Our Reporter Returned to Afghanistan, Seeking Lessons and Secrets

Azam Ahmed, a Times correspondent and former bureau chief in Afghanistan, made repeated trips to areas in the country that had once been off-limits to foreigners.

The New York Times

Here’s what he found.

The Talib looked as ragged as his outpost, a trailer banked on a snowy mountain pass. Holes were bored into its sides to ventilate a sputtering wood stove.

Upon seeing foreigners, the Talib, with an unkempt beard and layers of ill-fitting sweaters, ordered us out of the car.

For more than an hour, my colleague Bryan Denton and I waited on the trailer floor as he reviewed our documents. Beside him, two guards slept beneath heaped blankets. It smelled as if they had been there a while.

The Talib asked questions: Why had we come to Afghanistan? Where were we going? What were we doing?

We told him what we had told so many other Taliban members. I covered the war as a New York Times correspondent and bureau chief. Now I wanted to see the war from another perspective, to see what lessons — and secrets — the United States left behind.

I began to wonder if our luck had run out. Bryan turned to me and frowned.

The guard began recording us with his phone, sending our hearts racing. Almost no recording of a foreigner in similar circumstances has ended well this century.

But the Talib had other things on his mind.

“Can you please indicate that you have been treated well, and that no harm has come to you?” he asked, presumably collecting evidence in case we complained to his superiors.

One of the stranger things about our travels was how freely the Taliban allowed us to explore. For most of the war, they had shot, bombed or abducted any foreigner they could find. Times colleagues had been kidnapped or killed.

Yet no matter where we were, if we produced our paperwork, we were granted access to places that few foreigners had ventured in nearly two decades: the other side of the war.

We spent nights in half-constructed buildings, in barren deserts and perched on the edge of raging rivers. We interviewed hundreds of people and surveyed more than 1,000 others about war crimes committed by American allies.

I often think of this moment in relation to Vietnam. In that war, decades passed before the United States engaged its former enemy. By then, parts of history were lost.

Here is what we learned.

Time and again, we found, the Americans set the stage for their own defeat well before the Taliban marched to power in August 2021.

The United States empowered warlords and criminals to conduct the war on its behalf, individuals who inspired so much hatred that their very presence became a Taliban recruiting tool. This propensity was embodied by no one more than Lt. Gen. Abdul Raziq, the police chief of Kandahar Province.

By blindly trampling into places they did not understand, the Americans seeded hatred. Errant airstrikes not only killed innocents. They killed American allies — the very people who supported them the most.

In the rugged region of Nuristan, we traced the origins of one of the deadliest assaults on American soldiers. We discovered that American troops had created the enemies that they feared the most — and in places that they never needed to be.

After the war, the Taliban declared that, no matter which side you had been on, the fighting was over. Former enemies were prohibited from settling scores — and for the most part people listened.

The Taliban has also declared an end to poppy, seemingly accomplishing one of Washington’s key war goals.

The district, Bakwa, had once been a barely inhabited stretch of desert. But thanks to American efforts to eradicate poppy — and the opium trade — people had flocked to the desert district, where the Taliban embraced them.

President Biden blames the Afghan Army for crumbling so quickly. President-elect Donald J. Trump blames Mr. Biden.

Both versions ignore the history in places like the north of Afghanistan, a region where values like democracy and women’s rights might have actually lasted.

There, the United States empowered militias to fight the Taliban. Instead, these groups tortured, kidnapped and massacred civilians. They created such hatred toward the Afghan government and its American allies that people turned to the Taliban.

Before the Americans withdrew, the Taliban were already negotiating their rise to power.

Azam Ahmed is international investigative correspondent for The Times. He has reported on Wall Street scandals, the War in Afghanistan and violence and corruption in Mexico, Central America and the Caribbean.

Our Reporter Returned to Afghanistan, Seeking Lessons and Secrets
read more

UN condemns Pakistani airstrikes in Paktika, Afghanistan

Richard Bennett, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on Human Rights for Afghanistan, has expressed his regret over the Pakistani airstrikes in the Bermal district of Paktika province.

On Friday, December 27, Bennett posted a message on X/Twitter, expressing his sorrow over the deaths of Afghan civilians, including women and children, in the airstrikes.

He emphasized the need to adhere to international law and called for an investigation and accountability to prevent further harm to civilians.

Previously, the United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan (UNAMA) had reported credible information regarding the deaths of dozens of civilians, including women and children, in the Pakistani airstrikes on Paktika.

The United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) also stated on Thursday that it had received reports of at least 20 children being killed in the airstrikes on the Bermal district of Paktika.

The tragic loss of life in these airstrikes highlights the growing vulnerability of civilians in conflict zones, particularly in border areas like Paktika. The deaths of women and children are especially concerning, as they reflect a disturbing disregard for international humanitarian law, which calls for the protection of non-combatants during armed conflicts.

As tensions continue to rise in the region, the international community must urgently address the issue of cross-border military actions and work towards ensuring the protection of innocent lives.

The call for an independent investigation into these airstrikes and holding accountable those responsible for violating international law is crucial in preventing further civilian casualties and ensuring justice for the victims.

UN condemns Pakistani airstrikes in Paktika, Afghanistan
read more

Kabir: Doha Agreement Does Not Define Nature of Our System

He also emphasized that all citizens who worked under the previous regime have been pardoned by the Islamic Emirate.

Deputy Prime Minister for Political Affairs Mawlawi Abdul Kabir said the caretaker government is working within the framework of Islamic principles to expand relations with the world.

Speaking at a graduation ceremony in Paktia province, Mawlawi Abdul Kabir stressed that the Islamic Emirate brings a message of peace and unity, but warned that if any party resorts to violence, they will face a serious response.

He stressed that with the establishment of the Islamic system, there is no justification for war in Afghanistan, and Afghans will always defend their religious and national values without hesitation.

He clarified that the Doha Agreement was not about the United States dictating governance to the Islamic Emirate but was solely about the timeline for the withdrawal of US forces from Afghanistan.

Mawlawi Abdul Kabir said: “Do not be deceived about the Doha Agreement. In Doha, Qatar, the Islamic Emirate made commitments with the Americans, but these commitments were not about them dictating how our system should operate. It was merely about scheduling the withdrawal of US forces.”

The Islamic Emirate official praised the activities of schools and madrasas in remote areas and stated that the Islamic Emirate is fully committed to developing all educational centers without any discrimination.

He also emphasized that all citizens who worked under the previous regime have been pardoned by the Islamic Emirate.

Mawlawi Abdul Kabir said: “Over the past 20 years, anyone who worked with the Americans or NATO was pardoned after the Islamic Emirate came to power. Whether they were soldiers or members of parliament, no Mujahid has troubled them because our conflict was with foreign forces.”

Some political experts believe that to strengthen the Islamic Emirate’s relations with the world and maintain stability in the country, interactions with regional and global countries must be enhanced.

“If any country lacks relations with its neighbors or the international community, it is like a paralyzed person. Therefore, we must strengthen our relations with all nations as much as international relations demand,” said Moeen Gul Samkanai, a political analyst.

Earlier, the deputy prime minister for political affairs announced that the Islamic Emirate has established direct relations with countries worldwide.

Kabir: Doha Agreement Does Not Define Nature of Our System
read more

Building resilience to address Afghanistan’s food security crisis

FARIS HADAD-ZERVOS

Building resilience to address Afghanistan's food security crisisFarmer planting wheat seeds in Kandahar, Afghanistan. Photo: FAO/Hashim Azizi

Afghanistan is facing a severe food security crisis, with millions struggling to access adequate food. An estimated 11.6 million Afghans—25 percent of the population—are experiencing food insecurity.

Climate shocks are exacerbating this crisis. The ongoing drought—among the worst in decades—has drastically reduced rainfall, severely impacting rain-dependent agriculture. Earlier this year, catastrophic flooding in provinces like Baghlan, Takhar, and Badakhshan, caused widespread destruction of homes, agricultural lands, and livestock.

Afghanistan ranks fourth on the list of countries most at risk of climate-related crisis and is considered the seventh most vulnerable country with the least coping capacity. The frequency of droughts in the country has increased from an average of once every 3 years over 1986–2012, to once every other year over 2013–2023.

These intensifying droughts and floods damage crops, disrupt supply chains, and increase food prices. Such climatic shocks—coupled with economic instability and conflict—worsen food insecurity.

Impact on agricultural economy

A new World Bank study examined the effects of climate and weather shocks on Afghanistan’s agricultural economy, with an emphasis on food security, prices, and wages. The findings reveal that both flooding and drought significantly increase food insecurity, directly and indirectly.

Floods cause immediate crop and infrastructure damage, while droughts exacerbate water scarcity and lower crop yields, driving up food prices and lowering agricultural wages. Economic factors, such as inflation, rising fuel costs, and currency depreciation, further reduce the purchasing power of consumers and strain affordability. These combined challenges leave vulnerable households particularly at risk.

Investing in long-term resilience

Addressing food insecurity requires a comprehensive approach. Investments in climate resilience, like drought-resistant crops and livestock, crop diversification, improved irrigation and integrated watershed management, are essential. Simultaneously, economic measures such as income support for vulnerable populations and improved market access can help mitigate the effects of rising costs.

Moving beyond emergency aid, Afghanistan must invest in long-term resilience. While emergency aid is necessary to address urgent needs, sustainable solutions are essential for lasting food security. This includes enhancing local agricultural production, promoting sustainable farming practices, enhancing agricultural value chains, and developing early warning systems for climatic events.

The World Bank is helping address the food security crisis through the Afghanistan Emergency Food Security Project (EFSP) which supports the Afghan population by boosting food crop production among smallholder farmers and addressing the nutritional needs of women-headed households, in partnership with the United Nations’ Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO). It is also promoting resilience and commercialization of agriculture production systems through the private sector by scaling up climate-resilient seed value chains, investing in improved water management technologies, and promoting value addition facilities to connect food supply chains to markets. The project has benefited more than 5 million people, employed more than 170,000 women farmers, increased production of wheat by 26 percent, and provided improved irrigation and drainage services on 523,000 hectares of land.

The Water Emergency Relief Project (WERP) is supporting a pilot to improve surface water irrigation systems to reduce the impact of droughts and thus foster greater agricultural climate resilience in partnership with the United Nations Office for Project Services (UNOPS) and the Agha Khan Foundation (AKF). By replacing diesel pumps with sustainable energy solutions, the project enhances farmers’ access to water and energy resources. It is also fostering community-private partnerships to deliver longer term solutions for drought-affected rural communities. The project will benefit 2,000 farmers and 100,000 community members.

The World Bank is also partnering with the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) to strengthen the delivery of hydrometeorology and early warning services to Afghan people. A drought forecasting and early warning tool is being developed, leveraging satellite remote sensing datasets and machine learning prediction models, to strengthen drought risk management and anticipatory actions. This open-source tool can help farmers to prepare in advance by adjusting their crop management practices, such as altering irrigation schedules, selecting drought-resistant crop varieties, or delaying planting to avoid the most vulnerable periods.

The challenges posed by climate change and its cascading impacts on food security in Afghanistan will continue to increase over time. By focusing on resilience and sustainable food system solutions, Afghanistan can build a more robust and adaptive food system that ensures food security and safeguards the livelihoods of the millions of Afghan people.

Building resilience to address Afghanistan’s food security crisis
read more

Dozens of House lawmakers rally around funding Afghan visa program as Trump vows major spending cuts

By Elizabeth Elkind

Fox News
Published December 24, 2024

Trump promised to cut ‘hundreds of billions of dollars’ in spending

A group of 51 bipartisan lawmakers is urging House negotiators to keep up the flow of dollars to a visa program for Afghans fleeing the Taliban takeover of their country.

Reps. Jason Crow, D-Colo., and Zach Nunn, R-Iowa, wrote to the House of Representatives’ top appropriators as they continue to negotiate federal funding for the remainder of fiscal year (FY) 2025.

“We write to urge you to maintain critical provisions for the Afghan Special Immigrant Visa (SIV) program1 in the Fiscal Year (FY) 2025 appropriations package. Authorizing new Afghan SIVs is critical to vetting and relocating qualified Afghan principal applicants currently in the processing pipeline,” they wrote to House Appropriations Committee Chairman Tom Cole, R-Okla., and others.

It comes as President-elect Trump promised to work toward steep spending cuts in the coming federal funding fights. He wrote on Truth Social last week, “The United States will cut Hundreds of Billions of Dollars in spending next year through Reconciliation!”

Lawmakers are calling for the preservation of an Afghan visa program as President-elect Trump vows steep spending cuts. (Getty Images)

People in Trump’s orbit, including some House Republicans, are pushing for him to have greater control over how congressionally appropriated funds are spent.

Meanwhile, Trump tapped Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy last month to lead an advisory panel on cost-cutting dubbed the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE).

The duo have already positioned themselves as influential players in Congress’ spending discussions as well, having led the revolt against a 1,547-page government funding bill that was a product of bipartisan negotiations. They have not, however, said where they want to see Congress pull back on spending.

The 51 lawmakers pushing for the Afghan SIV program to be preserved argue it is “a life-saving path to safety for Afghan nationals who face serious danger as a result of their work alongside U.S. troops, diplomats, and contractors.”

“Congress must continue this work so that the State Department is able to issue visas to eligible Afghans who face imminent threats from the Taliban, Islamic State, and other hostile groups because of their service to the U.S. and our allies,” they wrote.

The Afghan SIV program was first enacted in 2009, but saw new importance after the Taliban’s lightening-fast takeover of Afghanistan in 2021 – which precipitated the U.S.’s withdrawal after decades in the Middle Eastern country.

Congressional negotiators have so far failed to come to an agreement on FY 2025 spending, forcing lawmakers to pass two extensions of last year’s funding levels to prevent a partial government shutdown.

The most recent extension, called a continuing resolution (CR), gives lawmakers until March 14 to make a deal.

Elizabeth Elkind is a politics reporter for Fox News Digital leading coverage of the House of Representatives

Dozens of House lawmakers rally around funding Afghan visa program as Trump vows major spending cuts
read more

Pakistan air strikes in Afghanistan spark Taliban warning of retaliation

Islamabad, Pakistan – The Pakistani military conducted air raids in neighbouring Afghanistan late on Tuesday night, targeting hideouts of the Pakistan Taliban, known by the acronym TTP, armed group in Paktika province, according to security officials.

While no official statement was issued by Pakistan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs or military media wing, the Inter-Services Public Relations (ISPR), sources confirmed to Al Jazeera that the attacks took place in the Barmal district of Afghanistan, near Pakistan’s South Waziristan tribal district in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province.

The interim Afghan government, ruled by the Taliban, also confirmed the attacks but insisted that civilians had been targeted. The Taliban spokesperson’s office told Al Jazeera that at least 46 people, including women and children, were among those killed in air raids.

“The Pakistani side should understand that such arbitrary measures are not a solution to any problem,” Enayatullah Khowarazami, spokesperson for Afghanistan’s Defence Ministry, wrote on social media platform X. “The Islamic Emirate will not leave this cowardly act unanswered and considers the defense of its territory an inalienable right,” he added, referring to Afghanistan by the name given by the Taliban government.

Advertisement

The air raids, which were conducted for the second time this year, came just hours after Pakistan’s special representative for Afghanistan, Mohammad Sadi, met interim Afghan Foreign Minister Amir Khan Muttaqi in Kabul.

“Met Foreign Minister Amir Khan Muttaqi today. Held wide-ranging discussions. Agreed to work together to further strengthen bilateral cooperation and promote peace and progress in the region,” Sadiq posted on X.

Sadiq’s visit to Kabul, which also included a meeting with Afghan interim Interior Minister Sirajuddin Haqqani on Monday, took place amid deteriorating relations between the two neighbours, and ties are likely to sink further following the Tuesday night attacks, say analysts.

Increasing attacks

Pakistan has repeatedly accused the Afghan government of harbouring armed groups, especially the TTP, which it claims carries out cross-border attacks targeting Pakistani security forces.

Last week, TTP fighters claimed responsibility for killing at least 16 Pakistani soldiers in South Waziristan in one of the deadliest recent attacks on security personnel.

While the Taliban denies providing refuge to armed groups or allowing their territory to be used for cross-border attacks, Pakistan asserts that the TTP conducts its operations from Afghan sanctuaries.

During a United Nations Security Council briefing last week, Pakistan said thousands of Pakistan Taliban fighters have sought shelter in Afghanistan.

“The TTP, with 6,000 fighters, is the largest listed terrorist organisation operating in Afghanistan. With safe havens close to our border, it poses a direct and daily threat to Pakistan’s security,” Pakistani diplomat Usman Iqbal Jadoon said at the UN briefing.

Advertisement

Data indicates a rise in attacks and deaths, particularly in Pakistan’s restive northwestern Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province and southwestern Balochistan province, both of which border Afghanistan.

According to Pakistan’s Interior Ministry, more than 1,500 violent incidents in the first 10 months of this year have resulted in at least 924 deaths. Among the casualties were at least 570 law enforcement personnel and 351 civilians.

The Pakistan Institute for Conflict and Security Studies (PICSS), an Islamabad-based research organisation, reported more than 856 attacks so far in 2024, surpassing the 645 incidents recorded in 2023.

Risk of retaliation

Pakistan maintains that it has repeatedly shared evidence with the Taliban regarding TTP operations but claims these concerns have not been adequately addressed.

The Pakistani government launched a military campaign, Azm-e-Istehkam (Resolve for Stability), in June, and security analyst Amir Rana believes that the latest air raids are likely part of this operation.

“Discussions within military circles have focused on conducting offensives on Afghan soil after the recent surge in attacks against security personnel. These strikes appear to be triggered by last week’s attacks on soldiers,” Rana told Al Jazeera.

Rana, who is also the director of Islamabad-based security think tank Pak Institute for Peace Studies (PIPS), further says the Kabul visit by Sadiq, Pakistani special representative to Afghanistan, might not be connected to Tuesday’s air raids.

Advertisement

“Sadiq’s visit was more about conveying the government message to share its apprehensions about increasing attacks by TTP networks which operate from Afghanistan, and was likely a trust-building exercise,” he added.

Ihsanullah Tipu, an Islamabad-based security analyst, said Pakistan has conducted at least four air raid operations on TTP hideouts in Afghanistan over the past few years.

However, Tipu added that a serious flaw in Pakistan’s Afghanistan policy was its “inconsistent approach”.

“Historically, Pakistan’s approach has been personality-driven rather than strategy-driven. Actions such as cross-border air strikes should be part of a comprehensive and well-planned policy instead of reactive measures,” Tipu, who is also a co-founder of The Khorasan Diary, a security research portal, told Al Jazeera.

Tipu also suggested that while the Afghan government has promised retaliation, the real response may come from the Pakistan Taliban.

“The actual reaction may come from the Pakistani Taliban, who have been discussing revenge attacks in their internal communications already, alleging that the strikes killed their women and children,” he said.

Rana from PIPS said such cross-border attacks are becoming a norm globally, and it was unlikely that Pakistan would face any criticism or consequences from the international community for the air raids.

“But this also presents a big challenge to us, and a matter to introspect, that despite four decades of engagement in Afghanistan, we still have not developed diplomatic skills to hold dialogue with rulers in Afghanistan, whoever it might be, in a constructive manner,” Rana said.

Advertisement

Tipu, meanwhile, emphasised that the TTP issue remained a big obstacle to Pakistan-Afghanistan relations.

“With Sadiq’s reappointment as special envoy, there were hopes for détente between the two countries. However, Tuesday’s strikes may significantly hinder any progress before it formally begins,” he said.

SOURCE: AL JAZEERA
Pakistan air strikes in Afghanistan spark Taliban warning of retaliation
read more

Over 180 cases of Journalists rights violations recorded in Afghanistan in 2024: AFJC

The Afghanistan Journalists Center released its annual report on December 26, 2024, highlighting the challenging situation for media outlets and journalists in the country. The report indicates that 181 cases of journalist rights violations were recorded, and 18 media outlets were shut down due to the Taliban’s repressive policies.

The Afghanistan Journalists Center has reported 181 instances of media rights violations by the Taliban in 2024, as part of its annual report.

The report, released on Thursday, December 26, indicates that 18 media outlets have been shut down due to the Taliban’s repressive policies over the past year.

According to the Center, over 50 journalists were arrested and imprisoned by the Taliban on various charges in 2024.

The center emphasized that the suppression of media freedom has increased by 8% compared to the previous year.

The report further notes that the legal framework for media operations in 2024 remains unclear, with the Taliban’s Ministry of Information and Culture largely sidelined.

The Taliban sent the proposed amendments to the Media Law and the Access to Information Law to Hibatullah Akhundzada, the group’s supreme leader, for approval.

The center also pointed out that the Taliban’s “Promotion of Virtue and Prevention of Vice” law has imposed even stricter restrictions on media, intensifying pressure on journalists.

The Taliban issued at least seven new directives in 2024, compared to only four in 2023. These included bans on filming, restrictions on women’s communication with the media in some provinces, and the prohibition of broadcasting live political programs.

The report highlighted how journalists who defy these directives face threats, imprisonment, or severe penalties, with media outlets often subjected to shutdowns. The Taliban’s control over the media landscape continues to grow, limiting free expression and press freedom across Afghanistan.

Female journalists, in particular, face an even harsher reality, as they are frequently targeted for their involvement in media work. The restrictions imposed on women’s participation in public life have led to a sharp decline in the number of female journalists, with many opting to leave the profession or the country altogether.

This further marginalizes the already vulnerable position of women in Afghanistan, making it difficult for them to contribute to the country’s media landscape and limiting their voices in a time of crisis.

Over 180 cases of Journalists rights violations recorded in Afghanistan in 2024: AFJC
read more

Muttaqi: Targeting Women, Children ‘Neither Courage Nor Manliness’

The acting Foreign Minister urged Pakistan to adopt a measured policy towards Afghanistan.

Amir Khan Muttaqi, the acting foreign minister, referring to Pakistan’s deadly attacks on Paktika province, said Afghans will not forget aggression against their homeland.

Speaking at an event marking the 45th anniversary of the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, Muttaqi stressed that countries that humiliate Afghanistan should learn lessons from Britain, the Soviet Union, and NATO.

The acting foreign minister urged Pakistan to adopt a measured policy towards Afghanistan.

Muttaqi said: “We send this message to Pakistan’s officials: it is no achievement to martyr children. You martyred women and elders and destroyed homes. This is neither courage nor manliness. Even the people of Waziristan have become refugees because of you.”

Meanwhile, Mawlawi Abdul Kabir, the political deputy prime minister, stated at the graduation ceremony of Kabul University students that the Islamic Emirate does not allow armed groups to operate on its soil. He said that baseless accusations against Afghanistan not only yield no benefits but also worsen relations and provoke violence.

Hamdullah Fitrat, the deputy spokesperson for the Islamic Emirate, shared Mawlawi Abdul Kabir’s remarks, stating: “He emphasized that the Islamic Emirate does not allow armed groups to operate in Afghanistan. Mawlawi Abdul Kabir considered false accusations against Afghanistan a cause for deteriorating relations.”

The United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan (UNAMA) also reacted to Pakistan’s attacks, stating that it had received credible reports of dozens of civilian casualties, including women and children, in the airstrikes conducted by Pakistani forces in Paktika province.

In a statement, UNAMA said: UNAMA received credible reports that dozens of civilians, including women and children, were killed in airstrikes by Pakistan’s military forces in Paktika province.”

“This attack proved that Pakistan adheres to neither Islamic nor diplomatic principles. Witnesses confirm that in this attack, innocent and defenseless people, including a large number of women and children, were martyred,” Abdul Sadiq Hamidzoi, a political analyst, told TOLOnews.

Meanwhile, as Pakistani airstrikes targeted Barmal district in Paktika province, Pakistan’s Foreign Ministry stated that it had faced some incidents at border crossings with Afghanistan. However, Pakistan’s primary concerns remain terrorism threats, drought, and internal issues in Afghanistan, which continue to be part of the bilateral agenda.

Mumtaz Zahra Baloch, the spokesperson for Pakistan’s Foreign Ministry, stated: “We have had some incidents on the border with Afghanistan. Pakistan’s major concern on terror hideouts and sanctuaries inside Afghanistan remained high on our bilateral agenda. We remain engaged with Afghan authorities on all issues.”

Meanwhile, the Islamic Emirate’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs announced that Pakistan’s acting ambassador was summoned to the ministry  in Kabul yesterday (Wednesday) over Pakistan’s airstrikes on Barmal district and other parts of Paktika province. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs said that the acting ambassador was told that the protection of national sovereignty is a red line for the Islamic Emirate and that such irresponsible actions will have serious consequences.

Muttaqi: Targeting Women, Children ‘Neither Courage Nor Manliness’
read more

Taliban accuse Pakistan of conducting strikes inside Afghanistan


Taliban authorities accuse Pakistan of carrying out airstrikes in Barmal, a district in the Afghan border province of Paktika, that resulted in several civilian casualties, including women and children.
Taliban authorities accuse Pakistan of carrying out airstrikes in Barmal, a district in the Afghan border province of Paktika, that resulted in several civilian casualties, including women and children. 

Taliban authorities said Tuesday that Pakistan carried out airstrikes in eastern Afghanistan that resulted in several civilian casualties, including women and children.

The Taliban Ministry of National Defense condemned the late-evening attack in Barmal, a district in the Afghan border province of Paktika. It asserted via the X social media platform that Pakistani refugee families residing in the area were the victims. The claims could not immediately be verified from independent sources.

“The Islamic Emirate considers this brutal bombing a violation of international principles and a clear act of aggression,” the ministry said, using the official title of the Taliban government. “This cowardly attack will not go unanswered,” the statement warned without elaborating.

The Taliban’s reaction came hours after security officials in Pakistan anonymously confirmed to reporters that their forces had launched multiple aerial strikes against suspected terrorist targets in Barmal.

The officials, who were not authorized to speak to the media, asserted the military action destroyed a training facility and eliminated several key militant commanders linked to the Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan, or TTP.

The globally designated terrorist organization is waging deadly attacks against Pakistani security forces and civilians from its alleged Afghan sanctuaries. Pakistan has struck suspected terrorist targets inside Afghanistan in recent months.

It was not clear whether Pakistani fighter planes or unmanned aircraft, known as drones, were employed to conduct Tuesday’s strikes.

Pakistani military spokesmen were immediately not available to comment on the reported counterterrorism cross-border strikes. They came two days after heavily armed TTP militants stormed a security outpost in South Waziristan, a Pakistani district adjacent to Barmal, and killed 16 soldiers in one of the deadliest attacks on Pakistan’s military in recent months.

Tuesday’s alleged strikes came on a day when Taliban leaders hosted meetings with a high-level Pakistani delegation, marking the resumption of such interactions after a yearlong pause due to terrorism allegations.

Taliban Foreign Minister Amir Khan Muttaqi, left, and Pakistan’s special envoy for Afghanistan Mohammad Sadiq led their respective teams at talks in Kabul, Dec 24, 2024. (Courtesy - Taliban)
Taliban Foreign Minister Amir Khan Muttaqi, left, and Pakistan’s special envoy for Afghanistan Mohammad Sadiq led their respective teams at talks in Kabul, Dec 24, 2024. (Courtesy – Taliban)

Mohammad Sadiq, Pakistan’s newly appointed special envoy for Afghan affairs, led his country’s team at the talks in Kabul with Taliban Foreign Minister Amir Khan Muttaqi and Interior Minister Sirajuddin Haqqani, among others.

Muttaqi’s office said in a post-meeting statement that the delegations focused on enhancing diplomatic, trade and transit relations between the countries, which share a nearly 2,600-kilometer border.

The chief Taliban diplomat stated that his government “desires positive relations” with Islamabad.

Muttaqi said without elaborating that to further develop trade and transit ties, both governments “must enhance mutual coordination, facilitate travelers’ cross-border movement and address issues straining relations between Afghanistan and Pakistan.

The Taliban’s statement quoted Pakistani envoy Sadiq as saying that his mission was to “bolster” bilateral political, economic, commercial and transit relations.

“Held wide-ranging discussions. Agreed to work together to further strengthen bilateral cooperation as well as for peace and progress in the region,” the Pakistani envoy wrote on X.

Sadiq’s predecessor, Asif Ali, visited Kabul in September 2023 when Pakistan was experiencing a dramatic rise in terrorist attacks attributed to the outlawed TTP, with Islamabad persistently alleging the militant group was orchestrating the deadly cross-border violence from its Afghan “hideouts.”

TTP attacks have since intensified and killed hundreds of Pakistani civilians as well as security forces, leading to a further deterioration in relations.

“Given the current circumstances, we must expedite our collaborative efforts to safeguard the relationship between our peoples and ensure regional stability and development,” Haqqani’s office quoted him Tuesday as telling the Pakistani delegation.

He stressed “the urgency of accelerating joint efforts to resolve security and political challenges,” according to the statement.

Taliban leaders have consistently denied allegations that Afghan territory is being used as a launching pad for attacks. The de facto Afghan government maintains it does not support the TTP or any other foreign militant group, describing the violence in Pakistan as an “internal problem” for the neighboring country to resolve rather than blaming Kabul for the crisis.

Afghanistan is landlocked, relying heavily on Pakistani overland routes and seaports to conduct bilateral and international trade. Tensions over terrorism charges have led to a significant decline in Afghan trade and transit activities through Pakistan in recent months.

The Taliban swept back to power in 2021, but no country has officially recognized them as the legitimate rulers of Afghanistan.

Taliban accuse Pakistan of conducting strikes inside Afghanistan
read more

Behind Afghanistan’s Fall, U.S.-Backed Militias Worse Than the Taliban

Azam Ahmed, a former Kabul bureau chief for The Times, returned to Afghanistan after the Taliban took control to report on the secrets the Americans left behind. He reported this story from Kunduz, Afghanistan.

Trump blamed Biden. Biden blamed the Afghan military. Our investigation found that the U.S. unwittingly laid the groundwork for the Taliban’s victory long ago.

The Taliban were inching closer, encroaching on land that had once seemed secure, the American officer warned. Four of his men had just been killed, and he needed Afghans willing to fight back.

“Who will stand up?” the officer implored a crowd of 150 Afghan elders.

The people in Kunduz Province were largely supportive of the Americans and opposed to the Taliban. But recruiting police officers was slow going and, by the summer of 2009, local officials and the American officer — a lieutenant colonel from the Georgia National Guard — landed on a risky approach: hiring private militias.

A murmur of discontent passed through the crowd.

“I don’t think this is a good idea,” an old man stood up and said, according to four people at the meeting. “We have seen this before. The militias will become a bigger problem than the Taliban.”

Over the grumbling, a onetime warlord named Mohammad Omar sprung up and denounced the others as cowards.

“I will fight the Taliban!” he shouted.

The gathering in Kunduz, in northern Afghanistan, is not registered in any official history of the war. But people across the province say this seemingly unremarkable moment reshaped the conflict in ways that Washington has never truly understood.

For years, the Americans supported militias in the north to fight the Taliban. But the effort backfired — those groups preyed on the populace with such cruelty that they turned a one-time stronghold of the United States into a bastion of the insurgency. People came to see the militias, and by extensions the Americans, as a source of torment, not salvation.

Mr. Omar, for example, who was known as the Wall Breaker, became the poster child of an abusive militia commander, marauding his way into local lore by robbing, kidnapping and killing rivals and neighbors under the auspices of keeping them safe from the Taliban.

The consequences came to a head during the chaotic American withdrawal in 2021. The north was expected to be America’s rear guard, a place where values like democracy and women’s rights might have taken hold.

Instead, it capitulated in a matter of days — the first region to fall to the Taliban.

President-elect Donald J. Trump has blamed President Biden for the messy end to America’s longest war, vowing to fire “every single senior official” responsible for the disastrous exit. Mr. Biden, by contrast, blames the Afghans for surrendering to the Taliban so quickly.

“Political leaders gave up and fled the country,” Mr. Biden said after the withdrawal. “The Afghan military collapsed.”

But both renderings miss a more fundamental reason for the rapid fall: In places like Kunduz, a New York Times investigation found, the United States set the conditions for its defeat long before the Afghan soldiers laid down their arms.

For years, the Americans helped recruit, train and pay for lawless bands of militias that pillaged homes and laid waste to entire communities. The militias tortured civilians, kidnapped for ransom, massacred dozens in vendetta killings and razed entire villages, sowing more than a decade of hatred toward the Afghan government and its American allies.

The Afghan Army, already overwhelmed, recognized that it was defending a government with vanishingly little support. So, when the advancing Taliban offered Afghan soldiers a choice — their lives for their weapons — they lay down arms.

The regions plundered by Mr. Omar and other warlords were active battlefields during the war, mostly off limits to outsiders. But more than 50 interviews, conducted in Kunduz over 18 months, showed how American support for the militias spelled disaster, not just in the province but also across the rest of northern Afghanistan.

That state-sponsored misery was central to how the United States and its Afghan partners lost the north — and how, despite two decades and $2 trillion in American money, Afghanistan fell.

Other Times investigations this year have revealed how the United States underwrote atrocities by Afghan forces and recklessly killed its own allies, essentially authoring its own defeat in Afghanistan.

The fall of Kunduz in 2021 was the final word on another unforced American error — its use of criminals to carry out operations against the Taliban.

“The militias shot at civilians and killed innocents,” said Rahim Jan, whose mother, father and two brothers were killed by Mr. Omar, which other villagers confirmed. With no other choice, he said, “we supported the Taliban, because they fought the militias.”

Even the Taliban, normally eager to boast of battlefield exploits, credit their victory in the province to American missteps.

“The U.S. empowered bandits and murderers in the name of counterinsurgency,” said Matiullah Rohani, a former Taliban commander and the current minister of information and culture in Kunduz. “But it only pushed more people into the hands of the Taliban.”

Human rights groups, academics and journalists have published numerous accounts of atrocities by militias. But the extent of the abuse, and how it helped enable the Taliban’s swift takeover of Afghanistan, is a story the Americans left behind when they abandoned the country three years ago.

Today, with the militias gone, the scale of their acts — in both human and political costs — is visible.

Previous accounts have blamed Afghan officials in the north for raising their own militias. But The Times found that the United States had recruited militias in Kunduz far earlier than was known, with a fallout far worse than American officials have acknowledged.

During its 20-year war in Afghanistan, the United States pushed an ever-evolving series of programs to recruit, train and support local resistance to the Taliban. Some formally created armed groups under the auspices of the police, while other backing was ad hoc, with money and training provided here and there. In many cases, the Afghan government doled out American cash, giving militias the imprimatur of Washington’s support.

Almost all of the efforts were problematic. Militias soon grew too powerful to disarm. And while they did fight the Taliban, they fought one another even more, creating the kind of civil war turmoil that first helped bring the Taliban to power in the 1990s. Some Afghans were so disgusted by the predatory militias that they began to see the Taliban as their defenders and joined the insurgency.

One of the first militias was born in the Kunduz district of Khanabad, the brainchild of the Georgia National Guard officer desperate to beat back the Taliban. And one of the earliest efforts involved Mr. Omar, the Wall Breaker.

“There was no doubt in my mind that Mr. Omar was a leader in that community,” said the now-retired officer, Lt. Col. Kenneth Payne, of the Second Battalion, 121st Infantry Regiment of Georgia’s 48th infantry brigade combat team. “And I firmly believe that, at the time, he was saying all the right things.”

Colonel Payne had not been sent to the north to recruit militias. He was there to mentor the police. But he had a wide remit, and a big idea. He decided that activating Mr. Omar’s group was worth the risk.

“It was almost like, ‘If this works, if this is better for me, where I will get an advantage, then I will do it,’” he said.

Instead, he wound up unwittingly supporting the only group in the region less popular than the Taliban.

Months after the summer meeting, a Taliban fighter lay against the floor of a collapsed guesthouse. Outside, Mr. Omar, the newly minted militia leader, paced the street.

“Come out now, or I will blow the walls of this house down!” he shouted into a megaphone, as his men prepped mortars, witnesses said. “I am the Wall Breaker!”

The insurgent weathered round after round of mortars, each one collapsing nearby homes and terrifying residents with the indiscriminate explosions.

Finally, Mr. Omar retreated with his men, fearful that the Taliban might send reinforcements. But on the way out of town, for good measure, his militia looted a local store and roughed up a few locals, residents said, actions that turned much of the community against him.

Mr. Omar had waged an all-day battle, blasting his way through an entire village, to chase down a single Taliban fighter. And still, somehow, his target had survived.

But the Wall Breaker moniker stuck. The name captured Mr. Omar’s capacity for wanton violence, though not necessarily effectiveness.

And that early foray was among his least offensive, many locals say.

In another early mission, in a neighboring district, he stole so brazenly and abused so widely that residents cite it as the moment the entire area turned toward the Taliban. “He even took people’s dogs,” one recalled.

Mr. Omar, who had first taken up arms against the Russians decades before, used his renewed power to exact vengeance on his enemies from past wars and past decades.

Akhtar Mohammad said that his father, uncle and brother had been rounded up and summarily executed, ostensibly for attacking Mr. Omar’s convoy with a roadside bomb. But Mr. Mohammad denied that his relatives were involved in the bombing, which he said was just pretext; the two families had feuded for three decades.

“Being part of a militia meant having the power and authority to settle scores,” Mr. Mohammad said.

In Colonel Payne’s estimation, “things went very well for a while.” But his deployment ended soon after Mr. Omar’s militia began and the area “had a hard time after we left,” he said.

“It really bothered me because I thought we had made a difference,” he added.

The United States knew about the debacle unfolding in Kunduz. A diplomatic cable from the U.S. Embassy in November 2009 emphasized the importance of controlling the militias. If left to their own devices, they could “divide Afghan communities and spark additional violence,” the cable noted.

Two months later, the embassy seemed to confirm those fears: The government had no power over the militias, which fought among themselves and forced locals to pay them illegal taxes.

The cable mentioned Mr. Omar’s role in the chaos, but blamed an overzealous Afghan governor for hiring him. The diplomats seemed unaware that the Americans had empowered Mr. Omar themselves.

In 2013, four years after helping to arm the likes of the Wall Breaker in Kunduz, the United States left the north, handing control of security, and the militias, to the Afghan government.

In the criminal free-for-all that blossomed, new commanders emerged even worse than Mr. Omar. They leveled villages and massacred families, and fought one another, too: over territory or perceived slights.

The Times spoke with dozens of families who had lost loved ones to those men and others, killings that tallied into the hundreds.

Forced conscription was common, they said. Men were killed for refusing to join one militia or another. Charges of supporting the Taliban were leveled against those who refused to pay taxes, and many were jailed.

“The militias would label anyone they didn’t like ‘Taliban,’ and then abuse them so much they had no choice but to join the Taliban,” said Mohammad Farid, a shopkeeper who said he was imprisoned for refusing to pay Mr. Omar a share of the proceeds from the sale of his store.

The Americans did not direct the abuse, but they funded the government with billions of dollars in cash and weapons, which officials then used to hire and arm the militias. As far as the villagers were concerned, this was an American project. And the Taliban increasingly seemed like a better option.

Shahd Mohammad, a tailor by trade, said he endured more than a year of beatings and abuse before he finally sold his shop in 2013, moved his family to another district and joined the Taliban.

For the next six years, he led a unit focused on fighting the militias in Khanabad.

“I went from living my life as a tailor to fighting on the front lines,” he said.

President Ashraf Ghani took office in Afghanistan in 2014 and realized the militias were running amok. With the Americans by his side, he loudly promised to bring security to Kunduz by bringing people like the Wall Breaker under control.

The effort proved disastrous.

Some militias, now maligned in public, soured on the government, former Afghan officials said. Some militias even switched sides, joining forces with the Taliban.

Seizing the moment, Taliban commanders began secretly calling militia leaders, sowing distrust by telling them that the government viewed them as the enemy, according to Taliban officials and former Afghan officials with access to classified intercepts. They, like some others, spoke on condition of anonymity because they feared repercussions.

The psychological tactic worked. Some militias stopped fighting for the government, while others kept clashing with one another, clearing the battlefield for the Taliban.

“The split between the militias was crucial for us,” said Hesmatullah Zalmay, a Taliban commander in Kunduz.

Within a year of Mr. Ghani’s threat to curtail the militias, Kunduz was on the verge of collapse.

It was too late. In August 2015, the Taliban stormed Kunduz City. Government forces and its militias fled until American airstrikes and special forces could help them retake the city.

Far from drawing lessons from the failed militia strategies, the Afghan government doubled down. To maintain order, Mr. Ghani’s government turned to a man even more ruthless than the Wall Breaker.

In a province shattered by ethnic and political divides, where factions of factions fought other factions, everyone agreed on one thing: Haji Fateh was the worst, most notoriously violent of all the militia commanders.

Accounts of his medieval torture methods — branding people with hot metal rods, burying them alive or keeping them chained in underground dungeons — still haunt the residents of Kunduz.

Mr. Fateh was widely seen as a scourge, a villain who killed innocents and charged their families to retrieve the bodies.

He was also an ally of the Afghan government and, by extension, their American backers.

Two former Afghan officials and several former militia commanders described years of government support for Mr. Fateh.

“We had a complicated relationship,” said one former high-ranking government official in Kunduz. “When the district came under attack, we gave him money and weapons to fight.”

The transfers were conducted in secret, he said, because Mr. Fateh was a wanted man.

Before the Taliban emptied the prisons in Kunduz during their brief takeover, Mr. Fateh had been locked up for killing a police officer while robbing a Kabul Bank truck.

“We supported him, yes, but it wasn’t like he could come to the governor’s house,” the official said.

How much the United States knew about the payments to Mr. Fateh is unclear. The money was given at a time when Afghan officials were under heavy pressure from Washington to take charge of their own security. The Pentagon did not respond to a list of questions about the militias.

After fleeing prison, Mr. Fateh set down roots in the braided hillsides of Deh Wayran, an area that was largely free of the Taliban.

He operated from a torture castle, according to residents, and demanded ransom payments for his kidnapping victims — men like Haji Wazir, a contractor for the Americans who said he was nearly starved to death by Mr. Fateh.

Mr. Fateh’s criminal empire was built on cruelty and swept up entire communities as he waged a brutal turf war with a rival militia.

Dozens died in scorched-earth battles between the two sides. Militias fired rockets and mortars into hillside villages and laced roads with bombs. They blamed the attacks on the Taliban, though they had no real presence there.

Almost nobody in Deh Wayran worried about the Taliban, residents said. To the contrary, they worried about the fight between two ostensible American allies.

Gul Afraz lived with her family in the village of Dana, a small community of Tajik families numbering fewer than 150 people.

Mr. Fateh planted roadside bombs that killed her son and two of her nephews, she said. Fearing that the village might take revenge, Mr. Fateh bulldozed every home there, villagers said, sending survivors fleeing.

Rival militiamen moved in, committing their own offenses, a tit-for-tat brutality that pushed more of the locals who remained to support the one group that wasn’t murdering them — the Taliban.

Within a year of Mr. Fateh’s arrival, the entire village had all but been wiped out.

“There was no Taliban here at first,” Ms. Afraz said, “but I am so grateful they are here now.”

Mr. Fateh operated with impunity, running checkpoints along the highway and extorting motorists of thousands of dollars a day, according to his former friends who remain in the region.

In a cynical twist, Mr. Fateh’s abuses made him ever more essential to the government: The more he pushed people into the arms of the Taliban, the more the government needed him to fight them.

The chief of police, the intelligence service and the army showered him with money and munitions, according to the former government officials and militia commanders. Even the highly trained Afghan Special Operations forces were supporting him.

And because the Afghan government was practically insolvent, it meant the Americans were paying for it all.

“We tried to capture him many times,” said Sadat, a former special operations commander, who like many Afghans goes by a single name. “But then the government began to support him.”

Prosecutors in Khanabad issued more than 100 warrants for Mr. Fateh’s arrest as complaints of robbery, extortion and murder poured in. But the local authorities refused to act.

One prosecutor gave his federal counterparts in the Ghani government 150 case files bearing evidence of Mr. Fateh’s crimes, to no avail. Mr. Fateh was untouchable, and he knew it.

One day in 2020, the Shiite owner of an ice cream store in Khanabad complained that Mr. Fateh should stop stealing his ice cream. Mr. Fateh had the shop owner beaten in the street.

In response, Haider Jafari, a local Shiite leader, said he had no choice but to confront him. Mr. Fateh responded by shooting him in the chest, wounding but not killing him.

Mr. Fateh then burned Shiite homes in the town and ordered Mr. Jafari to flee. To reinforce his point, Mr. Fateh murdered his nephew, Mr. Jafari said.

“We went directly to the governor, and he could not do anything,” Mr. Jafari said. “We began to support the Taliban after that.”

In February 2020, when the Trump administration reached a peace deal with the Taliban, the die was cast: the Americans were leaving.

The Taliban went from district to district, using elders to encourage the Afghan Army to lay down its arms. It was not much of a negotiation. Thanks to the militias, the Taliban were stronger than ever, and there was no good will left for the government.

By the time the United States announced its timetable for the withdrawal in 2021, the Taliban had all but taken most districts in Kunduz.

Khanabad was different, in part because men like Mr. Fateh and Mr. Omar dug in.

The Taliban and the government traded control of Khanabad three times during the second week of June.

Mr. Biden met Mr. Ghani in Washington that month, insisting that the war’s final act had not yet been written.

“Afghans are going to have to decide their future,” Mr. Biden said.

Mr. Fateh apparently did not share that optimism. Taliban officials say he tried to switch sides and even called a Taliban commander to offer his cooperation. But by then, the government was on its heels, and the Taliban saw no point in granting him quarter.

The militias abandoned Khanabad for Kunduz City, taking residence in whatever areas they could find. Mr. Fateh positioned himself in a home near the eastern edge of the city. Mr. Omar emptied a madrasa of students and claimed it as his headquarters.

Afghan commandos were dispatched to Kunduz to beat back the Taliban.

“They have the capacity. They have the forces. They have the equipment. The question is: Will they do it?” Mr. Biden said in July 2021. “The likelihood there’s going to be the Taliban overrunning everything and owning the whole country is highly unlikely.”

But the fight in Kunduz was over before it began. Even as commandos fought to defend the city, the Taliban were negotiating with the Afghan Army to take over the province, Taliban officials said.

Everyone saw the writing on the wall. Even residents who loathed the Taliban were tired of years of abuse at the hands of militias. The Afghan military was easily persuaded not to die for a lost cause, former Afghan officials said.

“In the end, the militias were the undoing of the government,” said Abdul Rauf Charsari, a former police commander in Kunduz.

Some of the most notorious warlords and criminals who brought such misery to Kunduz — and ultimately did more to support the Taliban than defeat them — faded away without a final battle or trial.

Mr. Omar, the Wall Breaker, died of natural causes not long after the Taliban took over.

Haji Fateh fled to safety as the province fell and resettled in Iran, where he lives in a swanky home paid for by the money he earned brutalizing the people of Kunduz, according to one of his friends.

Mr. Fateh could not be reached for comment, but he welcomes visitors regularly for lavish meals or tea, said the friend, speaking on condition of anonymity out of fear of incurring his wrath.

Among his most frequent guests, the friend said, are former Afghan government officials, hoping to convince him once more to take up arms on their behalf.

Azam Ahmed is international investigative correspondent for The Times. He has reported on Wall Street scandals, the War in Afghanistan and violence and corruption in Mexico, Central America and the Caribbean

Behind Afghanistan’s Fall, U.S.-Backed Militias Worse Than the Taliban
read more