You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Afghanistan
Why Taliban are so strong in Afghanistan
2012-03-03
Posted by:Besoeker

#8  Here's what happened to Najibullah after the Soviets withdrew:

Without the Soviets

Pakistan, under Zia ul-Haq, continued to support the mujahideen even if it was a contravention of the Geneva Accords. At the beginning most observers expected the Najibullah government to collapse immediately, and to be replaced with an Islamic fundamentalist government. The Central Intelligence Agency stated in a report, that the new government would be ambivalent, or even worse, hostile towards the United States. Almost immediately after the Soviet withdrawal, the Battle of Jalalabad broke out between Afghan government forces and the mujahideen. The offensive against the city began when the mujahideen bribed several government military officers, from there, they tried to take the airport, but were repulsed with heavy casualties. The willingness for the common Afghan government soldier increased when the mujahideen began to execute people early on during the battle. During the battle Najibullah called for Soviet assistance. Gorbachev called an emergency session of the Politburo to discuss his proposal, but Najibullah's request was rejected. Other attacks against the city failed, and by April the government forces were on the offensive.[40] During the battle over four hundred Scud missiles were shot, which were fired by a Soviet crew which had stayed behind.[44] When the battle ended in July, the mujahideen had lost an estimated 3,000 troops. One mujahideen commander lamented "the battle of Jalalabad lost us credit won in ten years of fighting."[45] A officer of the Inter-Service Intelligence, Pakistan's intelligence agency, said "The Jihad has never recovered from Jalalabad.".[45]

From 1989 to 1990 the Najibullah was partially successful in building up the Afghan defence forces. The Ministry of State Security had established a local milita force which stood at an estimated 100,000 men. The 17th Division in Herat, which had begun the 1979 Herat uprising against PDPA-rule, stood at 3,400 regular troops and 14,000 tribal men. In 1988, the total number of security forces available to the government stood at 300,000.[46] Sadly for Najibullah, this trend would not continue, and by the summer of 1990, the Afghan government forces were on the defensive again. By the beginning of 1991, the government controlled only 10 percent of Afghanistan, the eleven year Siege of Khost had ended in a mujahideen victory and the moral of the Afghan military finally collapsed. In the Soviet Union, Kryuchkov and Shevardnadze, had both supported continuing aid to the Najibullah government, but Kryuchkov had been arrested following the failed 1991 Soviet coup d'état attempt and Shevardnadze had resigned from his posts in the Soviet government in December 1990 – there was no longer any pro-Najibullah people in the Soviet leadership. It didn't help either that the Soviet Union was in the middle of an economic and political crisis, which would lead directly to the dissolution of the Soviet Union on 26 December 1991. At the same time Boris Yeltsin became Russia's new hope, and he had no wish to continue to aid Najibullah's government, a government which he considered a relic of the past. In the autumn of 1991, Najibullah wrote to Shevardnadze "I didn't want to be president, you talked me into it, insisted on it, and promised support. Now you are throwing me and the Republic of Afghanistan to its fate."[47]
[edit] Fall from power

In January 1992, the Russian government ended its aid to the Najibullah government. The effects were felt immediate, the Afghan Air Force, the most effective part of the Afghan military, was grounded due to the lack of fuel. The mujahideen, in contrast to Najibullah, continued to be supported by Pakistan. Major cities were lost to the rebels, and terrorist attacks became common in Kabul. On the fifth anniversary of his policy of National Reconciliation, Najibullah blamed the Soviet Union for the disaster that had stricken Afghanistan.[47] The day the Soviet Union withdrew was hailed by Najibullah as the Day of National Salvation. But it was to late, and his government's collapse was imminent.[48]

In March Najibullah offered his governments immediate resignation, and followed the United Nations (UN), to be replaced by an interim government. In mid-April Najibullah accepted a UN plan to hand power to a seven-man council, few days later on 14 April, Najibullah was forced to resign on the orders of the Watan Party because of the lose Bagram airbase and the town of Charikar. Abdul Rahim Hatef became acting head of state following Najibullah's resignation.[49] Najibullah not long before Kabul's fall, appealed to the UN for amnesty, which he was granted. But Najibullah was hindered by Abdul Rashid Dostum to escape, instead, Najibullah sought haven in the local UN headquarters in Kabul.[50] The Afghan civil war did not end with Najibullah's ouster, and continued until 1996 when the Taliban took power.[51]
[edit] Death

When the Taliban were about to enter Kabul Ahmad Shah Massoud offered Najibullah, a political enemy but someone he had known since childhood as they had lived in the same neighborhood, twice to flee Kabul. Najibullah refused, believing the Taliban, Ghilzai Pashtuns like Najibullah, would spare his life and not harm him. General Tokhi, who was with Dr. Najibullah until the day before his torture and murder, wrote that when three people came to both Dr. Najibullah and General Tokhi and asked them to come with them to flee Kabul, they rejected the offer. This proved to be a fatal mistake. Najibullah was at the UN compound when the Taliban soldiers came for him on September 27, 1996. He was castrated[52] before the Taliban dragged him to death behind a truck in the streets. His blood-soaked body was hanged from a traffic light.[53] His brother Shahpur Ahmadzai was also with him throughout this whole ordeal at the UN compound, and was shot to death.
[edit] International reaction

There was widespread international condemnation,[54] particularly from the Muslim world.[55]

India, which supported Najibullah as a proxy against Pakistan, strongly condemned the public execution of Najibullah and began to support Ahmed Shah Massoud's Northern Alliance in an attempt to contain the rise of the Taliban.[56]


If we get out and don't continue our subsidies to Karzai, his government will be in a pickle, because Pakistan will continue to subsidize the Taliban. It's not a sure thing, but India, Iran, Russia, the Central Asian states and China might subsidize Karzai to keep him standing, because an Afghanistan under Taliban control would once again be a nearby font of terrorists heading into their territory.
Posted by: Zhang Fei   2012-03-03 20:18  

#7  The Taliban aren't strong, or they'd be inflicting more casualties on ISAF. The daily GI body count is 1, as compared to 2 dozen during the Vietnam War. The press's daily diarrhea of defeatist rhetoric is obscuring the fact that the Taliban are inflicting minimal casualties on US forces. The real problem isn't that the Taliban is strong - it's that we're weak, with ROE's that defy belief.
Posted by: Zhang Fei   2012-03-03 20:02  

#6  Soddies pay the bills for the madrassas, so who to blame, the stone maker or the stone?
Posted by: tipper   2012-03-03 12:40  

#5  Because they blend in and we stick out.
Posted by: Fat Bob Unotch3711   2012-03-03 12:09  

#4  Why Taliban are so strong in Afghanistan

Because of the sanctuaries in Pakistan, incubated by the ISI?
Posted by: Procopius2k   2012-03-03 10:29  

#3  We had the opportunity to do so early on, but because of damned stupid "cultural sensitivity", we blew it and condemned them to more of their perpetual Hell.

To make matters worse, we could have done it on the cheap.
Posted by: Anonymoose   2012-03-03 09:34  

#2  Can you bring modern democracy to a mullah led intolerant religious people who still want to live in the 7th Century?
Posted by: Gruth McGurque5303   2012-03-03 07:35  

#1  BBC? Not exactly a credible source. Why are we linking there again?
Posted by: gromky   2012-03-03 04:16  

00:00