Bomber attacks NATO-Afghan officials, kills Top Afghan policeman, wounds NATO commander

[Papay]

Yahoo:

TALOQAN, Afghanistan (Reuters) – A suicide bomber killed one of the most powerful men in north Afghanistan on Saturday, underlining the spread of insurgent violence in once peaceful parts of the country and casting a shadow over plans for Afghans to take control of security.
A provincial police chief, at least two Afghan policemen and two German soldiers also died in the attack on political and military leaders, Afghan and NATO officials said.
They were meeting in the capital of northern Takhar province to discuss an operation against insurgents, and at least another 10 people were injured, including the provincial governor, said the governor's spokesman Faiz Mohammad Tawhidi.
NATO's commander for the northern region, German Major General Markus Kneip, was among the wounded but not seriously hurt, General Rainer Glatz told reporters in Berlin.
The most high-profile casualty was General Dawood Dawood, police chief of north Afghanistan, a former deputy interior minister and before that a close associate of mujahideen commander Ahmad Shah Masood.
The loss of such a prominent and influential leader is a big blow to a force which is struggling to professionalize and shake off a reputation for abuse and corruption as foreign forces prepare to hand over security responsibilities in coming years.
He had been energetic opponent of the growing insurgent movement in the north, fostering state-sponsored armed self-defense groups known as the Afghan Local Police and organizing campaigns against the Taliban.
The day of his death he held a news conference announcing the start of operation Hope, which aimed to oust the insurgents from Takhar and neighboring Kunduz, where they have only gained a strong foothold in recent years.
Takhar was once so peaceful that there is no major permanent base for foreign troops there. German troops supervise the area from a base in neighboring Kudzu province.
But violence has risen sharply in recent months, as the insurgency gathers strength in northern areas. The Taliban claimed responsibility for Saturday's attack, saying they were target ting top regional leaders.
A mosque bombing last October killed the governor of Kunduz while he was attending Friday prayers and a Dutch aid worker was taken hostage there the same month.
Earlier this week at least 14 people were killed in violent protests about a night raid by foreign forces.
ATTACKERS IN UNIFORM
Dagwood's death may also complicate NATO efforts to prepare for the start of a security handover from foreign forces to Afghan soldiers and police in some parts of north Afghanistan.
Afghan President Humid Kara said he condemned the attack in the strongest terms.
"The martyrs of this brutal attack were those who tirelessly worked to bring peace in the country," he said in a statement.
The attacker was wearing police uniform, said Tahiti, making this the latest in a string of attacks by rogue members of the security forces or insurgents who have used uniforms to breach security cordons.

The police chief of Kandahar province, Khan Mohammad Khan was killed by another attacker wearing police uniform in mid-April, and authorities have struggled to find a replacement.
An insurgent in army uniform also struck inside the Defense Ministry headquarters in Kabul a few days afterwards, killing two although neither was a senior leader.
Fighters under pressure in traditional strongholds because of a surge in U.S. troops are seeking spectacular urban attacks to underline their reach, and the use of rogue police and troops, or insurgents in uniforms, has been growing.
The Taliban this month announced the start of a long-expected "spring offensive," vowing to carry out attacks including suicide bombings on foreign and Afghan troops and government officials.
The assaults by uniformed insurgents also highlight the pressure U.S. and NATO troops face as they race to prepare Afghan security forces for a critical security handover which begins later this year. Western forces in Afghanistan have begun to train counter-intelligence agents to help root out Taliban infiltrators in the Afghan army and police, General William Caldwell, head of the U.S. and NATO training mission in Afghanistan, said recently.

Is this the right time for NATO to withdraw?

[Vanoi]

Yahoo:



Is this the right time for NATO to withdraw?

Not really. We have been in the war for 10 years now, there would be no point in leaving and destroying any progress we have made in thid conflict. I am sure if Pakistan could do its job of eliminating Taliban militants, the war would be over sooner.

[HissingNewt]

Is this the right time for NATO to withdraw?

No. Why would it be? That would just reverse everything our troops have fought for in that nation if we leave before the ANA can stand on its own.

[Mythos]

No. Why would it be? That would just reverse everything our troops have fought for in that nation if we leave before the ANA can stand on its own.

Something that is at least 5 - 10 years in the future if you are an optimist. An even if the ANA can stand on its own, how will it regain control of the country when ISAF is struggling to do so with all the modern equipment, firepower and extreme commitment that is has? Even if the ANA is proficient in the role it is supposed to have, how do you deal with the very real possibility that its political superiors will not use it correctly or even not use it at all? Whats the point of leaving a capable army and some completely incapable and corrupt politicians? Just leaving is not really a solution, but believing that the ANA will eventually be able to perform as good as ISAF is just wishful thinking.

[Mangalore]

No. Why would it be? That would just reverse everything our troops have fought for in that nation if we leave before the ANA can stand on its own.

This is an erroneous argument. What our troops achieved now is irrelevant to the overall cost / benefit assessment of what our staying costs vs what we gain from staying. The end result may well be that staying is worth it but it is not worth it just because we have been there for 10 years already.

The problem is assessing the benefit of a stable Aghanistan for the Western World vs the monetary sinkhole it represents in terms of military and civilian expenditures. Human losses not even counted.

My overall problem is seeing Afghanistan become a halfway stable nation.

My second problem is that even if Afghanistan turns into a great, western democratic nation: What did we get out of that matching our massive investments? The terror threat could have been contained far cheaper...

That said I really don't know. I just don't see even "victory" giving the West much it couldn't get by cheaper means, justifying occupying ourselves to such a degree in the affairs of some place in Central Asia.

[Imperial]

This is an erroneous argument. What our troops achieved now is irrelevant to the overall cost / benefit assessment of what our staying costs vs what we gain from staying. The end result may well be that staying is worth it but it is not worth it just because we have been there for 10 years already.

The problem is assessing the benefit of a stable Aghanistan for the Western World vs the monetary sinkhole it represents in terms of military and civilian expenditures. Human losses not even counted.

My overall problem is seeing Afghanistan become a halfway stable nation.

My second problem is that even if Afghanistan turns into a great, western democratic nation: What did we get out of that matching our massive investments? The terror threat could have been contained far cheaper...

That said I really don't know. I just don't see even "victory" giving the West much it couldn't get by cheaper means, justifying occupying ourselves to such a degree in the affairs of some place in Central Asia.

The victory is making sure Pakistani nukes stay in the hands of the of the Pakistan government. This isn't about Afghanistan anymore. Ever since NATO got rid of the Taliban government, the Taliban have set up shop next door in Pakistan. The government can't control its own country anymore, and it's increasingly clear that their nuclear weapons may become compromised by the Taliban or Al Qeada.

Simply put, I believe that Pakistan is the real reason why NATO is still in Afghanistan. Afghanistan gives NATO a great base of operations to launch raids on Al-Qeada in Pakistan.

[Gumpfendorfer]

The victory is making sure Pakistani nukes stay in the hands of the of the Pakistan government. This isn't about Afghanistan anymore. Ever since NATO got rid of the Taliban government, the Taliban have set up shop next door in Pakistan. The government can't control its own country anymore, and it's increasingly clear that their nuclear weapons may become compromised by the Taliban or Al Qeada.

Simply put, I believe that Pakistan is the real reason why NATO is still in Afghanistan. Afghanistan gives NATO a great base of operations to launch raids on Al-Qeada in Pakistan.

The irony is off course, that leaving Iraq is impossible given the instability created in the region due to the invasion, and the massive delays of fixing Afghanistan because of the Iraq invasion made absolutely sure that South Asia was bound to destabilize even further. Pakistan destabilizing was predictable, that it would be so bad even surprises me. So we're stuck and our goals are constantly shifting. Staying is creating more and more problems, leaving also holds serious risks. " A fine mess you got us in" -which film was that again?

Last week in Kazakhstan two bombs, one of them suicide, exploded, it's creeping into Central Asia at a worrying speed.

[Yosemite]

what a blunder

[Admiral Piett]

No, it would be time for withdrawal if actual Afghan officials and security started allying with Taliban.

[Imperial]

No, it would be time for withdrawal if actual Afghan officials and security started allying with Taliban.

This.

The fact that they are targeting Afghan policemen means there is still a divide in the country that NATO can take advantage of, as cynical as that may seem.

[Gumpfendorfer]

No, it would be time for withdrawal if actual Afghan officials and security started allying with Taliban.

Afghan officials have been cooperating with the Taliban for very long time now. What most people simply do not understand that the political situation is far too fluid and has been since the day the civil war started in the 70ties, before the Russian invasion. It's not a matter of one party vs the other. All parties switch sides more than I switch underwear. We in the West are too occupied with ideology and religion and constantly think the Talibs are some alien faction to Afghanistan. This war is about money, drugs and power, Most of the current and past powerbrokers do not care about the Taliban ideas. Nor flat out reject them.

Walli Karzai for instance is accused many times of cooperating with the Talibs in his heroin trafficking. He uses the Taliban to assassinate political opponents or those in the way of his business empire. Governors and local officials do the same.

'Marshall Fahim is using the Taliban (which by the way is the wrong word for the insurgency, it has morphed into something way beyond the Taliban) to assassinate local ANA and police commanders in the north of the country not loyal to him. He is also selling weapons to the Taliban.

In the case of Daoud Daoud, I wouldn't be surprised if local drugs Mafia or someone as Fahim is involved in some way. Daoud Daoud is of the Massoud/Abdullah faction, very likely corrupt, but still one of the rare persons in the higher echelons who realized Afghanistan needs to change. Very straight forward and capable.

The Fahim faction and Abdullah are deeply embroiled and have been killing each other.'It's all very murky. An attack on such a well protected target makes me wonder.

What we can see now is that all factions are positioning themselves for the moment the USA starts to withdraw, a scramble for power. With no central government in place, its going to get ugly. We're almost to the point of a full blown civil war. Finally.

Haven't been there for 1.5 year due to a mysterious illness, but a friend just came back, he was almost sold by his police escort to the Taliban in Kunduz, in Kabul he was harassed on the streets constantly, threatened that they would cut his head of. Unheard and unprecedented in Afghanistan. The mood is now very anti Western, and with reason, in fact a long list of grievances to get very upset about.

[The Noble Lord]

In the case of Daoud Daoud, I wouldn't be surprised if local drugs Mafia or someone as Fahim is involved in some way. Daoud Daoud is of the Massoud/Abdullah faction, very likely corrupt, but still one of the rare persons in the higher echelons who realized Afghanistan needs to change. Very straight forward and capable.

The Fahim faction and Abdullah are deeply embroiled and have been killing each other.'It's all very murky. An attack on such a well protected target makes me wonder.

The thing is, it is unlikely that Fahim is involved since General/Governor Daoud Daoud was fellow Tajik and member of Ahmad Shah Massoud's iner-circle same like Fahim. They were comrades from the early 80s and together with Massoud they formed Shoura e-Nazar. They know each other very well and in the post-2001 politics of Afghanistan they know that as Tajiks they have to be connected and supportive of each other. Of course Fahim is with Karzai and Daoud Daoud was officially with the Dr Abdullah Abdullah, but they still supoorted each other. It is a power game by the Tajik dominated Northern Alliance, Fahim-Qanuni wing will dominate Kabul, Dr Abdullah would be covering Panjir valley with former president Rabani, and duo of Daoud Daoud and very powerful warlord Atta Mohamed would dominate three crucial provinces in the north: Takhar, Kunduz and Balkh.
Until recently it worked very well, it is Tajik dominance of Kabul that is pretty obvious to everybody, they control the intelligence and interior ministry plus it is Fahim that is the business tycoon of Kabul. Plus, Qanuni and Dr Abdulllah are very much formidable political presence in the capital whatever happens. The entire setup drives the pro-Karzai Pashtuns mad and let alone Taliban and Hezbi Islami factions who hate them with everything that they have. Of course Karzai is the president but many Pashtuns see him just being there for appearances sake and defense minister Rahim Vardak is good Pashtun with marvelous reputation but he lacks power base and grassroots support due to his absence from the country for many years.
In the north you have exactly same situation like in Kabul, the Tajiks dominate three major provinces and they have all the economical and quasi-military dominance over the other ethnic groups there and let alone any government influence. Karzai can't remove them because he needs them and because they are just too powerful to be removed by a man from Kabul.
Their strength is demonstrated with how easily they were able to sideline the once all-powerful Uzbek warlord general Abdul Rashid Dostum and Karim Khalili's Hazara Hezbi e-Wahdat party. Now you have three most powerful and important provinces in the north ruled by the Tajiks. Furthermore, general Daoud Daoud was also police and security chief for all the northern provinces which gave him enormous power, of course he was Afghan nationalist and patriot but in the Byzantine world of Afghan internal tribal/ethnic/provincial/clan politics he was first and foremost Tajik and Tajik that is of Panjiri orientation! And that tells you something. He is to be despised by the other ethnic groups and hated by the Taliban and Gulbudin Hekmatyar's Hezbi islami especially since Hekmatyar is Pashtun from the north, that's where his power base once was and remnants of his supporters are still there.

In conclusion, this unfortunate event was most definitely a well planed and executed assassination of general Daoud Daoud by the Taliban and Hezbi Islami elements because he was the pillar of Tajik dominance of the north and Afghanistan as a whole! If I had to guess it is Atta Mohamed that is next and it certainly makes Fahim, Qanuni, Rabani and Dr Abdullah very nervous, for they are part of the government and they have the power now but if their tough and reliable compatriots are being killed one by one then there is nobody left to fight and to make them strong, Afghanistan is still fractured along ethnic lines and you are respected and accepted only if you have military muscle to back it up and few days ago Tajiks lost one of their "swords"!

[Gumpfendorfer]

The thing is, it is unlikely that Fahim is involved since General/Governor Daoud Daoud was fellow Tajik and member of Ahmad Shah Massoud's iner-circle same like Fahim.

You are missing the nuances: Fahim and Abdullah fell out long time ago, Fahim has never been popular with the Massoud faction to begin with, Fahim is now allied to Karzai as you say. I know quite a few NA commanders close to Massoud who loath Fahim, and suspect him of assassinations, being too close to Karzai and a roughneck/peasant who is not suitable to play any role ina future Afghanistan. Not one the the enlightened and capable NA commanders as Massoud, Atta or Massoud. Being old buddies means nothing in Afghanistan. They are very certain that it was Sayaf who was instrumental in killing Massoud for example. Pretty convincing story. The NA as such no longer exists as a cohesive force. Dostum was already weak, after his defeat in Mazar by the Taliban before 2001, not in the least because of the betrayal of his commanders. Other simply filled the gap after 2001. Tensions between Uzbeks and Tajiks are on the rise, one the reasons the insurgents have made serious inroads outside of their traditional Pashtun powerbase in the North.

So I'll keep the options open who actually killed Daoud.

[The Noble Lord]

You are missing the nuances: Fahim and Abdullah fell out long time ago, Fahim has never been popular with the Massoud faction to begin with, Fahim is now allied to Karzai as you say.

Marshal Fahim and Dr Abdullah Abdullah did have some disagreements but they been together for a long time and they know each other very well. Both of them are Panjshiris with Abdullah being half Kandahari Pashtun. But they been with Massoud since the early 80s and he had nobody closer than them two. After his assassination it was Fahim that became commander of the NA.
Fahim is now allied to Karzai and it works quiet well, he is the tycoon of Kabul and together with Junus Qanuni and Dr Abdullah Abdullah they form the Tajik/Farsi dominaiton of Kabul which is resented by many Pashtuns and Hazaras for that matter. They maybe in two different camps but they will stick together for a simple reason, interest!

I know quite a few NA commanders close to Massoud who loath Fahim, and suspect him of assassinations, being too close to Karzai and a roughneck/peasant who is not suitable to play any role ina future Afghanistan.

As for the other commanders who can't stand Fahim, it means nothing really since he has been number two to Massoud for a long time and he may be "roughneck peasant" like you said but he is Marshal of Afghanistan, he controls Kabul basically, he is more powerful than defense minister Rahim Vardak and he has powerful Panjshiri lobby behind him, they been in control of Kabul in 1992-1996 and they lost it to Taliban, they don't want same to happen again!

Being old buddies means nothing in Afghanistan. They are very certain that it was Sayaf who was instrumental in killing Massoud for example. Pretty convincing story.

That allegations that Sayyaf was involved in Massoud's kiling has nothing to do with reality, it's a baseless accusation. It has been proven beyond reasonable doubt that it was Osama bin Laden and Al Qaeda who assassinated Massoud, two days before 9/11 in order to boost Taliban military supremacy since it was reasoned that without Massoud the NA would collapse. Sayyaf was Massouds ally in the 1990s and he was thrown out by the Taliban and was in exile when Massoud got killed in Takhar. Before allied intervention in Afghanistan in October 2001, Sayyaf and his party had no power and he had no power base, he was only given money and unleashed month later to organize his people and fight Taliban from the back, from his home base of Paghman. It is more likely that it was ISI who facilitated the assassins to get close to Massoud since he was the mortal enemy of Pakistan' ISI who wanted him dead since the late 80s!

The NA as such no longer exists as a cohesive force. Dostum was already weak, after his defeat in Mazar by the Taliban before 2001, not in the least because of the betrayal of his commanders. Other simply filled the gap after 2001. Tensions between Uzbeks and Tajiks are on the rise, one the reasons the insurgents have made serious inroads outside of their traditional Pashtun powerbase in the North.

The north is now in total control of the Tajiks being the three most important provinces in the north (Balkh, Kunduz and Takhar) being dominated by the Tajik warlords. Dostum lost too much with his constant bickering with other Uzbek commanders and with his short exile in Turkey in 2008. He came back but that was it for him, no more power in the north and no more impunity that he had previously. It's firmly Mohammad Atta and until recently Daoud Daoud who were in control of the north with the tacit approval of the Panjshiri faction that is sort in control of Kabul now.

So I'll keep the options open who actually killed Daoud.

Like I stated previously, the Taliban and Hezbi Islami forces in the north who resent the situation where they are dominated by the Tajiks, it is more likely Gulbudin Hekmatyar that is responsible!

[Armenum]

Is this the right time for NATO to withdraw?

So there's this one incident and NATO decides to withdraw? I'm pretty sure they are more committed than that.

[The Noble Lord]

Not a good news at all. The North has been relatively peaceful and safe and Taliban were not much active there. But due to the corruption of the local power structures and excesses of some warlords
in the provinces of Takhar, Kunduz and Balkh, the local Taliban and Hezbi-Islami forces are gaining more and more support, it was passive before but it's getting more bolder now. Not a good news at all,
the commander in question was a good guy and someone whop could really improve the situation in the North.

[Tiberios]

Is this the right time for NATO to withdraw?

What would a NATO withdrawal achieve?

[Heathen Hammer]

What would a NATO withdrawal achieve?

No more spending of tax money on a pointless and unwinnable war?

[SPECTREtm]

No more spending of tax money on a pointless and unwinnable war?

And make the situation in Afghanistan even worse than it was previously, and be a massive waste of time and resources already spent. A withdrawl cannot be done untill some of the objectives have been achieved. Also, why is it pointless? Because the Kremlin doesn't approve of it?

[Heathen Hammer]

And make the situation in Afghanistan even worse than it was previously, and be a massive waste of time and resources already spent.

Not the first time for such thing to happen.

A withdrawl cannot be done untill some of the objectives have been achieved. Also, why is it pointless? Because the Kremlin doesn't approve of it?

Um, how is Kremlin (which actually approves the war) relevant here? Its pointless because NATO can hardly cooperate with either Pakistan or current extremely corrupt Afghanistan's government.