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

Hide the following 8 comments

multiple ?

14.11.2001 11:34

hey is this a new multiple name ??
can any one be daniel brett ?? or is this one person
working long hours.. nice one on all the 'good' news ..

good g'day LB

Luther Blissett


not so fast

14.11.2001 11:36

just a thought, the taliban may be going to the south to cement the southen front and hope to hold the line over the winter which would humillate the US and increaes tentions within the northen allance.

rich


Names

14.11.2001 11:58

LB: As far as I know, there are no copyrights on names, so you can call yourself Daniel Brett if you want. With a name like Luther Blissett, you might be wise to reconsider a pseudonym!
I come across stuff that comes to me at work and upload it for the benefit of all humankind.

Daniel Brett
mail e-mail: dan@danielbrett.co.uk


2 to tango

14.11.2001 12:05



"The myth of the USA's military prowess"

The quick collapse of the Twin towers is clear evidence that the tyrannical regime had survived all these years with the overt and covert support of multi-nationals.
The tide has turned. Capitalism is crumbling, and with it, the USA military bully-boy tactics.

Jk


stating the obvious

14.11.2001 12:41

The taliban are only about 40,000 strong, several thousand of them defecting.
Of course they were going to fall, with no support by anybody, constant air survaillence and bombing by america 24/7, in a country the size of texas, while fighting a northern alliance which has recieved massive military aid from iran, india, and russia, and a series of uprisings in the cities they controlled by the people they oppressed, it was only a matter of time before the regime fell apart.

unless you go at the usa with massive airpower, you are certain to lose, cuz they will bomb you and everything else in your country for a decade to keep their ass out of infantry warfare

says a lot about military prowess(and ethics) of the usa..

rick


well whats in a name

14.11.2001 14:57

dan, my comment was a bit of a doubled edged joke.
I see you come up quite a bit on Indymedia and if what you say about yourself is true, I have a got the gist of where you are coming from. seeing that you have been posting most of the shit that has gone down in the last couple of days
I jokingly enquired if you were a multiple.
I don't really see that our names are important, the use of multiple names is very interesting from an anarchist point of view. But as you are aware the problems we are facing are not going to be that easily resolved...
You have put up some very interesting stories in the last few days, keeping everyone in tune with what has happened in Afghan war and giving the WTO a fierce tonking.

i didn't follow the latest developements of the WTO, but I am very well aware who's interests they are looking after.

As far as the war this article, wot I am commenting on is a good one. The Myth about the fighting prowess of the taleban
seems to have been flushed down the pan pretty damn rapidly.
But to have a, much needed, war the U.S needed a foe, The Evildoers, as GW Bushwhacka calls them. So the western media
built them up to be legendary proportions. it seems to me as though they are definately finished.
The yankee bombing scared the shit out of them, but the situation is now at a stage where they(the yankees) have an excellent chance to prove how fucking stupid they are.
if as it seems jahalabad is being taken by a Pashtan Militia and the same thing is probably happening in Kandahar. These militia are going to be anti northern alliance and could include taleban defectors amongst their ranks.
The question is will the U.S distinguish between pashtan warlords and Taleban. if the U.S realise in time that the taleban no longer exist, but the people of the south have taken up arms against the Northern mafia, then they should
halt the war, pick two representative teams and get get them
talking asap. If they were to bomb forces, not loyal to the taleban, this could be the start of an ethnic civil war
which could very soon involve all the countries bordering Afghanistan and perhaps China and then bingo WW3.
Which is quite possibly what GW wants, or is it just the Oil.

Anyway daniel I trust you'll carry on with the good work
i read a bit from you the other day saying you got a couple of degrees, you lucky bastard I was kicked out of school at 15, but I have spent most of my life travelling the world and
very little time in the UK, since the advent of thatcher. Getting rid of my brit mentality is worth at least one.
degree. i don't consider myself part of any country, just slag them all off ..
regards LB

Luther blissett


What in it for them?

14.11.2001 16:32

Thanks for the feedback. Little of what I post is actually by me - I just upload interesting articles or press releases from Africa, Middle East and Asia. I was worried that perhaps I was saturating Indymedia, but no-one's complained ... yet. As for having two degrees, it's really a matter of having the willingness and money to do it. There are a large number of idiots with degrees, who've not given a shit about the subject but have got good civil service jobs out of it. A degree says little about the capability or intellect of an individual, although I really enjoyed studying. I've also really enjoyed working as a gardener, a farm labourer and a youth worker.

As for Afghanistan, I think the problems the West will encounter is the martial culture of all Afghani tribes. To impose a western style of state and capitalist economy may not sit easily with Afghanis. There are also an awful lot of guns in the country and even if the Taliban are completely destroyed, there will be high levels of banditry as seen in many post-conflict situations: Angola, Congo, Nicaragua, etc.

The west might not be so interested in imposing a coherent form of government. Access to Afghanistan's one billion cubic metres of natural gas and its potential as a host for US-owned oil pipelines like the one backed by Unocal will be crucial for the energy-hungry West, India and China. My bet is that they will argue for rock-bottom transit revenues and 'closed' pipelines, ie not allowing access to the local population for development of the country.

The US and its allies will need some sort of stability within Afghanistan to exploit adequately the region's hydrocarbons reserves. Therefore, I don't think they want to exclude Pashtuns from the government, particularly since their tribal areas are crucial for western plans. I think the US is erring on the side of Pakistan on this one, inviting Zahir Shah, the former King who is a Pashtun himself, to head the government, as opposed to former president Rabbani, who's seen as a malevolent character. This may or may not require acquiescence of ex-Talibans - India is resolutely opposed to Talibans in the interim government, but could be bought off if Musharraf cracks down on the Kashmiri terrorists. Iran will also advocate a high degree of Shi'ite influenced in the interim government, although the US won't take much interest in it.

I think we will see an interim puppet government in control of Afghanistan by the end of the year and early next year the oil companies will start taking interest. Just how long the interim government will last will depend on how much support it gets from the international community. Just as in Northern Ireland, dissenters and extremists need to feel that they would lose out if they broke away. Of course, this has nothing to do with ordinary people, but is all about appeasing warlords - ie genocidal terrorists who've shown no regard for human rights or decency in the past.

Daniel Brett
mail e-mail: dan@danielbrett.co.uk


my apologies

14.11.2001 17:55

sorry for being somewhat ill in my 'stating the obvious' post, i was ticked off after reading some of the right-winger's posts on the main imc page, so i was under the wrong impression!


great followup though, albeit grim.
I reckon all that we can do is speculate for the future..
and just assume that in 5 years there will be a pipeline owned by some conglmorate running through afghanistan, which might still be in turmoil over its 20 years of combat
The caspian will be tapped eventually anyway

the saddest element of post 9-11 for me is how impotent the left has become. I'm in the usa, and it's basically become what nader said all along his campaign in 2000, there's no real difference between the domocrats and republicans anymore. Compound that with the rediculous division within the left itself, and abondon all hope ye. I guess a division will re-emerge at some point, but I seriously doubt that anybody learned a lasting lesson from the attacks. Perhaps I'm wrong but oh well, we'll just wait and see

rick