What's new

Afghan Taliban say no links with Pakistani Taliban

link: Insurgents Share a Name but Pursue Different Goals Pakistan Ka Khuda Hafiz

By Scott Shane

WASHINGTON — As it devises a new Afghanistan policy, the Obama administration confronts a complex geopolitical puzzle: two embattled governments, in Afghanistan and Pakistan; numerous militias aligned with overlapping Islamist factions; and hidden in the factions’ midst, the foe that brought the United States to the region eight years ago, Al Qaeda.

But at the core of the tangle are the two Taliban movements, Afghan and Pakistani. They share an ideology and a dominant Pashtun ethnicity, but they have such different histories, structures and goals that the common name may be more misleading than illuminating, some regional specialists say.

“The fact that they have the same name causes all kinds of confusion,” said Gilles Dorronsoro, a French scholar of South Asia currently at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in Washington.

This week, Mr. Dorronsoro said, as the Pakistani Army began a major offensive against the Pakistani Taliban, many Americans thought incorrectly that the assault was against the Afghan Taliban, the force that is causing Washington to consider sending more troops to Afghanistan.

At stake is not just semantics. Grasping the differences between the two Taliban forces, and their shifting relationships with Al Qaeda, is crucial to understanding the debate under way in the White House situation room. Though both groups threaten American interests, the Afghan Taliban — the word Taliban means “religious students” — are the primary enemy, mounting attacks daily against the 68,000 American troops in Afghanistan. Washington’s biggest fear is that if the Afghan Taliban overrun the country, they could invite Al Qaeda’s leaders back from their Pakistani hide-out.

Alex Strick van Linschoten, a Dutch researcher who lives in Kandahar, in the heart of the Afghan Taliban’s power base, said that while leaders of the two Taliban groups might say that they share common interests, the two movements are quite separate.

“To be honest, the Taliban commanders and groups on the ground in Afghanistan couldn’t care less what’s happening to their Pakistani brothers across the border,” said Mr. Strick van Linschoten, who has interviewed many current and former members of the Afghan Taliban.

In fact, the recent attacks of the Pakistani Taliban against Pakistan’s government, military and police, in anticipation of the army’s current campaign into the Pakistani Taliban’s base in South Waziristan, may have strained relations with the Afghan Taliban, said Richard Barrett, a former British intelligence officer who tracks Al Qaeda and the Taliban for the United Nations.

The Afghan Taliban have always had a close relationship with Pakistani intelligence agencies, Mr. Barrett said recently. “They don’t like the way that the Pakistan Taliban has been fighting the Pakistan government and causing a whole load of problems there,” he said.

The Afghan Taliban, whose group is by far the older of the two forces, have been led by Mullah Muhammad Omar since he founded the movement in 1994. They seeks to regain the power they held over most of Afghanistan before being ousted by the American invasion of 2001.

In an interview this week, speaking on the condition of anonymity, an Afghan Taliban commander expressed sympathy for the Pakistani Taliban, but said, “There will not be any support from us.” He said the Afghan Taliban “don’t have any interest in fighting against other countries.”

“Our aim was, and is, to get the occupation forces out and not to get into a fight with a Muslim army,” the commander added.

Before 9/11, the Afghan Taliban hosted Osama bin Laden and the other leaders of Al Qaeda, but the groups are now separated geographically, their leaders under pressure from intensive manhunts. On jihadist Web sites, analysts have detected recent tensions between Al Qaeda, whose proclaimed goals are global, and the Afghan Taliban, which have recently claimed that their interests lie solely in Afghanistan.

Mr. Dorronsoro, the French scholar, said the Afghan Taliban were a “genuine national movement” incorporating not only a broad network of fighters, but also a shadow government-in-waiting in many provinces.

By comparison, he said, the Pakistani Taliban were a far looser coalition, united mainly by their enmity toward the Pakistani government. They emerged formally only in 2007 as a separate force led by Baitullah Mehsud under the name Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan, or Students’ Movement of Pakistan.

After Mr. Mehsud was killed by an American missile in August, a fellow tribesman, Hakimullah Mehsud, took over after a period of jockeying for power in Pakistan’s tribal areas.

Another complication for regional terminology: most leaders of the Afghan Taliban are based in Pakistan, directing their forces from hide-outs across the border. Mullah Omar and his top deputies are believed to be in or around the southern Pakistani city of Quetta. Two other major factions in the Afghan insurgency are led by veteran Afghan warlords, Jalaluddin Haqqani and Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, who are in Pakistan’s tribal areas, where the Pakistan Taliban is strongest.

Al Qaeda’s leaders, including Mr. bin Laden, are believed to be hiding in the same tribal areas of Pakistan. While it has been weakened by American missile strikes, the terrorist network nonetheless is believed to have provided support for the Pakistani Taliban’s strikes against the Pakistani government.

For the United States, regional experts say, the long-term challenge is to devise policies that peel away as many militants as possible from both Taliban forces, isolating Al Qaeda and other hard-liners and strengthening the Pakistani and Afghan governments. But for a non-Muslim superpower, widely resented in the region, that is a tall order.

“At the moment the ground isn’t very well prepared for splitting the militant groups,” said Stephen Biddle, senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, who spent a month last summer in Afghanistan. “The security trends are running in their favor.”

Of course, if the United States’ enemies in the region are complicated, so are its allies. In Afghanistan, President Hamid Karzai is seen as unwilling to take on corruption and tainted by fraud in the recent election, though he has now agreed to a runoff.

In Pakistan, with 172 million people, a population at least five times as large as that of Afghanistan, power is divided among the army, the intelligence service and two rival political parties — “four actors,” Mr. Biddle said, “each of which sees the threat from the others as bigger than the threat from the militants.”

Polls show that Americans, frustrated by the United States’ supposed allies and confused by the conflict, are losing their fervor for the fight. “The complexity of all this is hard enough for experts to understand,” said Paul R. Pillar, a former Central Intelligence Agency analyst now at Georgetown University. “It’s not surprising if it baffles a lot of ordinary people.”
 
What's the difference? One faction kills women and children in Afghanistan, the other in Pakistan.

Its more then just killing of innocents on both sides, which makes the difference.
 
What is their difference of view with respect to Islam and Jehad?

They both have same view blow yourself up and go to Jannat to find some Virgin hoors.

They are targetting pakistan because and only because you have chased them out of their homes in Tribal regions. This is what they say so.

If you are sick of Taliban treat them equally, Afghan taliban or Pakistan taliban, or else you would be back to square one.

You seriously need to study first about the problem and then give your views, especially about the bold part. As this is a shocker for me, to read this as a cause.
 
Afghan Taliban Issue New Code Of Conduct Pakistan Ka Khuda Hafiz

July 27, 2009

LuBEazSQlTg[/media] - Taliban issues new code of conduct - 27 July 09

The Taliban in Afghanistan has issued a book laying down a code of conduct for its fighters.

Al Jazeera has obtained a copy of the book, which further indicates that Mullah Omar, the movement’s leader, wants to centralise its operations.

The book, with 13 chapters and 67 articles, lays out what one of the most secretive organisations in the world today, can and cannot do.

It talks of limiting suicide attacks, avoiding civilian casualties and winning the battle for the hearts and minds of the local civilian population.

James Bays, our correspondent in Afghanistan, said every fighter is being issued the pocket book entitled “The Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan Rules for Mujahideen”.

Our correspondent said the book sheds considerable light on the structure, organisation and aims of the group.

In the book, Mullah Omar is quoted as saying that creating a new mujahideen group or battalion is forbidden.

“If unofficial groups or irregular battalions refuse to join the formal structure, they should be disbanded,” Omar says.

So far, individual Taliban commanders have had a fair degree of autonomy, often deciding what operations to conduct and how to run the territory that they control.

Our correspondent said the regulations seem to be an attempt by Mullah Omar to bring all of the Taliban under his control.

“We have in the past had a lot of different groups in Afghanistan operating under the umbrella of the Taliban,” Bays said.

“But it says in these regulations that if you find an irregular battalion that is not obeying orders then what you have to do is find that battalion and then disarm them.”

Suicide bombing rules

While the Taliban have repeatedly used suicide bombings across Afghanistan, the book now says that they should be used only on high and important targets.

“A brave son of Islam should not be used for lower and useless targets. The utmost effort should be made to avoid civilian casualties,” the book says.

There are now clear guidelines on how the Taliban will treat its prisoners as well.
“Whenever any official, soldier, contractor or worker of the slave government is captured, these prisoners cannot be attacked or harmed,” it says.

“The decision on whether to seek a prisoner exchange or to release the prisoner with strong guarantees will be made by the provincial leader.

“Releasing prisoners in exchange for money is strictly prohibited.”

The book further states that if a “military infidel” is captured, the decision on whether to kill, release or exchange the hostage is only to be made by the Imam, a reference to Mullah Omar, or deputy Imam.

Winning hearts

The book makes it clear that it is the duty of every fighter to win over the local population.

“The mujahideen have to behave well and show proper treatment to the nation, in order to bring the hearts of civilian Muslims closer to them.

“The mujahideen must avoid discrimination based on tribal roots, language or geographic background.”

Our correspondent said the reference to winning over the hearts of the Afghan people is very similar to language used by Nato-led military forces in the country.

“Recently the Nato commander here issued a new tactical directive saying that civilians should not be bombed – almost the same words in these regulations to Taliban fighters,” Bays said.

“Both sides [are] trying to win over the civilian population in their area.”

The release of the rule book comes less than a month before Afghans head to the polls for a presidential election, which the Taliban has deemed an illegitimate system imposed by foreigners.

The timing may be just a coincidence, however, as rival presidential candidates detail their manifestos and the Taliban makes an effort to win over the Afghan public.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
can you elucidate on what you mean exactly?


you should read all the articles i posted! Also you might want to watch all the videos i posted on this thread as well! Instead of blindly questioning us, it would be better to read the articles which will answer all your questions!
 
Mazhar Tufail's article about Omar's admonishment to the TTP makes clear that he believes his power extends to those groups and that he wishes to enlist the support of the TTP against Afghanistan.

Should the TTP adhere to Omar, it would alleviate the pressure on Pakistan. That would mean that Pakistan now would possess the ability to go after the sanctuaries.

Doing so, though, would be attacking your friend Omar who'd called off the TTP dogs. Pakistan wouldn't do that as it might turn both Omar AND the TTP against Pakistan.

Ah...what to do?
 
I have no interest in reading drivel posted by Ahmed Qureshi and the likes. The question was also posted to Taimi, not to you.
 
What is their difference of view with respect to Islam and Jehad?

They both have same view blow yourself up and go to Jannat to find some Virgin hoors.

They are targetting pakistan because and only because you have chased them out of their homes in Tribal regions. This is what they say so.

If you are sick of Taliban treat them equally, Afghan taliban or Pakistan taliban, or else you would be back to square one.

So why there are non Muslims in TTP? it is proved.
So they are not doing in favor of Islam , They only want to unstabilize the fort of Islam - Pakistan.

They are extremists, They are doing suicide bombing that is 'Haram' in Islam, They are destroying schools etc.
 
I have no interest in reading drivel posted by Ahmed Qureshi and the likes. The question was also posted to Taimi, not to you.


Ahmed Quraishi? lol, where did he come from? did you read the name of the Author of the article?
 
Mazhar Tufail's article about Omar's admonishment to the TTP makes clear that he believes his power extends to those groups and that he wishes to enlist the support of the TTP against Afghanistan.

Should the TTP adhere to Omar, it would alleviate the pressure on Pakistan. That would mean that Pakistan now would possess the ability to go after the sanctuaries.

Doing so, though, would be attacking your friend Omar who'd called off the TTP dogs. Pakistan wouldn't do that as it might turn both Omar AND the TTP against Pakistan.

Ah...what to do?

But the point is that TTP didn't listen to Mullah Omar! And if you haven't read other articles related to this topic, the Afghan Taliban have repeatedly said that attacks on TTP doesn't have any effect on Jihad in Afghanistan!

So if Pakistan does attack those sanctuaries (Which have been destroyed in tribal areas and south Waziristan) it still wouldn't do no harm to Afghan Taliban!
 
because u guys are pakistanis and he TTP is attacking pakistani citizens thats why u call them terrorists.but when afghan taliban kill common afghans u call them freedom fighters...:rofl::rofl:
why cant u guys keep ur yard sticks same.just because the afghan taliban does not attack pakistan as u believe..they are freedom fighters.if TTP kill ur people they r terrorists if afghan taliban kill aghanis and LeT kill ppl in kashmir they r freedom fighters.the whole idea is laughable.why u ppl have some supreme divine right to live that kahsmiris and afghans dont have.
 
because u guys are pakistanis and he TTP is attacking pakistani citizens thats why u call them terrorists.but when afghan taliban kill common afghans u call them freedom fighters...:rofl::rofl:
why cant u guys keep ur yard sticks same.just because the afghan taliban does not attack pakistan as u believe..they are freedom fighters.if TTP kill ur people they r terrorists if afghan taliban kill aghanis and LeT kill ppl in kashmir they r freedom fighters.the whole idea is laughable.why u ppl have some supreme divine right to live that kahsmiris and afghans dont have.


The difference between Afghan Taliban and TTP is that Afghan locals support Afghan Taliban (which is why Afghan Taliban control more than 70% of Afghanistan) and Pakistanis hate TTP!


 
Last edited by a moderator:
I'm sorry but this comment doesn't make any sense-

"So if Pakistan does attack those sanctuaries (Which have been destroyed in tribal areas and south Waziristan) it still wouldn't do no harm to Afghan Taliban!"

To date Pakistan has attacked NO sanctuaries. The TTP possess no sanctuaries on Pakistani lands to attack Pakistan. It is the afghan taliban who've been protected on your lands since late 2001. You've also sheltered Haqqani and Hekmatyar.

You also have permitted your own tribal citizens like Maulvi Nazir and Hafez Gul Bahadur make war upon Afghanistan.

Sanctuary means a protected place. Why do you protect the afghan taliban? We know why.

Finally, the most important part of Omar's letter is that it chronicles the affinity that exists between the afghan taliban and the PA. The afghan taliban KNOW on which side their bread is buttered.

The afghan taliban would NEVER do anything against the PA which might jeopardize the protected status provided by sanctuary.

These are your protected proxy assets. You make proxy war upon Afghanistan. It is wrong.

Thanks.:usflag:
 
Sanctuary means a protected place. Why do you protect the afghan taliban? We know why

You should.after all you are packing bags to leave in a few days.You will leave but we have to remain here so one has to do things in his interest.

These are your protected proxy assets. You make proxy war upon Afghanistan. It is wrong.

War on Afghanistan due to American incompetency in destroying TTP sanctuaries in Afghanistan.It is America conducting a Proxy war against Pakistan.Our Army conducts operation TTP runs in Afghanistan.

Due to American Inability to destroy TTP sanctuaries in Afghanistan it is our civilians who suffers.It is we that feel the pain.It is our citizens that are killed.You wouldn't feel the pain.It is very easy to say that you attack Afghan Taliban sanctuaries so that they also start bombing Pakistan.
 
Back
Top Bottom