Skip to content or view screen version

The myth of Taliban's military prowess

Daniel Brett | 14.11.2001 11:09

The quick collapse of the Taliban is clear evidence that the tyrannical regime had survived all these years with the overt and covert support of Pakistan, says Parsa Venkateshwar Rao Jr

New Delhi, November 13

After September 11, it seemed that the war would not begin because there was no recognisible enemy. And when the American air strikes began on October 7, it seemed that the war would be a long drawn out affair. On both the counts, pundits have been outpaced by events.

The fall of Kabul to Northern Alliance troops on November 13 has created a tricky situation. The Americans are plainly not yet ready with a political plan. The Northern Alliance leaders, according to reports, are not inclined to take over the government. They are willing to serve under former king Zahir Shah, now in Rome, which is part of an American plan.

But the defeat of the Taliban has come as a surprise. It seemed that the fanatical Islamic militia would fight every inch of the ground. After the fall of Mazar-e-Sharif three days ago, the Taliban defenses have collapsed like a pack of cards.

The collapse is greatly due to Pakistan being forced to cut off the supply line. It was a difficult decision that Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf had to make last month. He chose to support the US at the risk of antagonising some of the fanatical elements in the army, in the Inter Services Intelligence (ISI) and in Pakistani society at large.

Though the Taliban have retreated from Kabul without a fight, it is not known where they have retreated. The caves and tunnels in the mountains will not serve as a good base if no supplies of food and guns arrive from Pakistan.

Musharraf has also made it clear that the Taliban forces have to stay within Afghanistan, and that Pakistan would not allow them to cross the border. He was responding to a question at a press conference at Istanbul on Tuesday evening. Musharraf was on a visit to Turkey on his way back from New York, where he addressed the UN General Assembly and met US President George W Bush.

It is also a matter of speculation whether the Taliban still retain an army worth its name, or they have just melted into thin air. It also points to the fact that the Taliban did not remain in power since 1996 on their strength, but they survived on help in men and materials from Pakistan, and indirectly from the US. The Americans are loath to admit the fact that they had helped Taliban to gain and power and retain it.

Though the right-wing religious fanatics in Pakistan might fret and fume, it seems that Musharraf had rid Pakistan of the Taliban elements by cutting off relations with Mullah Omar and his band of fanatics, as Talibanism would have one day submerged Pakistani polity and society.

It might seem that the Taliban will continue to wage a guerrilla war from the mountains the way the mujahideen did during the years of Soviet occupation of the country in the 1980s. But it was the American and Pakistani military aid which enabled the mujahideen to press against the Soviet troops.

Unless Pakistan plays truant once again and flirts with Islamic extremists, the Taliban would not be able to sustain a guerrilla war because the supply lines from Pakistan will not be there this time round.

The defeat of Taliban should also explode the myth that it is difficult to fight an army with a fanatical fervour. Fanatics and terrorists can be defeated if covert supply lines are cut off. Superior strategy and superior firepower have an edge over extremists.

The quick collapse of the Taliban gives rise to some intriguing questions. Were the Taliban ever a fighting force in the first place? Or, was it Pakistani soldiers on deputation who fought in the ranks of the Taliban?

There is also the presence of a few thousands of Arab and other mercenaries in the Taliban army, which goes to show that the Taliban was no fighting force, and that its numbers were swelled by outsiders. This was a point which some of the American right-wingers had been making, especially in the columns of The New Republic.

It is, perhaps, for this reason, that we find common people in Kabul so happy with the exit of the Taliban. Their jubilation on the streets, recorded by cameras of the BBC, was not a staged one.

Pakistan and the Americans will have to bear the responsibility of imposing the Taliban regime on an unwilling populace. Pakistan had not been a democracy, and it is understandable that it should support an authoritarian regime. What is sad that a democratic United States should perpetuate the tyranny of the Taliban in Afghanistan, and which would have gone on doing so but for the tragic and horrific terrorist attacks of September 11.

Daniel Brett
- e-mail: dan@danielbrett.co.uk
- Homepage: http://www.tehelka.com/channels/currentaffairs/2001/nov/13/ca111301war.htm

Comments

Display the following 8 comments

  1. multiple ? — Luther Blissett
  2. not so fast — rich
  3. Names — Daniel Brett
  4. 2 to tango — Jk
  5. stating the obvious — rick
  6. well whats in a name — Luther blissett
  7. What in it for them? — Daniel Brett
  8. my apologies — rick