|
According to "The Frontier Post" of November 27, 1996, the US Assistant Secretary of State Robin Raphel had expressed her country's opposition to the efforts of isolating the Taliban militia, saying "if we wish them to moderate their policies, we should engage with them."
Ironically, this is the same logic which is given by European countries in justification of their policies towards Iran. They say that "if we wish the Iranian regime to moderate its policies we should engage with it." But the USA is vehemently rejecting this standpoint and keeps on trying to persuade the European countries to stand firm against Iran and reduce their economic and trade ties with it to the minimum level.
Ms Raphel should explain whether there is a change in the US policy now that she prefers to be "engaged with" a group of fundamentalists more rotten than their Iranian brothers?
She also said that despite "nearly universal misgivings" about the Taliban movement, it must be acknowledged as a significant factor in the Afghan equation and one that will not simply disappear any time soon."
Again, we would like to ask Ms Raphel that if your CIA believes that they can topple the 18-year old regime of Iran by allocating a modest amount of 8 million dollars only, then how do you assume that a small, irregular band of
ultra-reactionary religious fundamentalists like Taliban is there to stay as it would not disappear any time soon?
Ms Raphel, some years back, America used to call the terrorist gang of Gulbaddin Hekmatyar as the "most powerful" and "effective" jehadi force, and the CIA poured almost half of the arms and funds meant for Afghan fundamentalists and their accomplices, to
his band. But you have seen how Gulbaddin, Rabbani, Sayyaf, Masood and other blue-eyed boys of CIA have been dislodged overnight and now all of them are on the run for their lives. If America or her allies do not "engage" themselves with the Taliban, the people of Afghanistan would have the strength to end once and for all their domination that is taking us back to the Dark Ages.
As a bird's strength is in its wings, the Taliban's strength is in their friends like your country Ms Raphel. We have had enough of the fundamentalists; please do not try to "engage" yourselves with them at the expense of the vast majority of the bereaved Afghan masses.
The Burst of the 'Islamic Government' Bubble in Afghanistan
No.2, Jan.1996
|
|
"US helping Taliban to destabilize Iran"
THE MUSLIM, April 13, 1996
TEHRAN, April 12 (AFP): Iran has accused the United States of helping the Afghan Taliban militia to smuggle in drugs to destabilize the Islamic republic, newspapers said here Thursday.
Intelligence Minister Ali Fallahian, quoted by newspapers, said the Taliban which controls western Afghanistan had set up "mafia-like" networks which "injected narcotics" into neighboring Iran:
The "US-guided" operations are "politically-motivated", aimed at "distracting Iranian security forces from other issues and creating trouble" for Iran, he said at a congress on drugs on Wednesday.
The United States itself has put Iran on a list of countries which have allegedly failed to do enough to combat drugs.
|
|
Taliban seek US help
THE MUSLIM, 14 October 1996
Following their defeats at the hand of the trio (Rabbani, Dostum and Khalili), the Taliban have contacted high officials in the American Embassy at Islamabad seeking help, reported London-based Arabic daily al-Sharq al-Awsat, quoting high officials in the Taliban movement. Taliban have requested military, financial and political help from the United States promising to close all training centers of the so-called 'Arab Afghans' inside the Afghan territories. |
|
"US supporting the rise of Taliban"
The News, October 6,1996
By special arrangement with Los Angeles Times and The Washington Post
Kabul: In this paradise of conspiracy theory, a country that has been the plaything of great powers for more than a century, a new rumor is making the rounds: that the United States is behind the stunning rise of the Taliban.
From the halls of the Foreign Ministry to offices of internationally funded charities, among UN officials and the clientele of Kabul's bazaars, many are persuaded the Clinton administration is covertly supporting the Taliban, the victorious Islamic militia.
The reasons people give are many, even if hard proof, so far, is lacking. The United States, they say is especially driven by the desire to checkmate Iran, Afghanistan's neighbor to the west and a country Washington considers one of the world's leading exporters of terrorism.
How did a ragtag force that emerged in late 1994 among Muslim religious students in the southern region of Kandahar and adjacent areas of Pakistan grow so quickly that two years later, it has become master of three-quarters of Afghanistan? Who paid for its weaponry, ammunition and vehicles?
Who organised its training and logistics? Is intelligence or military assistance received from outside one of the reasons the Taliban has enjoyed astonishing, and relatively bloodless, successes over experienced mujahideen commanders who for nearly a decade fought occupying Soviet troops?
The United States has moved swiftly to establish official contact with the new masters of the Afghan capital.
The very day Kabul fell, a senior Clinton administration official said an envoy would probably be sent here in the near future to consult with officials of the new government formed by the Taliban.
To those numerous Afghans who see an American hand in the Taliban's triumph, the relative speed with which the United States is now seeking to establish official contact with them is offered as further proof of collusion.
|
|