AFGHANISTAN: Battling the Taliban With Soviet-era Weapons

[TexasLawyer]

Source: InterPress Service

AFGHANISTAN: Battling the Taliban With Soviet-era Weapons
By Fawzia Sheikh*

KANDAHAR, Oct 15 (IPS)

<snip>

The Afghan army is arguably well ahead of the police in its readiness to defend the nation, but is still wracked by equipment problems due to limited economic progress, a lack of maintenance facilities, slow-paced NATO weapons contributions meant to be a short-term solution ahead of American equipment deliveries, among other issues.

Brig. Gen. Gul Aqa Nahibi, who commands over 13,000 soldiers of the 205th Afghan army Hero Corps scattered throughout the southern provinces of Kandahar, Zabul, Helmand and Uruzghan, acknowledged that his corps' arsenal stems back to the 1980s war with the Soviets and the civil war between mujahideen factions in the 1990s. Speaking from his Hero Camp office, Nahibi, a 41-year veteran of Afghanistan's army, said the Afghan military more recently has collected old weapons acquired from civilians but many are ineffective. He was quick to point out, however, that Western forces have provided combat and telecommunications vehicles as well as uniforms.

"It's the coalition's responsibility to equip the Afghan, as they promised the Afghan government . . . but they have a schedule," he said. His soldiers can carry out independent operations if properly armed, he said, adding that checkpoints stationed outside the camp are manned by Afghan National Army soldiers with coalition forces acting only in supportive roles.

Back in Kabul, Maj. Gen. Robert Cone, commanding general of the U.S. Combined Security Transition Command-Afghanistan, told IPS that the U.S. is on track to issue most weapons, including M16s and other machine guns, in the fall of 2008. "What we're really working to do is get donations from NATO right now in the interim until the U.S. weapons are available" but the process could be better, conceded Cone, the senior-most American general in charge of training and coaching the Afghan army.

<snip>

"And again, my concern is getting it into the hands of the right people that can account for it and are not going to lose it," he stressed. "And that sometimes slows this process down. One of the problems you have is you can't just give them equipment. You have to build maintenance facilities. They have to know how to maintain them otherwise they'll just be broken down all over the countryside."


Read more: http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=39647

---

A small window into the Pentagon's actual set of priorities in the war on terror.

[TexasLawyer]

1. kicking

'cause I think this is an important and under-reported story.

[happyslug]

2. My Favorite Paragraph sums up the problem.

"There's no tax base and they literally do not have the financial resources to even have a supply system," Anderson said in an interview at Kandahar airfield. "The government brings in no revenue from the people of Afghanistan, so they have no money to buy bullets. They have no money to buy uniforms. They have no money to buy rifles, pick-up trucks," food, medicine and other supplies. "

But ignores the fact the Taliban CAN buy bullets and food. Why can the Taliban raise the needed revenue but the present Government can't? Could it be the people support the Taliban NOT the Government? Classic situation with a Guerrillas force, as long as the Guerrillas have popular support the Government can NOT raise the money needed to defeat them for the people show they support for the Guerrillas by paying their taxes to the Guerrillas.

We NOT like want the Taliban wants, but given present trends it look like that is what the people of Afghanistan wants (Except for the non-Pashtuns in the north of the Country and the Shiites near the Iranian Borders).

This map shows the Pashtun's heartland in Red:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pashtun_people

[TexasLawyer]

3. Heroin money

The Taliban and war lords are very well financed now by poppy cultivation and their new corner on the market on heroin trade.

Hard for an underfunded army and rag tag police force to fight that!

[happyslug]

4. But the Taliban banned Heorin....

And you had the largest DECREASE in heroin production in Afghanistan in the years BEFORE the invasion. The huge increase since has been accredited to the existing ruling groups (i.e. NOT necessary the Central Government, but the warlords supporting it and which it depends on).

As to the Taliban using Heroin, I do NOT doubt it, Pakistan and the Warlords AGAINST the Taliban have used Heroin as a source of Income since 1990 (and other Guerrillas have used Drugs as a source of income for decades). The problem with this is that in 2000, as the Taliban ruled most of Afghanistan, it banned opium production AND ENFORCED THE LAW (i.e. you actually saw a drop in production form 285 square Miles to just 30 Square miles within a year, and most of th e30 miles wa sin areas controlled by the Northern Alliance NOT the Taliban). Thus while today, the Taliban is financing itself via heroin, so is the Northern Alliance warlords, Pakistan and anyone else who can get the drugs out of Afghanistan. Thus the money is NOT always to the Taliban. The support for the Taliban extends beyond the Heroin trade as does the support for the Taliban.

Pakistan and the Heroin Trade:
http://www.saag.org/papers3/paper288.html

the CIA and Afghanistan Heroin Trade:
http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/CHO404A.html
http://www.drugwar.com/cv37.shtm

The Collapse of the Tababan helped the Heroin trade:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2001/12/04/attack/main320038.shtml

[TheLastMohican]

5. What's wrong with the Soviet-era weapons?

They did the job back in the 80's.
They sure as heck can do it now.