1,000 government prisoners held by the extremists according to the agreement.

US officials encouraged the Loya Jirga in recent days to support the release of the prisoners despite the drawbacks, in order to get the peace process moving. With November elections on the horizon and the White House being behind in the polls, US President Donald Trump needs progress in his 2016 campaign promise to end America’s longest war. 

The Coming US Troop Reduction in Afghanistan

US Secretary of Defense Mark Esper recently reiterated that the number of US troops in Afghanistan would be reduced to less than 5,000 – which is a decrease of only 3600, however.  The Taliban were in power in Afghanistan between 1996 and 2001 before US-led international military intervention put an end to their oppressive regime following the 9/11 al-Qaeda attacks on the United States.

L'articolo Afghanistan to Release 400 Taliban Prisoners proviene da InsideOver.

Last month, Afghanistan’s top two political rivals Ashraf Ghani and Abdullah Abdullah reached a political settlement to share power after months of bickering.

Roots of the Conflict

The tussle between the two began after the Independent Election Commission of Afghanistan declared Ghani as the winner in 2019 Presidential elections. Abdullah rejected the results outright alleging voter fraud and blaming election officials of colluding with President Ghani.

The squabbling continued for months before US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo warned the two leaders to reach a political settlement or risk losing billions in aid to the country.

That too however, did not bring the leaders on the table.

Karzai Weighs In

Former Afghan President Hamid Karzai led the mediation efforts and after two weeks of arguing, the two leaders finally agreed to share power. Under the agreement, Ghani will continue to serve as the country’s President and Abdullah will head the High Council for National Reconciliation (HCNR) – the peace portfolio.

Although, the remaining details regarding who gets to nominate the cabinet are still unclear, there has been some advance towards forming a government. The agreement’s vagueness still leaves one very important question unanswered: who has the final word in important decisions?

Abdullah, who chairs the HCNR, will oversee the peace process, which primarily includes coordinating between the war-torn country’s internal and external stakeholders including its neighbors like Russia, China, Iran and Pakistan.

Abdullah will also manage the release of Taliban prisoners from government jails and bring the insurgent group to a table to chalk out the path forward once US troops withdraw from the country. He will also be in charge for overseeing Taliban’s gradual inculcation in to the mainstream politics of the country.

Peace Talks Are Still in Question

His toughest task however is to kick start inter-Afghan peace talks.

The talks will only begin if both sides: the Taliban and the Afghan government hold their end of deal made in Doha. Taliban must show their commitment to reduce violence, and Afghan government needs to release at least 5,000 for the talks to begin.

However, the lack of decisive leadership stands to be a major obstacle in the entire process if Taliban fail to reduce violence and disputes and Afghan government refuses to release some prisoners.

As on one hand, Abdullah drives the peace process, Ghani deals with the country’s internal security. The peace agreement was signed after came after a year of conflict in Afghanistan. The United States estimates around 10,000 Afghanis were killed in 2019.

Then there are insurgent groups like the Al-Qaeda and the Islamic State who pose a different albeit constant threat to peace in the country.

With Abdullah dealing with the Taliban, the rise in bombings and violence from the Taliban destabilizing the country’s internal security has overarching implication for both leaders.

The Taliban is Far From Beaten

Last month, after Ghani directed Afghan security forces to resume offensive against insurgents, the Taliban destroyed an army compound in Gardez city of Patkia province. The Taliban spokesperson, while claiming the responsibility said the attack was in response to Ghani’s order to the Afghan security forces.

This came just days after the Taliban killed more than 50 people including newborn babies in a horrific attack on a hospital. The attack showed how the insurgents refuse to give up violence despite securing guarantees from the United States and the Taliban.

The carrot and stick approach used by Ghani and Abdullah to contain Taliban does not seem to be working. Things are bound get worse once the Taliban enters mainstream politics.

The situation and infighting among Afghanistan’s political parties seems to be favoring the Taliban most at the moment. If Afghanistan democratic leadership fails to reach a consensus on political issues, the infighting will only cede more space for the Taliban to expand its clout.

L'articolo Afghanistan’s Power-Sharing Agreement Will Face the Taliban Test proviene da InsideOver.

Few Afghans have been safe from the ongoing fighting across the country. The violence has been brutal and often close to home. The war has destroyed hospitals, schools, mosques, wedding halls, and other public places. Yet the cycle of violence continues.

The dream of peace is distant as ever in a country where violence is a means to win the war through gaining leverage over negotiations. With the derailed peace talks villages are once again under siege, improvised explosives devices continue taking lives and widespread combat breaks apart mothers who wait for their sons to come home from the frontline. The Afghan people are trapped inside the fire.

Militants Stage Gruesome Hospital Massacre

One tragic episode of violence that impacted a young mother is indicative of the horrible effects of this war on families. Ms. Zamira Hussaini, a 32-year old, gave birth to her sixth child on May 5 in a Doctors without Borders hospital in the Dasht-e-Barchi neighborhood of Kabul. The family named the newborn Hadia — which means Gift in English. Hadia was born into the carnage of a ruthless war.

The doctors told Hussaini that Hadia had breathing trouble and Hadia was kept in the ward. Hussaini stayed with Hadia and visited her home once to take shower four days after giving birth. She then went back to her Hadia who was due to be discharged on May 12.

“There is a suicide bombing and I want to come home,” Hussaini told her eldest daughter over the phone on that morning of May 12. “Whatever happens to me, please do not cry.”

‘I Was Crying, and I Was Feeling Alone’

Hussaini’s wheelchair-bound husband Sayed Qurban Hussaini called back two minutes later, but she did not pick the phone. Hussaini went in his wheelchair to go look for her.

A local community elder stopped Mr. Hussaini on the street and told him that it was too late to save her from the violence. Meanwhile Hadi — Ms Hussaini’s 16-year old son — rushed out onto the streets, wandering into each hospital to find his mother.

“I was crying, and I was feeling alone,” Hadi said, “I was hoping that my mother might have been wounded” and he could still find her alive. That evening as Hadi dialed the phone number of his mother again, a doctor picked up the phone and told him to come collect the dead body of his mother tomorrow. The young baby Hadia had survived. The news broke Hadi’s heart and the hearts of his entire family.

Three militants had attacked the hospital and thrown a hand-grenade inside the maternity ward. They shot everyone in the hospital including newborns, new mothers, unarmed guards, and nurses. Ms. Hussaini was killed along with 23 others including two newborns, three women with unborn babies, and 16 women.

The Afghan government blamed the Taliban for the massacre. The United States blamed the Islamic State for it. The Taliban denied the claims, and no other group claimed responsibility for the massacre of newborns and new mothers.

Ghani’s Reaction

President Ashraf Ghani of Afghanistan ordered the Afghan forces to go back offensives against the Taliban, leaving their previous “active defense” gestures. In response, the Taliban said they were ready for renewed war. The violence surged across the country against the wishes of people who were expecting less violence with the US-Taliban deal.

The United States signed a deal with the Taliban on February 29 in a bid to open the door for negations between the Afghan government and the Taliban. The process stalled over prison release, with the Taliban demanding the release of 5,000 prisoners and the government refusing to do so. The Taliban waged war.

Eid Ceasefire?

Amid ruthless violence, the Taliban announced a three-day ceasefire on the occasion of Eid-Fitr. The Afghan government, as well as neighboring countries and other countries, welcomed the move. The government announced the release of 2,000 prisoners of the Taliban in a bid to keep the ceasefire and take the process to the next level of direct negotiations.

The ceasefire seems to an empty promise now for the people who have even recently lost countless loved ones to the war. The war takes the lives of people like Ms. Hussaini who leaves behind a broken family. Losing Ms. Hussaini to the shooting has been devastating for her family, as her husband Mr. Hussaini is disabled and she was the breadwinner of the family. Ms. Hussaini was the hope of her family living in a poor neighborhood of Kabul.

Born in a remote village of Daikuni province, they married at 16. Mr. Hussaini left home for Iran to work, just like thousands of Afghans do in desperation. Mr. Hussaini did day laboring and once was digging a well where he fell down, suffered a serious injury and lost the ability to walk.

‘I Never Thought My Life Would Reach This Point’

“I never thought my life would reach to this point, who can think?” said Mr. Hussaini. “Everyone wants to have a good life and wishes to build the best life for his children.”

Crippled, Mr. Hussaini returned home to find out that he needed to relocate from Daikundi to Kabul in search of hope and work. Once the family settled in Kabul, the struggle had began. Ms. Hussaini stepped in and took responsibility.

Ms. Hussaini used to work as a home cleaner and tried to make ends meet for her family. She borrowed money from relatives to carry on. The family’s condition deteriorated so much that they were on the edge of selling off one of their daughters.

The Hussaini family is just one of the thousands of families who had reached the point of selling their loved one for the survival of other family members. In Afghanistan, 54 percent of the population lives under the poverty line and 12.5 million Afghans are severely food insecure, according to the World Food Program.

The Mirage of Hope

Then the Hussaini family was offered a golden opportunity: The International Committee of Red Cross helped the couple to learn new skills and set up a small business. Mr. Hussaini learned to repair smartphones and mobile phones. Ms. Hussaini learned to tailor and set up a shop one year ago close to her house.

“Every responsibility was on her shoulders,” explained Hadi. “She used to go to work in the early morning and return home late in the evening. She always told us to study and not to work.”

With revenue from her shop Ms. Hussaini fed six people, including her husband and five children. She also took on two interns. One was Hawa, a 29-year old girl who was hit by an explosion in the civil war that took place between 1992 to 1996 in Kabul. Ms. Hussaini offered her a chance to learn a skill and build trust in herself, as many other disabled women in the country face discrimination.

Ms. Hussaini was the hope of her family and she was close to lifting her family out of poverty. In the blink of an eye, Ms. Hussaini was taken away and her death left her family back in poverty struggling desperately to survive.

‘I Remember Her Every Moment … She Was My Everything’

“I feel like I am orphan now,” said Mr. Hussaini. “When I wake up in the morning and I can’t believe it. I remember her every moment. How she was hit? What happened to her at the last moment? How much she suffered. She was my everything.”

The family now faces an uncertain future, so does the country. President Ashraf Ghani and former chief Executive Abdullah Abdullah brokered a power-sharing deal to end months-long bitter over the result of the 2019 presidential election. With the deal, both of them share 50 percent of the power and Abdullah Abdullah takes over a high council of peace, a body to make peace with the Taliban.

The deal raised hope for moving the country toward a broader deal between the Afghan government and the Taliban. But the year-long negotiation between the U.S. and the Taliban shows a complicated process lies ahead of a country that has been burring in the war for 40 years now.

The Empty Promises of Afghan Politicians

“In Afghanistan, such things [peace] are meaningless,” said Mr. Hussaini. “They [politicians] say whatever they like to say on TV, but when they go away from the TV screens, they forget what they said in front of the TV.”

The decisions made by the Afghan government and the Taliban and others shape the future of millions of children including those the late Ms. Hussaini. Hadi is old enough to understand that he lost his mother. Four other children are too young to understand they lost their mother to the war and young Hadia will grow up in deep poverty and instability.

One of the other surviving is 14 years old. One is 9 years old. One is 4 years old. Mr. Hussaini is caught between grieving and thinking of the future of his children. The prospect of his repairing phones does not seem promising, though he says he will try his very hardest to make sure his children will study. “It is very, very, very, very hard,” he said.

The eldest child, Hadi who is 16-years old, seems to be one option for the family to rely on for survival. As many other Afghan families rely on child labor for survival, the family of Hussaini lacks other options than sending Hadi onto the street to sell gum or cigarettes to strangers.

The youngest child, Hadia survived the war, but not poverty. When relatives of Mr. Hussaini received Hadia from the hospital, a couple who had been unable to have a baby for 18 years quickly reached out to Mr. Hussaini and requested adoption.

“They wrote a paper that Hadia belongs to them,” said Mr. Hussaini. “After this, I have no right to demand her back.”

L'articolo In Afghanistan War Breaks Families One by One   proviene da InsideOver.

Islamdeen Bahaduri woke up, washed his face and began his morning routine. He ran for an hour and then returned back to his home in the Barchi neighborhood of Kabul, the Afghan capital. Bahaduri ate breakfast and went to accept his certification for completing his TOEFL iBT preparation course and then walked home for lunch. Bahaduri’s passion was for shoot boxing, in which he had won an international gold medal and after lunch he went to practice shoot boxing in a nearby sports club.

The next day on March 6, Bahaduri went to to attend a gathering in Kabul. The 21-year-old and winner of 26 medals was thinking about opening a new sports club in memory of his fellow athlete and friend who had been killed in an attack in the past, Mohammad Baqir.

Suddenly two militants opened fire on the crowd.

A friend of Bahaduri’s called his brother Mahram Ali Bahaduri to ask about Islamdeen after hearing of the attack, so Mahram called Islamdeen. Islamdeen’s phone rang without an answer. Mahram called again, and this time someone else picked up the phone and told him that Islamdeen had been killed. Mahram fell on the ground and his uncles helped him to regain consciousness.

Bahaduri’s Brother: ‘This Attack Will Be Forgotten’

In the United States, Bahaduri’s other brother commented on the awful situation.

“There is a new thing happening and previous incidents are forgotten,” said Jumakhan Buhaduri, who was in Washington D.C. where he learned about the death of his brother from social media pages. “We do not know who the perpetrators are. There is no ending the impunity and people do not know who their enemy is.”

“I am a peaceful man and nobody should be miserable,” said Jumakhan. “But peace will not heal my wounds from losing my brother. This attack will be forgotten, like other attacks and their victims. He was our hope.”

The Islamic State claimed responsibility for the shooting on civilians which came amid US-led peace efforts to end the long Afghan war. Hundreds of people had gathered to commemorate slain Hazara leader Abdul Ali Mazari in a large venue in the western part of Kabul on Friday, March 6 where top Afghan politicians, including Abdullah Abdullah and senior leaders of the Hazara Shiite ethnic group were present.

Twenty days later, one Islamic State militant dressed in a local police uniform killed a Muslim guard at a Sikh temple in Kabul. The militant begin shooting at civilians trapped inside the temple complex, also using grenades. He besieged the temple and took Afghan Sikhs hostage while exchanging fire with Afghan security forces for six hours. The militant killed 25 people in that attack.

Islamic State’s Bloody Campaign in Afghanistan

The two attacks on minority groups by the Islamic State were part of larger efforts by the terrorist group to establish a branch of the Islamic State of Sham and Iraq in Afghanistan. Since its emergence in 2015, the group gained various territories and terrorized the country with their brutal attacks on civilians. The Islamic State claimed responsibility for two recent high-level attacks. On April 9, a vehicle was parked near the Bagram airfield and five rockets hit the large US base. Last month in March, President Ashraf Ghani was taking his oath of office when three rockets hit nearby. The Islamic State claimed responsibility for both attacks.

Afghanistan’s National Directorate of Security said in a statement that his agents later captured the leader of Islamic State in Afghanistan whose name is Abdullah Orakzai, also known as Aslam Farooqi, along with 19 other members of the group. Orakzai became the first leader to be arrested, unlike other leaders of the group that were killed in airstrikes and raids.

The Afghan Government had formally announced the defeat of the Islamic State in November 2019. The US as well as the Taliban also announced the group was destroyed.

But the reality on the ground was far different than the official story.

Emergence of the Islamic State in Afghanistan

In 2010, a number of militants from Pakistan’s Orakzai, North Wzisristan and Khyber tribal groups arrived into the eastern Nangarhar area of Afghanistan. Their numbers increased over the years in Nangarhar and Pakistan’s army attacked them in their homes, pushing them out with their families.

The new wave of the militants known as refugees arrived in October 2014 and March 2015. The Afghan Government welcomed them and the intelligence agency opened connections with them as a small-scale tit-for-tat against Pakistan’s strategic support for the Taliban group inside Afghanistan.

With the emergence of the Islamic State in Iraq and Sham in 2014, the trouble with the Islamic State started also started to intensify in Afghanistan. Tahreki Taliban Pakistan’s leader died in November of 2013 and the militants were divided over who should succeed him. They split into small groups, forming the ideal situation for the rise of another, stronger group: the Islamic State.

In October 2014, Pakistani national Hafiz Saeed Khan was chosen to lead Islamic State in Khorasan, which is the old name for Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iran, and Central Asia. The leadership council of the Islamic State was made up of former Tahrik-e Taliban Pakistani commanders. Factions of the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan, Tehrik-e-Khilafat, Jandullah, and the Bajour faction of Pakistani group’s also pledged allegiance to the Islamic State.

“Khorasan is an important base and place for the Islamic State in Asia overall, which includes Iran, India, Bangladehs, Central Asia and Xian chin of China,” explains Davood Azami, a researcher focused on extremism. “There has been a long attempt to build a Waliat since the British colonization of India.”

ISIS Afghanistan Announces its Official Formation in January, 2015

ISIS officially announced their expansion in Afghanistan in January 2015. The Islamic State was appealing for youths in region where they were unhappy with the existing groups, like the Taliban, Al-Qaeda, and the official government. ISIS represented the so-called caliphate for youths that wanted to build one in the world.

With the ultimate aim of replacing all other existing extremist groups, the Islamic State recruited from lower and middle class youths in the country and in the region. Many fighters joined the Islamic State in Afghanistan and from Gulf countries, Central Asia, Chechnya, Europe, and the sub-continent of India and Pakistan.

“We came here expecting an Islamic life, and life under Islamic law,” said Sonia Sebastian, an Indian woman who had joined the Islamic State and was interrogated by Indian security agents in Kabul after surrounding to Afghan forces. “Many things were not up to our expectations.”

ISIS’ Afghan Recruiting Efforts

The Islamic State aimed to recruit students from Afghan universities, institutions that were vulnerable to exploitation. Ramin Kamangar, a researcher at the Afghan Institute for Strategic Studies in Kabul, conducted research that found half of 373 surveyed students at three universities in Herat, Kabul, and Nangarhar universities supported an Islamic Caliphate as a political system.

Many of the students were entranced by propaganda from the Islamic State. Lecturers at Kabul University, for example, were responsible for the recruitment of fighters among students. The first step was encouraging them to become Salafi, a strict branch of Sunni Islam. The students were sent to strongholds in Nangarhar province for training and then the students would become fighters of the Islamic State.

The Islamic State built a complex network of supporters and strongholds in the country within three years. Hussain Ehsani, who co-authored a research on Islamic State for Afghan Institute of Strategic Studies, said that the Islamic State had three sub divisions in the eastern swathes, in the north, and in the west of Afghanistan.

“The Islamic State has very complex sponsors,” said Ehsani, who has interviewed policymakers, security agents and Islamic State fighters for his research. “It is unclear which non-state actor or which state supports the Islamic State in Afghanistan.”

How Does Afghanistan’s ISIS Get Their Funding?

Pakistan’s intelligence Agency, the Inter-Services Intelligence, has been accused of funding the Islamic State and supplying the group in the country. The Afghan Government has also made such claims.

ISIS has been largely self-reliant. The majority of their financial support comes from smuggling, mining, and taxation from locals. The group also enjoyed control over the Khyber Pass border between Afghanistan and Pakistan, controlling the flow of mines like talc and timber resources, according to Ehani’s book, “Islamic State Wilyat Khorasan.”

Haris, owner of a shop in a luxuries shopping mall in the heart of Kabul, used to fundraise from European and gulf countries in the name of helping poor Afghans, according to a statement by Afghanistan’s intelligence agency. In reality, Haris worked for the Islamic State with nine others in Kabul, running small shops to financially and logistically support the group.

Ruthless Attacks on Afghan Civilians

With fighters from all different parts of the world, the Islamic State in Afghanistan waged war to establish a caliphate similar to what they believed it had been in the time of the Prophet Mohammad, following the hardline doctrine of Salafism. The group primarily targeted soft targets and minorities, mainly Shiite Muslims that they consider to be blasphemous infidels.

The Islamic State conducted many of the most brutal attacks in the country even by the standards of the long Afghan war. The militants bullied villagers, executed farmers, displaced thousands of people, and attacked soft-targets that were not heavily protected but were crowded, such as in mosques, educational centers, sports clubs, and even wedding halls.

Their attacks happened across Asia, from Bangladesh to Sri Lanka and Afghanistan and Pakistan. Islamic State fighters killed dozens of Afghan forces, Taliban fighters, and Pakistani forces. Reportedly the Bangladesh bombing was even traced back to the Islamic State in Afghanistan as well as the attack on Sri Lanka.

In a propaganda video, Afghanistan’s Islamic State put 10 male prisoners on a green hill of eastern Nangarhar province and placed land mines under them. As the men kneel down, the explosives went off and they were killed instantly. The graphic video sent shockwaves across the country in August 2015.

Kidnappings and Executions

Militants of the Islamic State in Afghanistan kidnapped civilians multiple times and then executed them. In November 2015, the Islamic State kidnapped seven Hazara civilians, including a nine-year old girl and then cut their throats with metal wire in the southern Zabul province of Afghanistan.

The Islamic State conducted their first high profile attack on the Afghan capital of Kabul in July 2016, which is when they first emerged as a serious enemy of the nation. As Hazara Shiite protesters marched in Kabul, two Islamic State suicide bombers detonated in their midst, killing 80 civilians and wounding more than 400 others.

Attacks on civilian gatherings, mostly the Shiite Muslim minority, became routine for the Islamic State. Mosques have been their favorite spot to hit because they have little security and yield high causalities. In October 2017, an Islamic State suicide bomber entered a Shiite mosque in Kabul, killing 56 worshipers and 55 wounded others.

“Zakria, 14-year old, was killed,” said Barat Ali Khaleqi, whose brother was killed in the October, 2017 suicide bombing. “The attacks cripple the society and these attacks are on all of people, not only one person.”

In August 2018, students were at an education center in Kabul to prepare for a university entrance exam when an ISIS suicide bomber entered the center and blew up the entire building. The bombing fatally tore apart 48 teenage students and wounded 67 others in a blink of eye.

“In Afghanistan, there is nothing safe. Losing our talented youths disappoints me,” said Mohammad Rezai, 18-year student who lost his peers in the bombing on the education center. “I don’t see a bright future. Everything is disappointing. These attacks stole our hope. I don’t feel safe at any gathering.”

Two other attacks claimed by the Islamic State made it extremely clear that no public gathering was safe. In September 2018, one suicide bomber detonated his vest at a wrestling club packed with young athletes and one car bomb torn apart an emergency team, killing 26 people and 91 others, including two journalists.

In August 2019 an Islamic State militant walked into a packed wedding hall in Kabul carrying a sports bag. The suicide bomber approached the men’s reception area of the wedding hall as the celebration was reaching its peak. The blast killed 83 civilians and wounded 160 others that included both Shiite and Sunni Muslims.

Fighting Back Against the Islamic State in Afghanistan

The atrocities of the Islamic State eventually contributed to their own fall over the years. Davood Azami, author of Countering the Islamic State in Asia, said that the horrific tactics used by the Islamic State made locals stand up against them.

“Takfir and Salafi ideology [of the Islamic State] was against Hanifi and Sunni religious and practices that are widely followed in Afghanistan,” said Azami. “They [Islamic State] did not understand the culture of local people. Daesh (ISIS) destroyed shrines of local people in Ghazni province and other provinces.”

Locals near ISIS strongholds were armed and fought back the Islamic State in eastern Afghanistan. The local forces, made up of farmers and elderly people who had mostly lost family members to the Islamic State’s attacks, were part of larger undeclared joint-operations of US air power, Taliban fighters, and the Afghan Government in a combined thrust against ISIS.

The United States conducted its first airstrike against the Islamic State in July 2015. The airstrikes aimed to kill senior leaders of the militant group, paving the way for junior militants to occupy their leaders’ places. The Islamic State had to choose a new leader sometimes within three to six months as their leaders were being repeatedly killed in American airstrikes.

MoAB

“The Islamic State is leader orientated, rather than strategically coordinated group,” said Hussain Ehsani who has studied the Islamic State in Iraq and in Afghanistan closely. “If there is a comprehensive strategy, their fighters would follow the strategy regardless of leaders.”

In April 2017, the U.S. Air Force dropped the “mother of all bombs”—the most powerful conventional bomb in the American arsenal—on complex caves used by the Islamic State located in the entrance to the Mamand Valley in the Asadkhel area of Achin district of Nangarhar province of Afghanistan. It killed a number of IS militants.

The US conducted such airstrikes by relying on operatives on the ground, mostly CIA agents and US Special Forces that coordinated attacks on the Islamic State hideouts. The US helped Afghan forces to battle the Islamic State, but they also provided “very limited support” to the Taliban in fighting the Islamic State.

After the Taliban’s initial failure to broker a deal with the Islamic State during the group’s emergence in 2014 and 2015, the Taliban also waged war on the Islamic State. First the Taliban asked ISIS leave the area in 2014, but the militants opened a new branch of the Islamic State in Afghanistan. The Taliban sent a message to the Islamic State headquarters in Iraq, demanding that they leave the jihad in the country to them but the group dismissed the Taliban’s demands.

“The Islamic State was the first group that challenged the Taliban, both militarily and ideologically,” said Azami. The Taliban supported “uprisings” against the Islamic State in July 2015 in their strongholds in eastern Nangarhar and fought ISIS over resources, such as mining, recruitment, as well as preventing an increase of their own unhappy fighters who had joined ISIS.

Ongoing Taliban Clashes with ISIS

The Taliban clashed with the ISIS across the country, not only in eastern Nangarhar province. In the northern Jawzjan province, in the western Herat and Ghor province, in the southern Zabul province, and elsewhere, the Taliban waged a bloody war to wipe out ISIS. Both the Islamic State and the Taliban suffered significant casualties in the mountains and they regrouped in swathes of the country where they enjoyed shelter from the eyes of US airstrikes and Afghan forces.

The main battlefield has been the eastern Nangarhar province. The Taliban battled ISIS fighters in mountains, mobilizing their Red Unit and their foot soldiers from other provinces, while the Afghan Government and their pro-uprising forces battled ISIS from low-ground areas.

The Islamic State gained increased attention from the Afghan Government in the summer of 2015. The Government supported local forces known as public uprising forces against ISIS and paid agents to collect information for battling ISIS in the country, while continuing to fight the Taliban on the larger scale.

US-Afghan Joint Ops Against Afghan ISIS

The US and the Afghan Government joint operation launched a number of strikes in the last four years to target the ISIS strongholds. US Special Forces and Afghan Commandos launched operations of targeted killings as well as coordinated airstrikes. On April 27, 2017, 50 US Army rangers and 40 Afghan commandos raided the compound of IS leader Sheikh Abdul Hasib, killing him and several other leaders of the militant group.

Adding on to these kind of operations against ISIS strongholds, the Afghan intelligence agency operated on cells of support and recruitment for the Islamic State in the country. The agency killed and destroyed several cells in Kabul, arrested university lecturers and students, and cut financial support to the group.

“The weakness of these anti-ISKP forces [government, tribal and Taleban] was coupled with the vitality of two pro-ISKP forces: small militant groups lacking fixed loyalties and the Salafi militants fighting in the ranks of the insurgency,” Borhan Osman, a former researcher for Afghanistan Analyst Network, wrote in September 2017.

The different operations by US forces, the Afghan Government and the Taliban reached an important phase in November 2019. The three operations led to the overall defeat of the Islamic State in the country, as all of them claimed credit for the defeat of the group in their stronghold of the Nangarhar province.

The Islamic State in Afghanistan broke into pieces. With many ISIS fighters killed, others escaped into deep mountains, and some surrendered to the Afghan Government. The defeat of the group in their initial stronghold did not mean the end of the group in the country that has been burning in war for 40 years.

“With a vast recruitment pool on both sides of the border [Afghanistan and Pakistan], it is hard to defeat [them] militarily without addressing the reasons for the emergence of ISKP in the first place,” said Borhan Osman, head of the Crisis Group for Afghanistan. “You can’t just kill them to death.”

Looking Ahead

Afghanistan and Pakistan have been an ideal place for extremist groups for decades and will likely continue to be so for years to come. The US-Taliban deal signed in February 2020 signaled a way for negotiations to end the long insurgency in the country, but it can serve as a reason for the regrouping of extremist groups. Atiqullah Amirkhil, an Afghan Army General, said that there is a possibility radical Taliban fighters who are not pleased with the prospect of peace could join the Islamic State in the country.

“If the government and the Taliban unite against the Islamic State and all forces cooperate with each other, Daesh [Islamic State] will be wiped out. If the deal leads to such a scenario, the peace is worthwhile,” said Amirkhil. “If nobody fights the Islamic State, it will remain in the coming years.”

Even the United States agreed to pull troops out of the country per deal with the Taliban, the US has established a network of Special Operations forces that will fight the Islamic State. The Afghan Government and the Taliban both vow to fight the extremist group, but in an absence of a strong state, the Islamic State may continue claim the lives of civilians, using complex underground cells and without holding territories.

“I am concerned with continuation of such attacks” said Sima Samar, member of UN High-Level Advisory Board on Mediation, referring to March 6 ISIS attack in Kabul. “Two persons who are willing to kill themselves [suicide attack], they can do it at any gatherings.”

The March 6 massacre is a prime example of how the Islamic State might survive despite losing territories in eastern Afghanistan. It can continue waging war on civilians to claim lives of those who are considered infields by them, like Islamdeen, the 21-year-old who was killed in the March 6 shooting in Kabul.

Born in a poor family, Islamdeen grew up weaving carpets to survive poverty. When he was only 9-years-old, he started exercising without the knowledge of his family. He asked his local club to waive one month of fees so he could do training. When he come the gold medal in 2018 his neighbors found out in surprise that he had been exercising and training secretly for years.

“Islamdeen was one of few who excelled in different fields of sports, gymnastics, shoot boxing, MMA, Free Fight, Muay Thai,” said Jumakhan Bahaduri, the 27-year old brother of Islamdeen. “He was known was Tiger Killer. Before even fighting, many athletes would give up to him. He had a statement: ‘I am fighting to bring smiles to face of Afghans.’”

Islamdeen was fighting against the odds. He had secured many offers to participate abroad, but the Government did not support him and he could not go there to compete for championships. Islamdeen found his way from poverty to be a champion, only to be killed instantly in a shooting by the Islamic State.

“His dream was the success of Afghanistan on the international stage,” said Islamdeen’s elder brother Mahrim Ali. “When Islam was alive, I felt like there was a mountain behind us.”

L'articolo The Rise and Fall of the Islamic State in Afghanistan proviene da InsideOver.