Global News : Passport : Ricks : Drezner : Walt : Rothkopf : Lynch
The Cable : The AfPak Blog : Net Effect : Shadow Govt. : Madam Secretary : The Call
Rohde and the Taliban
We're two installments into New York Times writer David Rohde's five-part epic on the seven months he spent as a hostage of the Taliban in Afghanistan and Pakistan. And I can't recommend it enough to anyone interested in the country. Here's one fascinating excerpt, from the first part:
Over those months, I came to a simple realization. After seven years of reporting in the region, I did not fully understand how extreme many of the Taliban had become. Before the kidnapping, I viewed the organization as a form of "Al Qaeda lite," a religiously motivated movement primarily focused on controlling Afghanistan.
Living side by side with the Haqqanis' followers, I learned that the goal of the hard-line Taliban was far more ambitious. Contact with foreign militants in the tribal areas appeared to have deeply affected many young Taliban fighters. They wanted to create a fundamentalist Islamic emirate with Al Qaeda that spanned the Muslim world.
Rohde's revelations about his kidnappers themselves are even more interesting. The Times reporter, his driver, and his translator were on their way to interview a Taliban leader, Abu Tayyeb, when their car was hijacked. They were taken hostage by one Atiqullah, who said he had never heard of Abu Tayyeb. A few weeks into his detention, Rohde finds:
In conversations when our guards left the room, Tahir and Asad each separately whispered to me that Atiqullah was, in fact, Abu Tayyeb. They had known since the day we were kidnapped, they said, but dared not tell me. They asked me to stay silent as well. Abu Tayyeb had vowed to behead them if they revealed his true identity. Abu Tayyeb had invited us to an interview, betrayed us and then pretended that he was a commander named Atiqullah. I was despondent and left with only one certainty: We had no savior among the Taliban.
It's gripping, cinematic stuff -- and all the better knowing there's at least something of a happy ending. (Though Rohde is getting raked over the coals in his New York Times Q&A.)
With detail like this, the articles show the Taliban in all its diversity. Rohde notes that many members of the Taliban are far more religious and radical than they were 8 years ago. But the movement has fragmented and atomized. Rohde notes that his captors were in essence common thieves, not ideological warriors, driven by and even obsessed with money.
That's why initiatives to bribe and negotiate with Taliban leaders, paying them in exchange for security, seem so attractive to me. The sums of money wouldn't need to be great -- there's not much to buy in Afghanistan anyway. Plus, there are only around 10,000 members of the Taliban remaining in Afghanistan, only 3,000 of whom are full-time militants. (Note, for a sense of scale there: Afghanistan is a good-sized country with a population of 33 million.) And the strategy has worked well elsewhere.













bribing the Taliban
Bribing the non-ideological Taliban is an attractive option, but to work the recipient of the bribe has to believe they'll be alive to spend it. That means they have to believe the Government of Afghanistan and ISAF will win. Bribery can accelerate a positive trend, but can't independently generate it. Ultimately it's one instrument in a larger strategy, not a substitute for a comprehensive strategy.
Though lord knows we could have flown all the Taliban to a tropical resort for deprogramming for the amount we've spent in Afghanistan since 2001.
From this morning's installment
"As the weeks passed, our captivity became increasingly surreal.
My Taliban guards slept beneath bedspreads manufactured by a Pakistani textile company and emblazoned with characters from the American television show “Hannah Montana” and the movie “Spider-Man.” My blanket was a pink Barbie comforter."
Along this vein, ever seen the flags of Pakistan with Mickey Mouse on the white rectangular section, waving his own Pakistani flag? Scroll down a bit:
http://pakistaniat.com/2007/08/14/pakistan-independence-day-august-14-special-coverage/comment-page-2/#
No judgment or criticism here - I'm just fascinated by the places where you find American cultural symbols, although admittedly, it's hard not to get a kick out of the implicit irony in some of these situations. Even more interesting is what the use (intentional or otherwise) of these symbols by other peoples might reveal about the intricacy of our intercultural relationships, particularly at different social and societal levels. Does anyone know of any worthwhile literature that looks at this issue?
Jorge