More

Taliban Attack: Afghanistan Capital Under Assault

ROBERT H. REID and RAHIM FAIEZ   01/18/10 09:31 PM ET   AP

Taliban Attack
Taliban Attack: A building smoulders in Kabul, Afghanistan.

KABUL — Taliban militants wearing explosive vests launched a brazen daylight assault Monday on the center of Kabul, with suicide bombings and gunbattles near the presidential palace and other government buildings that paralyzed the city for hours.

Afghan forces along with NATO advisers managed to restore order after nearly five hours of fighting as explosions and machine gunfire echoed across the mountain-rimmed city, sending terrified Afghans racing for cover. Twelve people were killed, including seven attackers, officials said.

The assault by a handful of determined militants dramatized the vulnerability of the Afghan capital, undermining public confidence in President Hamid Karzai's government and its U.S.-led allies.

The attacks also suggested that the mostly rural Taliban are prepared to strike at the heart of the Afghan state – even as the United States and its international partners are rushing 37,000 reinforcements to join the eight-year war.

"We are so concerned, so disappointed about the security in the capital," said Mohammad Hussain, a 25-year-old shopkeeper who witnessed the fighting. "Tens of thousands of U.S. and NATO troops are being sent to Afghanistan, yet security in the capital is deteriorating."

The violence began shortly before 10 a.m. and persisted until mid-afternoon with attacks at four locations within an area of less than one square mile.

The attack unfolded as Cabinet members were being sworn in by President Hamid Karzai despite that parliament's rejection of most of his choices. Presidential spokesman Waheed Omar said the ceremony occurred as scheduled and that everybody in the palace was safe.

In the first assault, a suicide bomber detonated his explosives at Pashtunistan Square, a major intersection near the gates to the presidential palace, the Central Bank and the luxury Serena Hotel, which is frequented by Westerners.

Clashes broke out as other militants fought with Afghan troops, who converged quickly on the scene in pickup trucks and armored vehicles. Police sealed off the area and helicopters buzzed overhead.

Several attackers then stormed into a nearby shopping mall, prompting a standoff with security forces. Two bombers were killed when their explosives detonated, setting the four-story building ablaze.

About 11:17 a.m., another suicide attacker drove toward the area in an ambulance but blew himself up after he was challenged at a checkpoint near the Education Ministry.

At about 1 p.m., three other attackers entered another commercial building housing offices and stores, holding off security forces for about two hours before they were killed.

Details were provided by Interior Minister Hanif Atmar at a press conference.

The dead included an intelligence agent, two policemen and two civilians, including one child, according to Atmar. He said 71 other people were wounded, including 35 civilians. Most of the injuries were caused by hand grenade attacks hurled by the militants, he said.

Taliban spokesman Zabiullah Mujahid told The Associated Press that 20 armed militants, including some with suicide vests, had entered Kabul to target the presidential palace and other government buildings in the center of the capital. Afghan authorities said seven militants were killed but that it was possible others were burned in the shopping center blaze.

It was the biggest assault on the capital since Oct. 28, when three gunmen with automatic weapons and suicide vests stormed a guest house used by U.N. staff, killing at least 11 people including five U.N. workers. Taliban suicide bombers and gunmen also struck government buildings in the capital in February 2009, killing more than 20 people.

But Monday's fighting persisted longer than any initiated by the Taliban in the capital since they were driven from power by the U.S. and its allies in 2001.

Flights into Kabul International Airport were suspended for several hours. Many shops closed, and the city's normally congested streets were largely empty of vehicles. Large plumes of white smoke rose into the cloudless sky.

At the Finance Ministry, employee Emal Masood said he and his colleagues were evacuated into the corridors while Afghan government forces used the roof to fire on militants in nearby buildings.

"The fight was intensifying moment by moment," he told BBC Television by phone. "We were able to see the fear in everybody's eyes."

The top U.S. and NATO commander, Gen. Stanley McChrystal, said the attack was "yet another example of (Taliban) brutality and contempt for the Afghan people."

However, many Afghan civilians expressed alarm that their city was so vulnerable despite the presence of thousands of Afghan security forces.

"Today it looks like a coup," said Abdul Rahman Hamedi, 38, who ran with his son from his shop. "Everybody said, `The city is full of suicide bombers.'"

Abdul Jabar, an Afghan policeman from Helmand Province, said thousands of foreign forces have been sent to Afghanistan yet "why are they not able to stabilize Afghanistan?"

"Nobody is secure," Masood told the BBC. "You never know when you leave your house whether you're going to come back alive to your family."

Most of the fighting has occurred in the southern and eastern provinces that are the homeland of the Pashtuns, the ethnic group from which the hardline Islamist Taliban draws nearly all of their members.

Since August, however, the militants have stepped up their attacks in Kabul, including car bombings at NATO headquarters, the Indian Embassy and near the home of a former vice president in addition to the attack on the U.N. workers.

NATO officials speculated that Monday's attack may have been timed to upstage preparations for a Jan. 28 major international conference in London on ways to shore up the Afghan government.

U.S. Lt. Gen. David Rodriguez, the No. 2 U.S. commander in Afghanistan, blamed the attack on the Haqqani network, an al-Qaida-linked Afghan Taliban faction based in Pakistan. The group also was believed to be linked to the Dec. 30 suicide bombing against a remote CIA base that killed seven of the agency's employees in Afghanistan's Khost province.

Richard Holbrooke, the U.S. special envoy to Afghanistan and Pakistan, said the Taliban behind the attack were part of a set of extremist groups operating in the border areas between Afghanistan and Pakistan.

"They are desperate people; they are ruthless," he said from New Delhi after a trip to Afghanistan. "The people who are doing this certainly will not survive the attack, nor will they succeed. But we can expect these sort of things on a regular basis."

___

Associated Press writers Amir Shah, Kim Gamel and Slobodan Lekic in Kabul, Raphael G. Satter in London and Kathy Gannon in Islamabad contributed to this report.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST WORLD

KABUL — Taliban militants wearing explosive vests launched a brazen daylight assault Monday on the center of Kabul, with suicide bombings and gunbattles near the presidential palace and other go...
KABUL — Taliban militants wearing explosive vests launched a brazen daylight assault Monday on the center of Kabul, with suicide bombings and gunbattles near the presidential palace and other go...
Filed by Adam J. Rose  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 185
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (5 total)
09:12 PM on 01/18/2010
I still can't get my head around this suicide stuff. The Vietnamese were just as cornered, just as desperate, just as committed to a deathfight for their country.

We STILL haven't heard a chorus of Islamic spiritual leaders teaching that this is not the way to heaven. I guess they just sympathize too deeply with the hatred of the way the West has treated them.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
1murillo
Can't be neutral on a moving train - Zinn
03:19 PM on 01/18/2010
12 dead, 7 were the Taliban (reportedly), is not a military victory. Of course no deaths and no attacks is much preferable, however if the Taliban can surprise Afghanistan and lose more members than others killed, it is a loss for the Taliban. The degree of fear instilled would be the victory for the Taliban, that's controllable to a degree by the Afghanis.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
RRK70
02:00 PM on 01/18/2010
I'm not a supporter of most of our policies in Afghanistan to date, but I do try to look at the news dispassionately.

IF the numbers are accurate, this was a win for the Afghani security.

12 dead, 7 of which were the attackers, some of whom were wearing suicide vests on an attack in the capital against multiple targets. That's a pretty significant failure for the Taliban.
02:19 PM on 01/18/2010
According to 12 minutes ago on Twitter, there is another attack on Kabul. Some say multiple attacks.
photo
BannedInBoston
Everyone is entitled to my opinion.
01:38 PM on 01/18/2010
Three things to think about:

1) If we had maintained previous troop levels, the situation in Afghanistan would have continued to deteriorate at the same rate.

2) Now that we are committing more troops to the military occupation of Afghanistan, the situation will deteriorate more slowly.

3) If we withdraw ALL troops, the situation will deteriorate more rapidly.

Folks, what do these three possibilities have in common and what does that tell you?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
RRK70
02:01 PM on 01/18/2010
It tells me that I sure hope Obama sticks to his pledge to withdraw by 2011!
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
01:17 PM on 01/18/2010
Afghanistan is win-win for the MIC.
01:23 PM on 01/18/2010
No it isn't.

I'll bet you you would not have found a single General or other military officer who would have thought in 2000 that getting into a war in Afghanistan was a good idea. For any reason.

Remember the Powell Doctrine?

We are there because of the incredible ignorance and corruption of the Bush/Cheney Administration who ignored the festering situation for 7 long years.

You think the US Army wants anything more than to see the end to these stupid wars?
photo
BannedInBoston
Everyone is entitled to my opinion.
01:25 PM on 01/18/2010
Well, adding more troops to the theaters of operation certainly isn't going to do it.
01:15 PM on 01/18/2010
Obama had to send 50,000 more troops because the Afghan people have rejected the US military occupation. The US has killed so many innocent civilians in their cowardly bombing war that the Afghan people want the US out, Taliban or not.
01:24 PM on 01/18/2010
According to the latest reports more than 60% of the civilain deaths came from the Taliban or their alles.

The Afghan people want and end to this endless war.

And will support whomever they think can best accomplish it.
photo
BannedInBoston
Everyone is entitled to my opinion.
01:27 PM on 01/18/2010
And that would be a bunch of Ahmad-come-lately foreigners who don't understand their language and culture and will probably leave in a few years at most?
01:49 PM on 01/18/2010
I am wondering about these reports.
photo
BannedInBoston
Everyone is entitled to my opinion.
01:14 PM on 01/18/2010
Afghanistan is a no-win situation for the US (just as it was for Russia in the '80's), no matter how many additional troops are commited to this _war of military occupation and no matter how long this occupation lasts. This is not defeatism, just realism and why the decision-makers can't see this is completely beyond me.

"If at first you don't succeed, try, try again. Then stop. No point in being a _damn fool about it."

--W.C. Fields
01:12 PM on 01/18/2010
We are still losing in Afghanistan and everywhere else because we do not understand the culture. 30,000 troops do not help when the average Afghan male wants to be part of the new Califate, the Afghan woman has no no rights, heroin is only economic engine, except for Saudi millionaires, "our friends" that help fund the Taliban.

We won the war initially because General Frank understood that in that tribal jungle you align with one tribe to beat the other and isolated the Taliban from their main source of power- the Pakistani ISS.

We need to attack the poppy crop, force Saudi Arabia and our other "friends" in the muslim world to prosecute contributors to Taliban and Al-Qaida, and promote women rights everywhere.

Otherwise, here comes a war MUCH WORSE THAN VIETNAM. Vietnam started a mini-domino with Cambodia and several African nations falling into the hand of the Russians, until the Russians tried Afghanistan. This time around the domino will be much larger:Afghanistan fall will be followed by oil rich countries, and hence funding bonanza for Al-Qaeda.
photo
BannedInBoston
Everyone is entitled to my opinion.
01:23 PM on 01/18/2010
Attack the _poppy crop??? What sacrilege! The CIA is getting most of its "_black budget" from that!
12:30 PM on 01/18/2010
$100s of millions of US dollars is finding their way into the hands of the Taliban resulting in this money being used to attack our soldiers. So, are we funding the enemy in order to create a long lasting military position in Afghanistan? This is all about the war stimulus/war industrial corporation profit making machine.

http://eye-on-washington.blogspot.com
12:30 PM on 01/18/2010
I wonder if Marcia noticed?
12:09 PM on 01/18/2010
Foreign troopers in a country that is not dealing with a natural disaster will always create blow-back. It's a visceral nationalistic reaction of any nation. Any government that allows armed foreign troopers on its soil will always be rejected by a significant portion of the population, and seen as selling out to stay in power.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Smithn
Different strokes for different folks.
12:39 PM on 01/18/2010
Good Morning, BumperSticker!
You are presenting a very OLD fashioned process in your comments: applying sociological history to current events. Are you sure you want people to know how kinky you are? LOL


Fan #25 should show up at your door any moment now. ~J*
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Mark Kraft
11:55 AM on 01/18/2010
The problem with leaving when you're attacked by large groups of indiscriminately brutal suicide bombers, is that if you leave, the indiscriminately brutal thugs are going to be the ones left in charge.

The simple fact is, most people in Kabul are quite cosmopolitan compared to these ultra-religious young, indoctrinated nutcases from the backwards "Quran-belt" of the Pakistan-Afghan border who are doing the bulk of the indiscriminate killing. There are millions of people in the area around Kabul who want nothing to do with the a bunch of scary, extremist yokels. As such, when we leave -- which hopefully will be soon -- it behooves us to leave these millions in a position where they are capable of defending themselves from the ignorance that surrounds them.

The US, NATO, and Pakistanis are seriously hurting the Taleban, on multiple fronts. Forces are forward-deployed in Taleban territory, while jobs and financial assistance are being floated by the Afghani government to co-opt Taleban defectors. The mood of the Afghani people -- at least those around Kabul -- is significantly improved. http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Asia-South-Central/2010/0112/Afghanistan-war-worsening-but-optimism-is-up-says-new-poll

POTUS has laid down a deadline for the mission in Afghanistan, and has only recently changed the tactics in play. If the goal is to protect the millions who want a future for their country without extremist domination, then patience is required.
12:01 PM on 01/18/2010
Not only patience.

But a political rather than a military solution.

Which nearly everyone on these posts ignores.

The moves made by the President are designed to achieve a political solution.
photo
BannedInBoston
Everyone is entitled to my opinion.
01:35 PM on 01/18/2010
Or better, NO solution, because it's not a problem that ours to solve.
photo
BannedInBoston
Everyone is entitled to my opinion.
01:34 PM on 01/18/2010
And when we're done with Afghanistan, next comes Yemen, and then the next failed state and the next, until we've "fixed" every "problem country" in the world. Who said it was up to the US to be world policeman and nation builder? That's why the kind of argument you're making is fatally flawed. And the other flaw is that what's really needed in a country like Afghanistan is a massive investment in education, not military occupation....
04:53 PM on 01/18/2010
So you think working with the Yemeni government to combat a common enemy is a bad idea.

And turning Afghanistan over to an organization that is not just destroying girls schools but all schools is the way to promote a massive investment in education?

You are living in a fantasy world.

Unfortunately the real world can be a very dangerous places.
CognitoErgoSum
CogitoErgoSum was taken when I signed up.
11:54 AM on 01/18/2010
In 1893, the British executed a treaty with Amir Abdur Rahman Khan to limit the extent of each nation's influence in the region. The treaty was presented in English, a language Amir Khan couldn't understand which deliniated the present-day border between Afghnistan and Pakistan (not an independent nation at that time) called the Durand Line. The line cut the indigenous Pashtun homeland in two (as well as Baluchistan) much the same way families were carved up geographically between East/West Germany by foriegn edict. The Northwest Tribal Province and Federally Administered Tribal Areas, where the Taliban have found refuge are Pashtun regions that just happened to be on the Pakistan side of the Durand Line. Afghanistan doesn't really accept the Durand Line border, which is why it is so porous and difficult to impose any order in that region on either side. The link below will show you what I mean:
http://www.lib.utexas.edu/maps/middle_east_and_asia/pakistan_ethnic_80.jpg

I think more the United States could cease military involvement and the region attain more stability if the following steps were taken:

1. Would Pakistan agree to exchange the lands occupied by the Pashtuns prior to the rise of the Taliban in exchange for annexing the contiguous indigenous lands of the Baluchis in southern Afghnistan?
CognitoErgoSum
CogitoErgoSum was taken when I signed up.
11:55 AM on 01/18/2010
Cont.

2. Would the Karzai government and Loya Jirga agree to establish an independent Pashtun nation in the lands they occupied prior to the rise of the Taliban, in exchange for the Taliban withdrawing into those lands and executing a peace treaty, ceasing violence against the rest of Afghnaistan?

3. Would the Pashtun want a nation with borders that encompass the vast majority of their people, rather than have them carved up among different countries and be willing to cease hostilities against their neighbors?

4. Would the United States support and independent Pastun nation in exchange for the surrender of Osama bin Laden and the remainser of the al-Qaeda forces in the Taliban-held areas to the United States and cease agression against the United States?

-Under those conditions, the United States could declare victory, as our security objectives will have been met.

-With the savings of revenue and lives, the United States could afford to render support to Pakistan in repatriating Pashtun refugees back home, relieving Pakistan of such an infrastrucural burden. We could also provide civil assitance for a Pashtun nation in attaining literacy, infrastructual and economic developmental benchmarks.

-The U. S. government to support such a measure, it must be undertaken now, prior to the 2010 elections, since any Republican seats gained in Congress will make this more difficult.
12:03 PM on 01/18/2010
Since you completed your thoughts.

Some sort of a political settlement will be the end to this endless war.

And I commend you for thinking along those lines.

i doubt Pakistan would give up authority in the Tribal areas, (what little authority it has) but you are certainly thinking along the correct lines.
11:58 AM on 01/18/2010
I think I can answer for Pakistan.

No.

I also think you mischaracterize the struggle as one of Pastun nationalism. I doubt even a majority of Pastun's support the Taliban.

After all Karzai was originally selected at the Loya Jurga because he is from a very prominent Pashtun family.
CognitoErgoSum
CogitoErgoSum was taken when I signed up.
12:55 PM on 01/18/2010
Never, in all of this struggle have I heard ANY Pashtun demand their own country. Pashtuns comprise the largest ethnic group in Afghanistan and the Taliban attempted to take the entire country for the Pashtuns by making refugees of other ethnic groups. I suppose, in a way, they were trying to achieve by violence what I am suggesting be done diplomatically.

I also would never EVER suggest Pakistan simply cede land without getting anything in return. You see, just south of the Pashtun-dominant region of Afghanistan are a small ethnic minority called the Baluchis. My guess is that they might be better administered if they were annexed to the Pakistani province of Baluchistan. The Pashtun region of Afghanistan geographically cuts off the Baluchis from the rest of Afghanistan, yet just south of their border is the majority of their ethnic group. (And some in Iran as well.)

I also think Pakistan is entitled to foreign assistance in repatriating Pashtun refugees back to their own land. When Pakistan was established, there was a massive refugee movement of millions of Muslims coming from-and Hindus going to India. The British established much of the administrative and economic infrastructure in Indian territory during the British Raj. When Pakistan was created, they were pretty much left with nothing to start with, minimal, if any foreign aid to manage a massive migration.
11:47 AM on 01/18/2010
Same old stuff, different day. Can't expect anything different from these idiot politicos who wave flags and try tell sell us a bill of goods that it's all about taliban vs. the democratically elected government of the most corrupt govenment in the world. We are being led by the nose by an inept establishment trying to make a silk purse out of a sow's ear. I wish they would read and understand history for crissakes. It's friggen Ground Hog Day over there ever since we put our stupidity and hubris on display in an area we Know nothing about.
11:17 AM on 01/18/2010
the u.s. military can't do it to many ethical limits on them where as if we used a group of 100 black water guys to go through and clear every village at night do a slash and burn on them this would end
photo
MajorKong
If the pilot's good, see, I mean if he's reeeally
11:20 AM on 01/18/2010
Um, the Red Army pretty much tried that. Didn't work out so well for them.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
05:40 PM on 01/18/2010
Didn't work for the British in the 1770's either, if I remember correctly.
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
jeb50
Retired.
11:21 AM on 01/18/2010
Same thing the Talaban does. Real Bright.