Two former (Afghan Communist) generals plot secret revolt

The Washington Times ^ | November 13, 2001 | Willis Witter

[rightwing2]

November 13, 2001
Two former generals plot secret revolt
By Willis Witter
THE WASHINGTON TIMES

PESHAWAR, Pakistan — Two former Afghan generals have secretly entered Afghanistan in recent days as part of a campaign by supporters of former King Zahir Shah to foment a revolt against the ruling Taliban regime by ethnic Pashtun tribal chiefs. About 10 days ago, former Afghan Gen. Abdul Wardak left from this western Pakistani border city with about 20 armed men for a province west of the capital city of Kabul that bears his tribal name, Wardak. A second former Afghan general, Shah Nawaz Tani, also crossed from Pakistan into the southeastern province of Paktia. Their missions are part of a larger effort to form the elusive "southern alliance" that both the United States and Pakistan are hoping can drive the Taliban from power and ease the political transition for a successor government.

Word of both trips, confirmed by sources close to the effort, came as armies of the opposition Northern Alliance drove toward Kabul and claimed to control the northern half of the country. The recent battlefield successes of the alliance, dominated by non-Pashtun ethnic groups, present a dilemma for the U.S.-led effort to oust the Taliban and capture Saudi financier Osama bin Laden, who is believed responsible for the September 11 terrorist attacks on the United States. Chaotic rule by some leading officials of the Northern Alliance in the early 1990s helped plunge Afghanistan into a civil war that destroyed Kabul — a scenario that President Bush is attempting to prevent by urging the alliance to delay any occupation of the capital.

Last month, an initial effort to encourage Pashtun tribal chiefs to revolt failed when Abdul Haq, a Pashtun military commander who fought the Soviet occupying army during the 1980s, was captured and summarily executed by the Taliban while in Afghanistan on a similar mission. Gen. Tani served as chief of the Afghan army following the withdrawal of Soviet troops in 1989 and Gen. Wardak was deputy army chief. Both were prominent in the government that the Soviets left behind following their withdrawal in 1989. Hamid Karzai, another southern-based Taliban opponent who began a similar campaign shortly after Abdul Haq was killed, also served as a deputy in the post-Soviet government. Mr. Karzai is now believed to be safe in an undisclosed location west of Kandahar.

Mr. Karzai and Gens. Wardak and Tani were described by Pakistani sources as part of an effort by supporters of the former king to call a traditional tribal council that would set up an interim government for a post-Taliban Afghanistan. "Each is responsible to educate and convince their tribes to support Zahir Shah," said one source close to the campaign. The former king "is the last and only option. If he passes away, Afghanistan will disintegrate." When support from enough of Afghanistan's 120 Pashtun tribes and sub-tribes is obtained, the former king would come to Peshawar from his home outside Rome and call the tribal council, known as a "loya jirga," the source said. The United States, Pakistan and Britain have supported the effort, repeatedly warning that any post-Taliban government must reflect the complex ethnic makeup of Afghanistan. The Pakistani government is also working frantically behind the scenes to support such an effort, said one Pakistani official.

The Northern Alliance, which last night had moved its forces to the edge of Kabul, is furious over Pakistan's longtime support of the Taliban prior to the September 11 attacks. The effort is further complicated by anger of Afghanistan's Pashtuns toward the Northern Alliance for accepting aid from its old enemy, Russia, to battle the Taliban. The Pashtuns also dislike the king, who was exiled in a 1973 coup, because he never condemned the Soviet invasion.

[rightwing2]

The effort is further complicated by anger of Afghanistan's Pashtuns toward the Northern Alliance for accepting aid from its old enemy, Russia, to battle the Taliban. The Pashtuns also dislike the king, who was exiled in a 1973 coup, because he never condemned the Soviet invasion.

No wonder the Russians have recruited so many top Afghan Communist generals and high government officials of Afghanistan's former Communist government to help arrange the King's return to act as head of state of a new Afghan government. He couldn't even bring himself to condemn the Soviet invasion which was responsible for the deaths of a million Afghans and causing an additional five million to become homeless refugees. When combined with the fact that the Northern Alliance Minister of Defense and military commander General Fahim is the former head of the Afghan KGB and Gen Dostum, one of his chief subordinates is a longtime Afghan Communist militia leader, this portends a worrisome future for Afghanistan to say the least and cast doubts as to the wisdom of the largescale US support that the Bush Administration has provided the Northern Alliance which has enabled them to take control of this wretched country.

Ultimately, a victory by the Northern Alliance over the Taleban will be a victory by former KGB director and Russian President Vladimir Putin who is up to his old games in restoring the Communists to power in Afghanistan. The US will be able to claim a victory over the Taleban, but it will prove a hollow one and at what price?

[Zviadist]

Ultimately, a victory by the Northern Alliance over the Taleban will be a victory by former KGB director and Russian President Vladimir Putin who is up to his old games in restoring the Communists to power in Afghanistan.

Only this time with us as a critical ally. So, tell me again, who really won the Cold War?

[rightwing2]

BUMP!

For more background, please see:

New Commander of Northern Alliance is former head of Afghan KGB

[Arthur Wildfire! March]

"The Hobbit." For those who know it, "Oh Great King from Under the Mountain..." "Yes, General?"

[Arthur Wildfire! March]

The Pashtuns also dislike the king, who was exiled in a 1973 coup, because he never condemned the Soviet invasion.

I don't blame them. Good find.

[Shermy]

I question the spin and accuracy of this article. It credulously accepts broad assertions like `pashtuns don't like the king.'

Seems these writers are still rehashing cold-war obsessions and categories. Sooooo 9-10.

[rightwing2]

Only this time with us as a critical ally. So, tell me again, who really won the Cold War?

This is a complex question. Clearly on a political level, the West won the Cold War as we have seen the former Soviet empire split into its component parts even though most of these component parts continue to be ruled by the “former Communists.” However, many of the Soviets and now the Russians most prized and cherished objectives are even now on the verge of being accomplished which cast in doubt the validity of the West's "victory" over Communism—namely:

(1) the neutralization of NATO as a military alliance and its transformation into a regional political grouping focused on internal peacekeeping missions with the inclusion of Communist led states like Poland and “non-Communist” ones like Czechoslovakia with a very active KGB network.

(2) the unilateral conventional and especially nuclear disarmament of the United States—which will be formally announced by President Bush at the Bush—Putin summit this week is perhaps the most cherished and important goal of the KGB led Russian Federation as it will spell the beginning of the end of the US status as a nuclear superpower and enable even Communist China to pose a credible nuclear threat against it. It will also enable Russia to engage in nuclear blackmail efforts against the US. The US is unilaterally disarming itself of its conventional military might by abolishing its entire 7600 strong M-1 Abrams tank fleet which will serve to eliminate its ability to fight and win even one major regional conflict once fully implemented.

(3) the limitation or neutralization of US efforts to deploy credibly effective national missile defenses as Russia did years ago with its 8500 S-300 ABM interceptor force as Bush appears set to allow the retention of ABM Treaty limitations on deployment by the US of a national missile defense above the limit of 100 now in place.

(4) the elimination of the “image of the enemy” in the minds of Western leaders to make them think that Russia is not only not a threat, but a friend and perhaps even an "ally". One has only to witness the much heralded strategic partnership between the US and Russia against terrorism to see the success of this initiative. Russia is no ally of the US and never will be until it is freed from control by the KGB-Communist coalition that now governs it. This objective furthers the motivation of the West to continue to unilaterally disarm.

(5) The formation of a credible military alliance between the Russian Federation and its old Communist ally, the People's Republic of China. This goal was achieved when the Sino-Russian alliance treaty was signed last July.

[DoughtyOne]

Do we have a replacement for the M1 Abrams?

[rightwing2]

Do we have a replacement for the M1 Abrams?

Not yet. The Army is planning to invent a 20 ton wheeled vehicle along with other supporting systems which will be collectively termed the Future Combat System (FCS) to replace the M-1. This will not be a tank, but will consist of a number of networked armored cars which will be extremely vulnerable to assymetric attack by countries like Russia and Communist China which now employ EMP warheads which will render these vehicles blind sitting ducks.

It is intended that the FCS will incorporate a number of technologies not yet invented and is supposed to be available in prototype form by 2008. The only problem is that I have talked to a number of chief Army scientists at CECOM, Fort Monmouth and the Army Research Lab in Adelphi, Maryland and they tell me that realistically speaking these technologies will not be available before 2020.

[DoughtyOne]

Just as I thought. Well sounds like it's appropriately named, FeCeS.

[MarkWar]

>For more background, please see: New Commander of Northern Alliance is former head of Afghan KGB

Well, a lot of this Afghan stuff is interesting, but I don't think we need to get sucked in all too deep here. Our whole main interest in Afghanistan -- officially at least -- is just to route the Taliban and punish bin Laden and his group.

I'm all for punishing the people who attacked us, and I'm all for making sure the individuals -- and governments! -- are reduced to never having the option of doing so again. But I couldn't care less about whether Afghanistan is "left" as a bunch of squabbling tribes or colonized by Pakistan or anything else.

I think this is how "mission creep" starts -- we go in there to wage war, and get tied down playing political games...

Mark W.

[rightwing2]

Just as I thought. Well sounds like it's appropriately named, FeCeS.

That's pretty harsh but also very funny! LOL!

[ffrancone]

So, tell me again, who really won the Cold War? Uh. We did.

[Scholastic]

ping