Pakistan's ISI intelligence agency 'supports' Taliban: UK University

[Ganga]

lool...... research publication on insurgency is totally a different world. economic institutions should stick with analyzing the economy by looking at the data available on their computer screens.

IITs are engineering institutes but they have other departments like economics humanities etc..Like wise LSE also teaches things other than economics.

 

[Malik Usman]

Well, the document is prepared by London School of Economics, the interviewers were from UK, India has been saying the same things since two decades now, Afghanistan has been saying the same, and its not the first time this has come to the light.

So personally I have enough reasons to believe its true and nothing about it seems false to me.

It is not that you are saying, or Afghanistan or UK is saying. Do you have proofs. Answer is no... I can say that India is running the Al-Qida and Tilban its very easy to raise finger on others, you must see your own country rather than us.
And the people you are refereeing about this story, they even don't' know about our or Afghanistan's culture their living style or their generation, buy sitting in room thousand miles away to make a story just to make himself popular its very easy.

 

[T-Faz]

Firstly I would like to review this report by an Economy Specific University. As far as I am aware, the standards for publications are very high and such a study seems to be in direct violation of the publication protocols. I would know, I am working on a Biology research publication which is very often checked for its credibility even with paramount proof found therein.

Secondly, why would LSE release such a report when it does not specialize in this particular area. The so called evidence seems to be hear say that is often twisted to suit the likings of the writer. The way these people are flip flopping is odd because such reports show that even they are not sure who supports the Taliban. Very often the blame is being put on Iran in the last few months and it amazes me how Pakistan and Iran are in frame for such blame all the time.

Taliban Training In Iran: McChrystal Says 'Clear Evidence' Of Inappropriate Iranian Activity

Taliban fighters being taught at secret camps in Iran - Times Online

Now the problem lies in this media campaign that is only being used to alter public perception and put pressure on the mentioned country. NATO has been defeated in Afghanistan, it is as simple as that. There is a new article up at NYT where they claim that US intelligence are now concentration on corruption and fraud in Afghanistan which leads me to believe that their work on the militant groups itself has been a failure.

U.S. Military Intelligence Puts Focus on Afghan Graft - NYTimes.com

All this leads me to believe that by putting blame on others, namely Pakistan and Iran, they ease the burden of their impending loss. It boggles me as to how NATO is changing their stance from one to another because of continuous failures that must have affected them badly.

Another thing noteworthy is that the Karzai is opening up new channels to solve this problem which NATO cannot do so anymore. The story about the Afghani Intelligence Chief is very much a part of this campaign because the war is just dragging on without any end in sight.

Oh and Taliban is actually winning according to them, so you should expect a lot of finger pointing because admitting loss is something that the coalition forces will not admit to.
Taliban Rejects Peace Talks Because They 'Think They're Winning' (VIDEO)

 

[T-Faz]

Here is an old yet wonderful article from a well respected and throughly unbiased journalist, it needs to be revisited in this case.

Blaming Pakistan's Spies For A War Gone Wrong​

NEW YORK -- The almost forgotten war in Afghanistan, that was supposed to have been won in 2001, has roared back to life with a vengeance. More American soldiers are now dying in Afghanistan than Iraq.

As resistance to the US-led occupation of Afghanistan intensifies, the increasingly frustrated Bush administration is venting its anger against Pakistan and its military intelligence agency, Inter-Service Intelligence, better known as ISI.

The White House leaked claims ISI is in cahoots with pro-Taliban groups in Pakistan's tribal agency along the Afghan border and warns them of impending US attacks. Some administration officials believe ISI may even be hiding Osama bin Laden.

On top of this, the Bush administration just leaked to the New York Times, which lost no time in again acting a megaphone for the administration, a claim that CIA had electronic intercepts proving ISI was behind the recent bombing of India's embassy in Kabul.

President George Bush angrily asked Pakistan's visiting prime minister, Yousuf Gilani, "who's in charge of ISI?" This is a good question, and one not easily answered.

I was one of the first western journalists invited into ISI HQ in 1986. ISI's then director, the fierce Lt. General Akhtar Rahman, personally briefed me on Pakistan's secret role in fighting Soviet occupation of Afghanistan. ISI's `boys' provided communications, logistics, training, heavy weapons, and direction in the Afghan War. I kept ISI's role in Afghanistan a secret until the war ended in 1989.

ISI was primarily responsible for the victory over the Soviets, which hastened the collapse of the USSR. At war's end, Gen. Akhtar and Pakistan's leader, Zia ul Haq, both died in a sabotaged C-130 transport aircraft. Unfortunately, most Pakistanis blame the United States for this assassination.

On my subsequent trips to Pakistan I was routinely briefed by succeeding ISI chiefs, and joined ISI officers in the field, sometimes under fire.

ISI is accused of meddling in Pakistani politics. The late Benazir Bhutto, who often was thwarted and vexed by Pakistan's spooks, always playfully scolded me, `you and your beloved generals at ISI.'

But before Gen. Pervez Musharraf took over as military dictator, ISI was the third world's most efficient, professional intelligence agency. It still defends Pakistan against internal and external subversion by India's powerful spy agency, RAW, and by Iran. ISI works closely with CIA and the Pentagon and was primarily responsible for the rapid ouster of Taliban from power in 2003. But ISI also must serve Pakistan's interests, which are often not identical to Washington's, and sometimes in conflict.

In fact, Washington has been forcing Pakistan's government, military and intelligence services through huge secret payments and threats of war into policies that are bitterly opposed by 90% of Pakistan's people. Small wonder Pakistan's leadership is so often accused of playing a double game.

The last ISI Director General I knew was the tough, highly capable Lt. Gen. Mahmood Ahmad. He was purged by Musharraf because Washington felt Mahmood was insufficiently responsive to US interests. Ever since 2001, ensuing ISI directors were all pre-approved by Washington. All senior ISI veterans deemed `Islamist' or too nationalistic by Washington were purged at Washington's demand, leaving ISI's upper ranks top-heavy with too many yes-men and paper-passers.

Even so, there is strong opposition inside ISI to Washington's bribing and arm-twisting the subservient Musharraf dictatorship into waging war against fellow Pakistanis and gravely damaging Pakistan's national interests.

ISI's primary duty is defending Pakistan, not promote US interests. Pashtun tribesmen on the border sympathizing with their fellow Taliban Pashtun in Afghanistan are Pakistanis. Many, like the legendary Jalaluddin Haqqani, are old US allies and `freedom fighters' from the 1980's. When the US and its western allies finally abandon Afghanistan, as they will inevitably do one day, Pakistan must go on living with its rambunctious tribals.

Violence and uprisings in these tribal areas are not caused by `terrorism,' as Washington and Musharraf claimed. They directly result from the US-led occupation of Afghanistan and Washington's forcing the hated Musharraf regime to attack its own people.

ISI is trying to restrain pro-Taliban Pashtun tribesmen while dealing with growing US attacks into Pakistan that threaten a wider war. India, Pakistan's bitter foe, has an army of agents in Afghanistan and is arming, backing and financing the Karzai puppet regime in Kabul in hopes of turning Afghanistan into a protectorate. Pakistan's historic strategic interests in Afghanistan have been undermined by the US occupation. Now, the US, Canada and India are trying to eliminate Pakistani influence in Afghanistan.

ISI, many of whose officers are Pashtun, has every right to warn Pakistani citizens of impending US air attacks that kill large numbers of civilians. But ISI also has another vital mission. Preventing Pakistan's Pashtun, 15-20% of the population of 165 million, from rekindling the old `Greater Pashtunistan' movement calling for union of the Pashtun tribes of Pakistan and Afghanistan into a new Pashtun nation. The Pashtun have never recognized the Durand Line(today's Pakistan-Afghan border) drawn by British imperialists to sunder the world's largest tribal people. Greater Pashtunistan would tear apart Pakistan and invite Indian military intervention.

Washington's bull-in-a-china shop behavior pays no heeds to these realities. Instead, Washington demonizes faithful old allies ISI and Pakistan while supporting Afghanistan's Communists and drug dealers, and allowing India to stir the Afghan pot -- all for the sake of new energy pipelines.

As Henry Kissinger cynically noted, being America's ally is more dangerous than being its enemy.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/eric-margolis/blaming-pakistans-spies-f_b_117571.html

 

[Ganga]

@ GangaOk when India says the same it is considered bullshi@.

Well many a times your Gov had come out and honoured us with the same bs to be found something else latter. So we rightfully consider it that.

When one of the most respected intitutions in the world says so it is considered as a plot to defame Pakistan.

Since when had the word of a taliban commander become the word of god, oh let me guess. Pakistan is the key word in those conversations I guess.

Tomorrow the UN will say the same and you will say that the UN is hijacked by Indians right?

Lets see when the UN will say the same, with evidence on hand and then we will talk.

The ISI had played a crucial role in creating the Taliban along with the US.It is impossible that they have severed all ties with the organisation they created.

 

[Aslan]

The ISI had played a crucial role in creating the Taliban along with the US.It is impossible that they have severed all ties with the organisation they created.

And yet you are sure that CIA did it, and by that token I think that it is safe to assume that raw and or the indian establishment had contacts with LTTE till the last minute.

 

[GUNNER]

Imagine Harvard analyst Matt Waldman finding it not hard to interview nine Taliban field commanders ( And US/NATO/ISAF/Afghan Forces cannot).

And then, these Taliban field commanders tell this analyst about their source of funding, so that it can be publishsed and the world can know where they are getting arms to fight the war from.

And these field commanders, who must be sitting in the war zones, give him no evidence and he still believes them.

Well, When they (US/NATO/ISAF/Afghan Forces) can't do their job right, they find a way out. And that is to blame their weakness on someon else.

There have been enough reports like this from such uncredible and unreliable sources for long enough. They should be put in their deserved place, a dust bin.

 

[Ganga]

And yet you are sure that CIA did it, and by that token I think that it is safe to assume that raw and or the indian establishment had contacts with LTTE till the last minute.

The CIA created the Taliban to drive the soviets out of afghanistan.Once that was done they had no more interest in it.But ISI still maintained a relationship with the Taliban to have a deep influence in Afghanistan.

 

[Aslan]

The CIA created the Taliban to drive the soviets out of afghanistan.Once that was done they had no more interest in it.But ISI still maintained a relationship with the Taliban to have a deep influence in Afghanistan.

And what is india doing there? And you think that the americans left when it was all over with. Think again!

 

[GUNNER]

The CIA created the Taliban to drive the soviets out of afghanistan.Once that was done they had no more interest in it.But ISI still maintained a relationship with the Taliban to have a deep influence in Afghanistan.

And the Indians didn't leave Afghanistan either. They pumped in Money and arms to the Northern Alliance.

 

[keyboard]

And the Indians didn't leave Afghanistan either. They pumped in Money and arms to the Northern Alliance.

Can you provide any source for ur claim ????
is their any Indian caught with any of this activity ???

 

[T-Faz]

The CIA created the Taliban to drive the soviets out of afghanistan.Once that was done they had no more interest in it.But ISI still maintained a relationship with the Taliban to have a deep influence in Afghanistan.

The CIA funded and observed the Mujahideen being armed, trained and developed, not the Taliban. The Taliban was a group formed mostly from the Peshawar 7 factions and has allies who were Mujahideen.

As for CIA had no more interest in them, I beg to differ, read this and understand the role CIA played in creating the Taliban.

1994-1997: US Supports Taliban Rise to Power

Journalist Ahmed Rashid, a long-time expert on Pakistan and Afghanistan, will later write in a book about the Taliban that the US supported the Taliban in its early years. “Between 1994 and 1996, the USA supported the Taliban politically through its allies Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, essentially because Washington viewed the Taliban as anti-Iranian, anti-Shia, and pro-Western. Between 1995 and 1997, US support was even more driven because of its backing for the Unocal [pipeline] project.” He notes that many US diplomats “saw them as messianic do-gooders—like born-again Christians from the American Bible Belt.” [DREYFUSS, 2005, PP. 326] Selig Harrison, a long-time regional expert with extensive CIA ties, will later say that he complained at the time about how Pakistani ISI support of the Taliban was backed by the CIA. “I warned them that we were creating a monster.” [TIMES OF INDIA, 3/7/2001] There is evidence the CIA may have helped supply the Taliban with weapons during the first months of their rise to power (see October 1994).
Entity Tags: Taliban, Ahmed Rashid, Selig Harrison
Timeline Tags: Complete 911 Timeline

October 1994: CIA and ISI Allegedly Give Help and Secret Cache of Weapons to Taliban

The CIA supposedly backs the Taliban around the same time the Pakistani ISI starts strongly backing them (see Spring-Autumn 1994 and 1994-1997). According to a senior Pakistani intelligence source interviewed by British journalist Simon Reeves, the CIA provides Pakistan satellite information giving the secret locations of scores of Soviet trucks that contain vast amounts of arms and ammunition. The trucks were hidden in caves at the end of the Afghan war. Pakistan then gives this information to the Taliban. “The astonishing speed with which the Taliban conquered Afghanistan is explained by the tens of thousands of weapons found in these trucks….” [REEVE, 1999, PP. 191] Journalist Steve Coll will later similarly note that at this time, the Taliban gain access to “an enormous ISI-supplied weapons dump” in caves near the border town of Spin Boldak. It has enough weapons left over from the Soviet-Afghan war to supply tens of thousands of soldiers. [COLL, 2004, PP. 291] Another account will point out that by early 1995, the Taliban was equipped with armored tanks, ten combat airplanes, and other heavy weapons. They are thus able to conquer about a third of the country by February 1995. “According to the files at one European intelligence agency, these military advances can be explained mainly by ‘strong military training, not only by the Pakistani services, but also by American military advisers working under humanitarian cover.’” Later in 1995, a Turkish newsweekly will claim to have learned from a classified report given to the Turkish government that the CIA, ISI, and Saudi Arabia were all collaborating to build up the Taliban so they could quickly unite Afghanistan. [LABEVIERE, 1999, PP. 262-263]
Entity Tags: Taliban, Pakistan Directorate for Inter-Services Intelligence, Central Intelligence Agency
Timeline Tags: Complete 911 Timeline

After September 1996: Journalist Sees US and Taliban Combating Russia over Central Asian Pipeline Issue

Ahmed Rashid. [Source: Jane Scherr/ University of California, Berkeley]

Ahmed Rashid, correspondent for the Far Eastern Economic Review and The Daily Telegraph, conducts extensive investigative research in Afghanistan after the Taliban conquest of Kabul. As he will later write in his 2000 book, Taliban: Militant Islam, Oil and Fundamentalism in Central Asia, he sees a “massive regional polarization between the USA, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and the Taliban on one side and Iran, Russia, the Central Asian states and the anti-Taliban alliance on the other. While some focused on whether there was a revival of the old CIA-ISI connection from the Afghan jihad era, it became apparent to me that the strategy over pipelines had become the driving force behind Washington’s interest in the Taliban, which in turn was prompting a counter-reaction from Russia and Iran. But exploring this was like entering a labyrinth, where nobody spoke the truth or divulged their real motives or interests. It was the job of a detective rather than a journalist because there were few clues. Even gaining access to the real players in the game was difficult, because policy was not being driven by politicians and diplomats, but by the secretive oil companies and intelligence services of the regional states.” [RASHID, 2001, PP. 163]

 

[Ganga]

And what is india doing there? And you think that the americans left when it was all over with. Think again!

The whole world knows what India is doing there.I think u know it.

 

[Aslan]

 

[Aslan]

The whole world knows what India is doing there.I think u know it.

Dont mind but when ones own house needs repairs you dont run to others to fix his first. I hope u get the point, and form what I have seen thus far is that your country choses its friends on the bases of profit and lose scenarios. So the charity in Afghanistan has its own P&L scenarios for you guys. There is nothing like a free give away.