| Submit your comments on this article |
| Afghanistan |
| Kabul moves to gain provincial control-officials |
| 2003-05-12 |
| President Hamid Karzai will attempt to seize the initiative in Afghanistan's lawless provinces this week by sacking regional officials defying his rule. Karzai plans to target civil, military and police officials in several key provinces from governor downwards, said one official. "The government will issue a statement in this regard in the near future. The aim is to improve working procedures and create good co-ordination between the centre and the provinces," a second official said. Afghan downsizing and reorganization normally involves crew-served weapons. Since replacing the fundamentalist Taliban in power in late 2001, Karzai has complained that several regional governors have paid more attention to strengthening their own rule than to the nation's interests and have failed to deliver vital tax revenue to Kabul. In the latest example of this, six people were killed on Sunday in a clash in the north of the country between fighters loyal to two commanders who hold senior positions in Karzai's government. Those killed southeast of Mazar-i-Sharif were all loyalists of Uzbek warlord General Abdul Rashid Dostum. Ahmad Khan, one of Dostum's commanders, blamed the clash on "expansionist moves" by the Ustad Atta Mohammed Jamiat-e-Islami faction. Translation: Ustad is poaching on Abdul's turf, Abdul's boys got wacked, dire revenge promised. The Godfather with turbans. Karzai announced the sacking of some provincial officials late last year but some ignored the order. Some regional rulers have private armies that allow them to defy Kabul and its attempts to re-establish central rule. One is Ismail Khan, governor of Herat province that borders Iran and Turkmenistan. He collects the bulk of Afghanistan's customs revenues but only a small proportion reaches Kabul. He's not going to give that up without a fight. Fighting has broken out between rival commanders in several provinces, southern authorities have failed to curb opium poppy cultivation and Taliban fugitives have stepped up attacks in recent months on government and U.S.-led coalition forces. Just another day in the 'stan. Officials declined to say which provincial rulers might be targeted by Karzai, whose power extends little beyond Kabul, which is protected by about 5,000 foreign peacekeepers. Efforts to establish his authority in the provinces have been hampered by the U.S.-led coalition's use of warlord soldiers in the hunt for Taliban and al Qaeda remnants. Some officials fear Karzai risks creating better conditions for Taliban guerrillas if he alienates regional leaders. Memo to Karzai: Pick the strongest regional leader (warlord) who is opposing you and take him out. The others will notice and get back in line. |
| Posted by:Steve |
| #3 not gonna use US air power and SOF against a warlord like Ismail - not just for the sake of customs revenues. Thats getting us too deep into local rivalries, "US is colonial murderer" "Karzai is US puppet" We studied history of Soviet and UK interventions carefully before going in. We're not going to make those mistakes. |
| Posted by: liberalhawk 2003-05-12 13:25:02 |
| #2 Seems simple enough to me,a batallion of loyal Karzi troops.Backed-up with U.S.Air and SoF. Take-out Ismail,disarm or kill the rest. "I said your fired get out!" |
| Posted by: w_r_manues@yahoo.com 2003-05-12 13:16:13 |
| #1 "Memo to Karzai: Pick the strongest regional leader (warlord) who is opposing you and take him out. The others will notice and get back in line" That would certainly be Ismail Khan, but I dont think Karzai has strenght yet to do that. On the one hand im getting nervous about Afghan. 6 months ago I was patient - but now things really are moving too slowly - evidence that hardly any reconstruction being done outside Kabul and surrounding provinces. Mainly due to security situation, so more money (US or other) wouldnt help. I see argument for not adding more US troops - keep footprint light, avoid colonial situation. Use US troops only against Taliban. That leaves taking on warlords to Afghan National Army - growth of that entity frustratingly slow. What are constraints on more rapid expansion of ANA? |
| Posted by: liberalhawk 2003-05-12 12:38:33 |