War in Afghanistan (2001–2021): Difference between revisions
m Reverted edits by 74.83.84.76 to last revision by Flosssock1 (HG) |
|||
| Line 799: | Line 799: | ||
*[http://www.randnotizen.info/afghanistan.html Uwe D.: "randnotizen - Hundert Mann und ein Befehl" Als Berufssoldat in Afghanistan, als Mensch in der Heimat - ein Tagebuch zweier Welten.] Diary-Documentation (Member of the German ISAF close protecion team 2002-2004, German). |
*[http://www.randnotizen.info/afghanistan.html Uwe D.: "randnotizen - Hundert Mann und ein Befehl" Als Berufssoldat in Afghanistan, als Mensch in der Heimat - ein Tagebuch zweier Welten.] Diary-Documentation (Member of the German ISAF close protecion team 2002-2004, German). |
||
*[http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/taliban/blowback Since the Birth of the Taliban] |
*[http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/taliban/blowback Since the Birth of the Taliban] |
||
*[http://www.studentpulse.com/articles/3/can-the-us-win-in-afghanistan Can the U.S. Win in Afghanistan?] |
|||
{{War in Afghanistan}} |
{{War in Afghanistan}} |
||
Revision as of 04:53, 17 November 2009
Template:FixBunching Template:Campaignbox War on Terrorism Template:FixBunching
The War in Afghanistan is an ongoing coalition conflict which began on October 7, 2001, as the US military's Operation Enduring Freedom that was launched, along with the British military, in response to the September 11 attacks. The UK has, since 2002, led its own military operation, Operation Herrick, as part of the same war in Afghanistan.
The stated aim of the invasion was to find Osama bin Laden and other high-ranking Al-Qaeda members and put them on trial, to destroy the whole organization of Al-Qaeda, and to remove the Taliban regime which supported and gave safe harbor to Al-Qaeda. The United States' Bush Doctrine stated that, as policy, it would not distinguish between terrorist organizations and nations or governments that harbor them.
Two international military operations in Afghanistan are fighting for control over the country. Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF) is a United States combat operation involving many coalition partners and currently operating primarily in the eastern and southern parts of the country along the Pakistan border. Approximately 28,300 U.S. troops were in OEF as of July 2008.[4][6][7]
The second operation is the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF), which was established by the UN Security Council at the end of December 2001 to secure Kabul and the surrounding areas. NATO assumed control of ISAF in 2003. By July 23, 2009, ISAF had around 64,500 troops from 42 countries, with NATO members providing the core of the force. The United States has approximately 29,950 troops in ISAF.[4]
The US and UK led the aerial bombing, in support of ground forces supplied primarily by the Afghan Northern Alliance. In 2002, American, British and Canadian infantry were committed, along with special forces from several allied nations, including Australia. Later, NATO troops were added.
The initial attack removed the Taliban from power, but Taliban forces have since regained some strength.[25] The war has been less successful in achieving the goal of restricting al-Qaeda's movement than anticipated.[26] Since 2006, Afghanistan has seen threats to its stability from increased Taliban-led insurgent activity, record-high levels of illegal drug production,[27][28] and a fragile government with limited control outside of Kabul.[29]
Background
Osama Bin Laden had been living in Afghanistan along with other members of Al-Qaeda, operating militant training camps having a loose alliance with the Taliban.[30] Sanctions to encourage them to turn over Bin Laden for trial in the deadly bombings of two U.S. embassies in Africa in August 1998, and close terrorist training camps and also children terrorist training camps. These resolutions did not authorize the use of force that was applied with the invasion of Afghanistan.
U.S. plans to remove the Taliban prior to September 11, 2001
Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) Special Activities Division paramilitary teams were active in Afghanistan in the 1990s in clandestine operations to locate and kill or capture Osama Bin Laden. These teams planned several operations, but did not receive the order to execute from President Bill Clinton.[31] These efforts did however build many of the relationships that would prove essential in the 2001 U.S. Invasion of Afghanistan.[31]
NBC News reported in May 2002 that a formal National Security Presidential Directive submitted two days before September 11, 2001, had outlined essentially the same war plan that the White House, the CIA and the Pentagon put into action after the Sept. 11 attacks. The plan dealt with all aspects of a war against al-Qaeda, ranging from diplomatic initiatives to military operations in Afghanistan, including outlines to persuade Afghanistan’s Taliban government to turn al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden over to the United States, with provisions to use military force if it refused.[32]
According to a 2004 report by the bipartisan commission of inquiry into 9/11, on the very next day, one day before the September 11, 2001 attacks, the Bush administration agreed on a plan to oust the Taliban regime in Afghanistan by force if it refused to hand over Osama bin Laden. At that September 10 meeting of the Bush administration's top national security officials it was agreed that the Taliban would be presented with a final ultimatum to hand over Bin Laden. Failing that, covert military aid would be channelled by the U.S. to anti-Taliban groups. And, if both those options failed, "the deputies agreed that the United States would seek to overthrow the Taliban regime through more direct action."[33]
However, an article published in March 2001 by Jane's, a media outlet serving the military and intelligence communities, suggests that the United States had already been planning and taking just such action against the Taliban six months before September 11, 2001. According to Jane's, Washington was giving the Northern Alliance information and logistics support as part of concerted action with India, Iran, and Russia against Afghanistan's Taliban regime, with Tajikistan and Uzbekistan being used as bases.[34]
The BBC News reported that, according to a Pakistani diplomat, Niaz Naik, a former Pakistani Foreign Secretary, had been told by senior American officials in mid-July 2001 that military action against Afghanistan would proceed by the middle of October at the latest. The message was conveyed during a meeting on Afghanistan between senior U.S., Russian, Iranian, and Pakistani diplomats. The meeting was the third in a series of meetings on Afghanistan, with the previous meeting having been held in March 2001. During the July 2001 meeting, Mr. Naik was told that Washington would launch its military operation from bases in Tajikistan – where American advisers were already in place – and that the wider objective was to topple the Taliban regime and install another government in place.[35][36]
An article in The Guardian on September 26, 2001, also adds evidence that there were already signs in the first half of 2001 that Washington was moving to threaten Afghanistan militarily from the north, via Tajikistan and Uzbekistan. A U.S. Department of Defense official, Dr. Jeffrey Starr, visited Tajikistan in January 2001 and U.S. General Tommy Franks visited the country in May 2001, conveying a message from the Bush administration that the US considered Tajikistan "a strategically significant country".
U.S. Army Rangers were training special troops inside Kyrgyzstan, and there were unconfirmed reports that Tajik and Uzbek special troops were training in Alaska and Montana. Reliable western military sources say a U.S. contingency plan existed on paper by the end of the summer to attack Afghanistan from the north, with U.S. military advisors already in place in Tajikistan and Uzbekistan.[37]
September 11, 2001 attacks
Thirty days after the events of September 11, 2001, U.S. President George W. Bush identified Osama Bin Laden as the 'prime suspect' in the attacks.[38] Osama bin Laden was understood to be in Afghanistan at the time. On September 20, 2001, in an address to a joint session of Congress, President Bush issued an ultimatum[39] demanding that the Taliban government of Afghanistan:
- deliver al-Qaeda leaders located in Afghanistan to the United States authorities
- release all imprisoned foreign nationals, including American citizens[40]
- protect foreign journalists, diplomats, and aid workers in Afghanistan
- close terrorist training camps in Afghanistan and "hand over every terrorist and every person and their support structure to appropriate authorities"
- give the United States full access to terrorist training camps to verify their closure
"They will hand over the terrorists or they will share in their fate" said Bush. No specifics were attached to the threat, though there followed a statement suggesting military action: "Our war on terror begins with al Qaeda, but it does not end there."
The Taliban government responded through their embassy in Pakistan, asserting that there was no evidence in their possession linking bin Laden to the September 11 attacks. They also stressed that bin Laden was a guest in their country. Pashtun and Taliban codes of behavior require that guests be granted hospitality and asylum.[41]
On September 22, 2001, the United Arab Emirates, and on the following day, Saudi Arabia withdrew their recognition of the Taliban as the legal government of Afghanistan, leaving neighboring Pakistan as the only remaining country with diplomatic ties.[citation needed]
On October 7, 2001, before the onset of military hostilities, the Taliban did offer to try bin Laden in Afghanistan in an Islamic court.[42] This offer was rejected by the U.S., and the bombing of targets within Afghanistan by U.S. and British forces commenced the same day.
October 14, 2001, seven days into the U.S./British bombing campaign, the Taliban offered to surrender Osama bin Laden to a third country for trial, if the bombing halted and they were shown evidence of his involvement in the September 11 terrorist attacks. This offer was also rejected by U.S. President Bush, who declared "There's no need to discuss innocence or guilt. We know he's guilty." [43]
The United Nations Security Council (UNSC) did not authorize the U.S.-led military campaign in Afghanistan (Operation Enduring Freedom). There is some debate as to whether UNSC authorization was required, centered around the question of whether the invasion was an act of collective self-defense provided for under Article 51 of the UN Charter, or an act of aggression.[44]
The U.S. Administration did not declare war, and labeled Taliban troops and supporters terrorists rather than soldiers, denying them the protections of the Geneva Convention and due process of law. This position has been successfully challenged in the U.S. Supreme Court[45] and questioned even by military lawyers responsible for prosecuting affected prisoners.[46]
On December 20, 2001, the UNSC did authorize the creation of an International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) with authority to take all measures necessary to fulfill its mandate of assisting the Afghan Interim Authority in maintaining security.[47] Command of the ISAF passed to NATO on August 11, 2003.[48]
2001: Initial attack
Teams from the CIA's Special Activities Division (SAD) were the first U.S. forces to enter Afghanistan and begin combat operations. They were soon joined by U.S. Army Special Forces from the 5th Special Forces Group and other units from USSOCOM. These combined forces led the Northern Alliance to overthrow the Taliban in Afghanistan with minimal loss to American lives. They did this without the need for U.S. Military conventional forces.[49][50][51]
On October 7, 2001, strikes were reported in the capital, Kabul (where electricity supplies were severed), at the airport and military nerve-center of Kandahar (home of the Taliban's Supreme Leader Mullah Omar), and also in the city of Jalalabad.
At 17:00 UTC, President Bush confirmed the strikes on national television and Prime Minister of the United Kingdom Tony Blair also addressed the UK. Bush stated that at the same time as Taliban military and terrorists' training grounds would be targeted, food, medicine, and supplies would be dropped to "the starving and suffering men, women and children of Afghanistan".[52]
CNN released exclusive footage of Kabul being bombed to all the American broadcasters at approximately 5:08 p.m. October 7, 2001.[53] A number of different technologies were employed in the strike. U.S. Air Force general Richard Myers, chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff, stated that approximately 50 Tomahawk cruise missiles, launched by British and U.S. submarines and ships, 25 strike aircraft from U.S. aircraft carriers, USS Carl Vinson and USS Enterprise and 15 U.S. Air Force bombers, such as B-1 Lancer, B-2 Spirit, B-52 Stratofortress were involved in the first wave, launched from Diego Garcia. Two C-17 Globemaster transport jets delivered 37,500 daily rations by airdrop to refugees inside Afghanistan on the first day of the attack.
A pre-recorded videotape of Osama bin Laden had been released before the attack in which he condemned any attacks against Afghanistan. Al Jazeera, the Arabic satellite news channel, reported that these tapes were received shortly before the attack. In this recording bin Laden claimed that the United States would fail in Afghanistan and then collapse, just as the Soviet Union did.[citation needed]
Air campaigns
Bombers operating at high altitudes well out of range of anti-aircraft fire bombed the al-Qaeda training camps and Taliban air defenses. During the initial build-up preceding the actual attack, there had been speculation in the media that the Taliban might try to use U.S.-built Stinger anti-aircraft missiles that were the bane of Soviet helicopters during the Soviet occupation in the 1980s. If any of these missiles existed at the time of the air campaign, they were never used and the U.S. did not lose any aircraft to enemy fire. U.S. aircraft, including Apache helicopter gunships, operated with impunity throughout the campaign.
The strikes initially focused on the area in and around the cities of Kabul, Jalalabad, and Kandahar. Within a few days, most Taliban training sites were severely damaged and the Taliban's air defenses were destroyed. The campaign then focused on command, control, and communication targets which weakened the ability of the Taliban forces to communicate. However, the line facing the Afghan Northern Alliance held, and no tangible battlefield successes had yet occurred on that front. Two weeks into the campaign, the Northern Alliance demanded the air campaign focus more on the front lines. Meanwhile, thousands of Pashtun militiamen from Pakistan poured into the country, reinforcing the Taliban against the U.S. led forces.
The next stage of the campaign began with carrier based F/A-18 Hornet fighter-bombers hitting Taliban vehicles in pinpoint strikes, while other U.S. planes began cluster bombing Taliban defenses. For the first time in years, Northern Alliance commanders finally began to see the substantive results that they had long hoped for on the front lines.
At the beginning of November, the Taliban front lines were bombed with daisy cutter bombs, and by AC-130 gunships. The Taliban fighters had no previous experience with American firepower, and often even stood on top of bare ridgelines where Special Forces could easily spot them and call in close air support. By November 2, Taliban frontal positions were decimated, and a Northern Alliance march on Kabul seemed possible for the first time.
Foreign fighters from al-Qaeda took over security in the Afghan cities, demonstrating the instability of the Taliban regime. Meanwhile, the Northern Alliance and their Central Intelligence Agency/Special Forces advisors planned the next stage of their offensive. Northern Alliance troops would seize Mazari Sharif, thereby cutting off Taliban supply lines and enabling the flow of equipment from the countries to the north, followed by an attack on Kabul itself.
The Washington Post stated in an editorial by the former Navy Seceratary John Lehman in 2006:
- What made the Afghan campaign a landmark in the U.S. Military's history is that it was prosecuted by Special Operations forces from all the services, along with Navy and Air Force tactical power, operations by the Afghan Northern Alliance and the CIA were equally important and fully integrated. No large Army or Marine force was employed.[54]
Areas most targeted
During the early months of the war the U.S. military had a limited presence on the ground. The plan was that Special Forces, and intelligence officers with a military background, would serve as liaisons with Afghan militias opposed to the Taliban, would advance after the cohesiveness of the Taliban forces was disrupted by American air power.[55][56][57]
The Tora Bora Mountains lie roughly east of Afghanistan's capital Kabul, which is itself close to the border with Pakistan. American intelligence analysts believed that the Taliban and al Qaeda had dug in behind fortified networks of well-supplied caves and underground bunkers. The area was subjected to a heavy continuous bombardment by B52 bombers.[55][56][57][58]
The U.S. forces and the Northern Alliance also began to diverge in their objectives. While the U.S. was continuing the search for Osama bin Laden, the Northern Alliance was pressuring for more support in their efforts to finish off the Taliban and control the country.
Scott Peterson, writing in the Christian Science Monitor, quoted a defector he described as the Taliban deputy interior minister, and "highest ranking Taliban defector to date".[59] According to Peterson this defector described the American bombardment as very effective:
- "Kabul city has seen many rockets, but this was a different thing."
- "The American bombing of Taliban trenches, cars, and troops caused us to be defeated. All ways were blocked, so there was no way to carry food or ammunition to the front. All trenches of the Taliban were destroyed, and many people were killed."
The Battle of Mazar-i Sharif
The battle for Mazar-i Sharif was considered important, not only because it is the home of the Shrine of Hazrat Ali or "Blue Mosque", a sacred Muslim site, but also because it is the location of two main airports and a major road that leads into Uzbekistan.[60] On November 9, 2001, Northern Alliance forces, under the command of generals Abdul Rashid Dostum and Ustad Atta Mohammed Noor, swept across the Pul-i-Imam Bukhri bridge, meeting some resistance.[61][62] and seized the city's main military base and airport.
U.S. Special Operation Forces (namely ODA 595, CIA paramilitary officers and Air Force tactical air controllers) [63][64][65] on horseback and utilizing Close Air Support platforms, took part in the push into the city of Mazari Sharif in Balkh Province by the United Islamic Front for the Salvation of Afghanistan ("Northern Alliance"). After a bloody 90-minute battle, Taliban forces, who had held the city since 1998, withdrew from the city, triggering jubilant celebrations among the townspeople whose ethnic and political affinities are with the Northern Alliance.[66][67]
The Taliban had spent three years fighting the Northern Alliance for Mazar-i-Sharif, precisely because its capture would confirm them as masters of all Afghanistan.[66] The fall of the city was a "body blow"[66] to the Taliban and ultimately proved to be a "major shock",[63] since the United States Central Command (CENTCOM) had originally believed that the city would remain in Taliban hands well into the following year,[68] and any potential battle would be "a very slow advance".[69]
After outlying villages fell from precision air strikes on key command and control centers, approximately 5,000-12,000 Taliban and foreign fighters - including Chechen, Pakistan, Arabs, Uzbeks and Chinese Uyghurs, began their withdrawal from the city towards Kunduz, in pickup trucks, SUVs and flat bed trucks fitted with ZSU 23-2's (anti-aircraft guns that were used to engage ground forces), in an effort to regroup.[69][70][71]
Mazar-i-Sharif had a significant strategic import, as its capture, almost immediately opening up a land corridor from the Uzbek border, would allow the U.S. to ship tons of military hardware to the Northern Alliance, and begin deploying its own forces in larger numbers inside Afghanistan.[66] It would also enable humanitarian aid to alleviate Afghanistan's looming food crisis, which had threatened more than six million people with starvation. A large proportion of those in most urgent need lived in rural areas to the south and west of Mazar-i-Sharif.[60][67]
Despite some European papers hesitancy to label the seizure of the city a military victory, others saw their retreat as the beginning of their demise. It is considered the first major defeat of the Taliban and its allies.[59]
After the fall of Mazar-I-Sharif
Following rumors that Mullah Dadullah was headed to recapture the city with as many as 8,000 Taliban fighters, a thousand American 10th Mountain Soldiers were airlifted into the city, which provided the first solid foothold from which Kabul and Kandahar could be reached.[72][73] While prior military flights had to be launched from Uzbekistan or Aircraft carriers in the Arabian Sea, now the Americans held their own airport in the country which allowed them to fly more frequent sorties for resupply missions and humanitarian aid. These missions allowed massive shipments of humanitarian aid to be immediately shipped to hundreds of thousands of Afghans facing starvation on the northern plain.[66][70]
After the U.S. Special Operation Forces departed the city for further operations in and around Konduz, there were later purported reports of summary executions and the kidnapping of civilians by the Northern Alliance. It was also told that the young men who were captured, were often brutally abused by their Northern Alliance captors who demanded a ransom from their families for their return. Some of them may still be incarcerated.[74][75]
It was also revealed that the airfield had been boobytrapped by the Taliban as they left, with explosives planted around the property, as well as being badly damaged by their own Air Interdiction missions in order to prevent it being used by the enemy.[61] The destroyed runways on the airfield were patched by the U.S. Air Force Red Horse personnel and local Afghans hired to fill bomb craters with asphalt and tar by hand, and the first cargo plane was able to land ten days after the battle.[61] The airbase wasn't declared operational until December 11.[76]
The American-backed forces now controlling the city began immediately broadcasting from Radio Mazar-i-Sharif, the former Taliban Voice of Sharia channel on 1584 kHz,[77] including an address from former President Burhanuddin Rabbani.[78] Music was also broadcast over Kabul radio for the first time in five years, and the songs were introduced by a female announcer—another major breakthrough for a city where women had been banned from education, work, and many other civil liberties since 1996.[79]
The fall of Kabul
On the night of November 12, Taliban forces fled from the city of Kabul, leaving under cover of darkness. By the time Northern Alliance forces arrived in the afternoon of November 13, only bomb craters, burned foliage, and the burnt-out shells of Taliban gun emplacements and positions were there to greet them. A group of about twenty hardline Arab fighters hiding in the city's park were the only remaining defenders. This Taliban group was killed in a brief 15-minute gun battle, being heavily outnumbered and having had little more than a telescope to shield them. After these forces were neutralized Kabul was in the hands of the U.S./NATO forces and the Northern Alliance.[citation needed]
The fall of Kabul marked the beginning of a collapse of Taliban positions across the map. Within 24 hours, all of the Afghan provinces along the Iranian border, including the key city of Herat, had fallen. Local Pashtun commanders and warlords had taken over throughout northeastern Afghanistan, including the key city of Jalalabad. Taliban holdouts in the north, mainly Pakistani volunteers, fell back to the northern city of Kunduz to make a stand. By November 16, the Taliban's last stronghold in northern Afghanistan was besieged by the Northern Alliance. Nearly 10,000 Taliban fighters, led by foreign fighters, refused to surrender and continued to put up resistance. By then, the Taliban had been forced back to their heartland in southeastern Afghanistan around Kandahar.[citation needed]
By November 13, al-Qaeda and Taliban forces, with the possible inclusion of Osama bin Laden, had regrouped and were concentrating their forces in the Tora Bora cave complex, on the Pakistan border 50 kilometers (30 mi) southwest of Jalalabad, to prepare for a stand against the Northern Alliance and U.S./NATO forces. Nearly 2,000 al-Qaeda and Taliban fighters fortified themselves in positions within bunkers and caves, and by November 16, U.S. bombers began bombing the mountain fortress. Around the same time, CIA and Special Forces operatives were already at work in the area, enlisting and paying local warlords to join the fight and planning an attack on the Tora Bora complex.[citation needed]
The fall of Kunduz
Just as the bombardment at Tora Bora was stepped up, the siege of Kunduz that began on November 16 was continuing. Finally, after nine days of heavy fighting and American aerial bombardment, Taliban fighters surrendered to Northern Alliance forces on November 25-November 26. Shortly before the surrender, Pakistani aircraft arrived ostensibly to evacuate a few hundred intelligence and military personnel who had been in Afghanistan previous to the U.S. invasion for the purpose of aiding the Taliban's ongoing fight against the Northern Alliance. However, during this airlift, it is alleged that up to five thousand people were evacuated from the region, including Taliban and al-Qaeda troops allied to the Pakistanis in Afghanistan, see Airlift of Evil.[80][81][82]
The battle of Qala-i-Jangi
On November 25, the day that Taliban fighters holding out in Kunduz surrendered and were being herded into the Qala-I-Janghi fortress near Mazar-I-Sharif, a few Taliban attacked some Northern Alliance guards, taking their weapons and opening fire. This incident soon triggered a widespread revolt by 300 prisoners, who soon seized the southern half of the complex, once a medieval fortress, including an armory stocked with small arms and crew-served weapons. One American CIA paramilitary operative who had been interrogating prisoners, Johnny Micheal Spann, was killed, marking the first American combat death in the war.
The revolt was finally put down after seven days of heavy fighting between an SBS unit along with some US Army Special Forces and Northern Alliance, AC-130 gunships and other aircraft took part providing strafing fire on several occasions, as well as a bombing airstrikes.[83] A total of 86 of the Taliban prisoners survived, and around 50 Northern Alliance soldiers were killed. The quashing of the revolt marked the end of the combat in northern Afghanistan, where local Northern Alliance warlords were now firmly in control.
Consolidation: the taking of Kandahar
By the end of November, Kandahar, the movement's birthplace, was the last remaining Taliban stronghold and was coming under increasing pressure. Nearly 3,000 tribal fighters, led by Hamid Karzai, a westernized and polished loyalist of the former Afghan king, and Gul Agha Sherzai, the governor of Kandahar before the Taliban seized power, put pressure on Taliban forces from the east and cut off the northern Taliban supply lines to Kandahar. The threat of the Northern Alliance loomed in the north and northeast.
Meanwhile, the first significant U.S. combat troops had arrived. Nearly 1,000 Marines, ferried in by CH-53E Super Stallion helicopters and C-130s, set up a Forward Operating Base known as Camp Rhino in the desert south of Kandahar on November 25. This was the coalition's first strategic foothold in Afghanistan, and was the stepping stone to establishing other operating bases. The first significant combat involving U.S. ground forces occurred a day after Rhino was captured when 15 armored vehicles approached the base and were attacked by helicopter gunships, destroying many of them. Meanwhile, the airstrikes continued to pound Taliban positions inside the city, where Mullah Omar was holed up. Omar, the Taliban leader, remained defiant despite the fact that his movement only controlled 4 out of the 30 Afghan provinces by the end of November and called on his forces to fight to the death.
As the Taliban teetered on the brink of losing their last bastion, the U.S. focus increased on the Tora Bora. Local tribal militias, numbering over 2,000 strong and paid and organized by Special Forces and CIA SAD paramilitary operations officers, continued to mass for an attack as heavy bombing continued of suspected al-Qaeda positions. 100-200 civilians were reported killed when 25 bombs struck a village at the foot of the Tora Bora and White Mountains region.
On December 2, a group of 20 U.S. commandos was inserted by helicopter to support the operation. On December 5, Afghan militia wrested control of the low ground below the mountain caves from al-Qaeda fighters and set up tank positions to blast enemy forces. The al-Qaeda fighters withdrew with mortars, rocket launchers, and assault rifles to higher fortified positions and dug in for the battle. The CIA paramiltary officers inserted with a highly trained Afghan force and were engaged by friendly fire, but stayed in the fight despite taking significant casualties.[84]
By December 6, Omar finally began to signal that he was ready to surrender Kandahar to tribal forces. His forces broken by heavy U.S. bombing and living constantly on the run within Kandahar to prevent himself from becoming a target, even Mullah Omar's morale lagged. Recognizing that he could not hold on to Kandahar much longer, he began signaling a willingness in negotiations to turn the city over to the tribal leaders, assuming that he and his top men received some protection.
The U.S. government rejected any amnesty for Omar or any Taliban leaders. On December 7, Mullah Mohammad Omar slipped out of the city of Kandahar with a group of his hardcore loyalists and moved northwest into the mountains of Uruzgan Province, reneging on the Taliban's promise to surrender their fighters and their weapons. He was last reported seen driving off with a group of his fighters on a convoy of motorcycles.
Other members of the Taliban leadership fled into Pakistan through the remote passes of Paktia and Paktika Provinces. Nevertheless, Kandahar, the last Taliban-controlled city, had fallen, and the majority of the Taliban fighters had disbanded. The border town of Spin Boldak was surrendered on the same day, marking the end of Taliban control in Afghanistan. The Afghan tribal forces under Gul Agha seized the city of Kandahar while the Marines took control of the airport outside and established a U.S. base.
Battle of Tora Bora
Al-Qaeda fighters were still holding out in the mountains of Tora Bora, however, while an anti-Taliban tribal militia steadily pushed bin Laden back across the difficult terrain, backed by UK Special Forces and withering air strikes by the U.S. Facing defeat, the al-Qaeda forces agreed to a truce to give them time to surrender their weapons. In retrospect, however, many believe that the truce was a ruse to allow important al-Qaeda figures, including Osama bin Laden, to escape. On December 12, the fighting flared again, probably initiated by a rear guard buying time for the main force's escape through the White Mountains into the tribal areas of Pakistan. Once again, tribal forces backed by British and U.S. special operations troops and air support pressed ahead against fortified al-Qaeda positions in caves and bunkers scattered throughout the mountainous region.
By December 17, the last cave complex had been taken and their defenders overrun. A search of the area by U.S. and UK forces continued into January, but no sign of bin Laden or the al-Qaeda leadership emerged. It is almost unanimously believed that they had already slipped away into the tribal areas of Pakistan to the south and east. It is estimated that around 200 of the al-Qaeda fighters were killed during the battle, along with an unknown number of anti-Taliban tribal fighters. No U.S. or UK deaths were reported.
Diplomatic efforts
Meetings of various Afghan leaders were organized by the United Nations Security Council and took place in Germany. The Taliban were not included. These meetings produced an interim government and an agreement to allow a United Nations peacekeeping force to enter Afghanistan. The UN Security Council resolutions of November 14, 2001, included "Condemning the Taliban for allowing Afghanistan to be used as a base for the export of terrorism by the Al-Qaeda network and other terrorist groups and for providing safe haven to Osama bin Laden, Al-Qaeda and others associated with them, and in this context supporting the efforts of the Afghan people to replace the Taliban regime"[85]
The UN Security Council resolution December 20, 2001, "Supporting international efforts to root out terrorism, in keeping with the Charter of the United Nations, and reaffirming also its resolutions 1368 (2001) of September 12, 2001, and 1373 (2001) of September 28, 2001."[86]
Humanitarian efforts
Before the U.S.-led invasion, there were fears that the invasion and resultant disruption of services would cause widespread starvation and refugees.
The United Nations World Food Programme temporarily suspended activities within Afghanistan at the beginning of the bombing attacks but resumed them after the fall of the Taliban.
2002: Operation Anaconda
Following Tora Bora, U.S. forces and their Afghan allies consolidated their position in the country. Following a Loya jirga or grand council of major Afghan factions, tribal leaders, and former exiles, an interim Afghan government was established in Kabul under Hamid Karzai. U.S. forces established their main base at Bagram airbase just north of Kabul. Kandahar airport also became an important U.S. base area. Several outposts were established in eastern provinces to hunt for Taliban and al-Qaeda fugitives. The number of U.S-led coalition troops operating in the country would eventually grow to over 10,000.
Meanwhile, the Taliban and al-Qaeda had not given up. Al-Qaeda forces began regrouping in the Shahi-Kot mountains of Paktia province throughout January and February 2002. A Taliban fugitive in Paktia province, Mullah Saifur Rehman, also began reconstituting some of his militia forces in support of the anti-U.S. fighters. They totalled over 1,000 by the beginning of March 2002. The intention of the insurgents was to use the region as a base area for launching guerrilla attacks and possibly a major offensive in the style of the Mujahideen who battled Soviet forces during the 1980s.
U.S. allied to Afghan militia intelligence sources soon picked up on this buildup in Paktia province and prepared a massive push to counter it. On March 2, 2002, U.S. and Afghan forces launched an offensive on al-Qaeda and Taliban forces entrenched in the mountains of Shahi-Kot southeast of Gardez. The jihadist forces, who used small arms, rocket-propelled grenades, and mortars, were entrenched into caves and bunkers in the hillsides at an altitude that was largely above 10,000 feet (3,000 m).
They used "hit and run" tactics, opening fire on the U.S. and Afghan forces and then retreating back into their caves and bunkers to weather the return fire and persistent U.S. bombing raids. To compound the situation for the coalition troops, U.S. commanders initially underestimated the Taliban and al-Qaeda forces as a last isolated pocket numbering fewer than 200. It turned out that the guerrillas numbered between 1,000-5,000 according to some estimates and that they were receiving reinforcements.[87]
By March 6, eight Americans and seven Afghan soldiers had been killed and reportedly 400 opposing forces had also been killed in the fighting. The coalition casualties stemmed from a friendly fire incident that killed one soldier, the downing of two helicopters by rocket-propelled grenades and small arms fire that killed seven soldiers, and the pinning down of U.S. forces being inserted into what was coined as "Objective Ginger" that resulted in dozens of wounded.[88] However, several hundred guerrillas escaped the dragnet heading to the Waziristan tribal areas across the border in Pakistan.
During Operation Anaconda and other missions during 2002 and 2003, special forces from several western nations were also involved in operations. These included the Australian Special Air Service Regiment, the Canadian Joint Task Force 2, the German KSK, the New Zealand Special Air Service and Norwegian Marinejegerkommandoen.
Post-Anaconda operations
Following the battle at Shahi-Kot, it is believed that the al-Qaeda fighters established sanctuaries among tribal protectors in Pakistan, from which they regained their strength and later began launching cross-border raids on U.S. forces by the summer months of 2002. Guerrilla units, numbering between 5 and 25 men, still regularly crossed the border from their sanctuaries in Pakistan to fire rockets at U.S. bases and ambush American convoys and patrols, as well as Afghan National Army troops, Afghan militia forces working with the U.S-led coalition, and non-governmental organizations. The area around the U.S. base at Shkin in Paktika province saw some of the heaviest activity.
Meanwhile, Taliban forces continued to remain in hiding in the rural regions of the four southern provinces that formed their heartland, Kandahar, Zabul, Helmand Province, and Uruzgan. In the wake of Operation Anaconda The Pentagon requested that British Royal Marines who are highly trained in mountain warfare, be deployed. They conducted a number of missions over several weeks with varying results. The Taliban, who during the summer of 2002 numbered in the hundreds, avoided combat with U.S. forces and their Afghan allies as much as possible and melted away into the caves and tunnels of remote Afghan mountain ranges or across the border into Pakistan during operations.[89]
2003–2005: Renewed Taliban insurgency
After managing to evade U.S. forces throughout mid-2002, the remnants of the Taliban gradually began to regain their confidence and started to begin preparations to launch the insurgency that Mullah Muhammad Omar had promised during the Taliban's last days in power.[90] During September, Taliban forces began a recruitment drive in Pashtun areas in both Afghanistan and Pakistan to launch a renewed "jihad" or holy war against the Afghan government and the U.S-led coalition. Pamphlets distributed in secret during the night also began to appear in many villages in the former Taliban heartland in southeastern Afghanistan that called for jihad.[91]
Small mobile training camps were established along the border with Pakistan by al-Qaeda and Taliban fugitives to train new recruits in guerrilla warfare and terrorist tactics, according to Afghan sources and a United Nations report.[92] Most of the new recruits were drawn from the madrassas or religious schools of the tribal areas of Pakistan, from which the Taliban had originally arisen. Major bases, a few with as many as 200 men, were created in the mountainous tribal areas of Pakistan by the summer of 2003. The will of the Pakistani paramilitaries stationed at border crossings to prevent such infiltration was called into question, and Pakistani military operations proved of little use.[93]
The Taliban gradually reorganized and reconstituted their forces over the winter, preparing for a summer offensive. They established a new mode of operation: gathered into groups of around 50 to launch attacks on isolated outposts and convoys of Afghan soldiers, police, or militia and then breaking up into groups of 5-10 men to evade subsequent offensives. U.S. forces in the strategy were attacked indirectly, through rocket attacks on bases and improvised explosive devices.
To coordinate the strategy, Mullah Omar named a 10-man leadership council for the resistance, with himself at the head.[93] Five operational zones were created, assigned to various Taliban commanders such as the key Taliban leader Mullah Dadullah, in charge of Zabul province operations.[93] Al-Qaeda forces in the east had a bolder strategy of concentrating on the Americans and catching them when they could with elaborate ambushes.
The first sign that Taliban forces were regrouping came on January 27, 2003, during Operation Mongoose, when a band of fighters allied with the Taliban and Hezb-i-Islami were discovered and assaulted by U.S. forces at the Adi Ghar cave complex 15 miles (24 km) north of Spin Boldak.[94] 18 rebels were reported killed and no U.S. casualties reported. The site was suspected to be a base to funnel supplies and fighters from Pakistan. The first isolated attacks by relatively large Taliban bands on Afghan targets also appeared around that time.
As the summer continued, the attacks gradually increased in frequency in the "Taliban heartland." Dozens of Afghan government soldiers, non-governmental organization and humanitarian workers, and several U.S. soldiers died in the raids, ambushes, and rocket attacks. In addition to the guerrilla attacks, Taliban fighters began building up their forces in the district of Dai Chopan, a district in Zabul Province that also straddles Kandahar and Uruzgan and is at the very center of the Taliban heartland.
Dai Chopan district is a remote and sparsely populated corner of southeastern Afghanistan composed of towering, rocky mountains interspersed with narrow gorges. Taliban fighters decided it would be the perfect area to make a stand against the Afghan government and the coalition forces. Over the course of the summer, perhaps the largest concentration of Taliban militants gathered in the area since the fall of the regime, with up to 1,000 guerrillas regrouping. Over 220 people, including several dozen Afghan police, were killed in August 2003 as Taliban fighters gained strength.
Coalition response
As a result, coalition forces began preparing offensives to root out the rebel forces. In late August 2005, Afghan government forces backed by U.S troops and heavy American aerial bombardment advanced upon Taliban positions within the mountain fortress. After a one-week battle, Taliban forces were routed with up to 124 fighters (according to Afghan government estimates) killed. Taliban spokesmen, however, denied the high casualty figure and U.S estimates were somewhat lower.
2006: NATO in southern Afghanistan
From January 2006, a NATO International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) started to replace the U.S. troops of Operation Enduring Freedom in southern Afghanistan. The British 16th Air Assault Brigade (later reinforced by Royal Marines) formed the core of the force in Southern Afghanistan, along with troops and helicopters from Australia, Canada and the Netherlands. The initial force consisted of roughly 3,300 British,[95] 2,300 Canadian,[96] 1,963 from the Netherlands,[97] 290 from Denmark,[98] 300 from Australia,[99] and 150 from Estonia.[100] Air support was provided by U.S., British, Dutch, Norwegian and French combat aircraft and helicopters.
In January 2006, NATO’s focus in southern Afghanistan was to form Provincial Reconstruction Teams with the British leading in Helmand Province while the Netherlands and Canada would lead similar deployments in Orūzgān Province and Kandahar Province respectively. Local Taliban figures voiced opposition to the incoming force and pledged to resist it.[101]
Southern Afghanistan faced in 2006 the deadliest spate of violence in the country since the ousting of the Taliban regime by U.S.-led forces in 2001, as the newly deployed NATO troops battled resurgent militants. NATO operations have been led by British, Canadian and Dutch commanders. Operation Mountain Thrust was launched on May 17, 2006, with the purpose of rooting out Taliban forces. In July, Canadian Forces launched Operation Medusa in an attempt to clear the areas of Taliban fighters once and for all, supported by U.S., British, Dutch and Danish forces.
Further NATO operations included the Battle of Panjwaii, Operation Mountain Fury and Operation Falcon Summit. The fighting for NATO forces was intense throughout the second half of 2006. NATO has been successful in achieving tactical victories over the Taliban and denied areas to them, but the Taliban were not completely defeated, and NATO had to continue operations into 2007.
2007: Coalition offensive
In January and February 2007, British Royal Marines mounted Operation Volcano to clear insurgents from firing points in the village of Barikju, north of Kajaki.[102] This was followed by Operation Achilles, a major sweeping offensive that started in March and ended in late May. The UK ministry of defence announced its intention to bring British troop levels in the country up to 7,700 (committed until 2009).[103] Further operations, such as Operation Silver and Operation Silicon, were conducted to keep up the pressure on the Taliban in the hopes of blunting their expected spring offensive.[104][105]
On March 4, 2007, at least 12 civilians were killed and 33 were injured by U.S. Marines in Shinwar district in Nangrahar province of Afghanistan[106] as the Americans reacted to a bomb ambush. The event has become known as the Shinwar Massacre.[107] The 120 member Marine unit responsible for the attack was asked to leave the country because the incident damaged the unit's relations with the local Afghan population.[108]
On May 12, 2007, ISAF forces killed Mullah Dadullah, a Taliban commander in charge of leading operations in the south of the country; eleven other Taliban fighters were killed in the same firefight.
Operation Achilles ended on May 30, 2007, and was immediately followed by Operation Lastay Kulang that night. During the summer, NATO forces achieved tactical victories over the Taliban at the Battle of Chora in Orūzgān Province, where Dutch and Australian ISAF forces are deployed. On August 28, 2007, at least 100 Taliban fighters and one Afghan National Army soldier were killed in several skirmishes in Shah Wali Kot district in Kandahar province.[109]
On October 28, 2007, about 80 Taliban fighters were killed in a 24 hour battle with forces from the U.S.-led coalition in Afghanistan's Helmand province.[110] During the last days of October, Canadian forces surrounded around 300 militants near Arghandab and killed at least 50 of them. This was said to have stopped a potential Taliban offensive on Kandahar.
The strength of Taliban forces was estimated by Western officials and analysts at about 10,000 fighters fielded at any given time, according to an October 30 report in The New York Times. Of that number, "only 2,000 to 3,000 are highly motivated, full-time insurgents", the Times reported. The rest are part-timers, made up of alienated, young Afghan men angry at bombing raids or fighting in order to get money. In 2007, more foreign fighters were showing up in Afghanistan than ever before, according to Afghan and United States officials. An estimated 100 to 300 full-time combatants are foreigners, usually from Pakistan, Uzbekistan, Chechnya, various Arab countries and perhaps even Turkey and western China. They tend to be more fanatical and violent, and they often bring skills such as the ability to post more sophisticated videos on the Internet or bombmaking expertise.[111]
On November 2, 2007, Afghan security forces killed a top-ranking militant, Mawlawi Abdul Manan, after he was caught trying to cross into Afghanistan from neighboring Pakistan. The Taliban confirmed his death.[112] On November 10, 2007, the Taliban ambushed a patrol in eastern Afghanistan, killing six American and three Afghan soldiers while losing only one insurgent.[citation needed] This attack brought the U.S. death toll for 2007 to 100, making it the deadliest year for Americans in Afghanistan.[113]
Security operations were conducted in the north by ISAF and Afghan forces, including Operation Harekate Yolo I & II. The exact death toll had not been disclosed at the time, but according to Norwegian news reports "between 20 and 25 insurgents" were killed in action,[114] the German MoD verified further 14 hostile fighters killed in action (Norwegian and German forces taking part in the operation). The operation ended on November 6/7.
The Battle of Musa Qala took place in December 2007. Afghan units were the principal fighting force, supported by British forces.[115] Taliban forces were forced to pull out of Musa Qala.
2008: Reassessment and renewed commitment
Admiral Mike Mullen, Staff Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said that while the situation in Afghanistan is "precarious and urgent," the 10,000 additional troops needed there would be unavailable "in any significant manner" unless withdrawals from Iraq are made. However, Admiral Mullen stated that "my priorities . . . given to me by the commander in chief are: Focus on Iraq first. It's been that way for some time. Focus on Afghanistan second."[116]
The U.S. government suspended, on March 27, 2008, AEY Inc. of Miami, Florida, a company hired by the U.S. military, for violating its contract. The company is accused of supplying ammunition, which was corroded and made in China from 1962 through 1974, to the Afghan National Army and police. United States Army-documents showed that since 2004 the company entered agreements with the U.S. government that totaled about $10 million. The papers also revealed the company received much larger orders in 2007 with contracts totaling more than $200 million to supply ammunition, assault rifles and other weapons. Army criminal investigators were sent to look at the packages in January 2008. The House Oversight Committee planned to hold a hearing into the matter on April 17, 2008.[needs update] The 22-year-old international arms dealer Efraim Diveroli and president of AEY Inc will face a congressional inquiry.[117][118]
On April 27, President Karzai escaped another attempt on his life: gunmen opened fire during a military parade celebrating the 1992 victory of the Mujahideen over the People's Democratic Party of Afghanistan communist government. The firefight lasted about a quarter of an hour, with 3 dead and over 10 wounded.[119]
On April 29, 2,300 U.S. Marines assaulted the town of Garmsir in Helmand province, a region of Afghanistan where the Taliban had a stronghold.[120]
In the first 5 months of 2008, the number of U.S. troops in Afghanistan increased by over 80% with a surge of 21,643 more troops, bringing the total number of U.S troops in Afghanistan from 26,607 in January to 48,250 in June.[6] In September, 2008, George Bush announced the withdrawal of over 8,000 troops from Iraq in the coming months and a further increase of up to 4,500 U.S. troops in Afghanistan.[121]
In May, Norwegian-led ISAF forces conducted a military operation in Badghis province.[122]
In June 2008, British prime minister Gordon Brown announced the number of British troops serving in Afghanistan would increase to 8,030 - a rise of 230 personnel.[123] The same month, the UK lost its 100th serviceman killed in the war since 2001.[124]
On June 13, Taliban fighters demonstrated their ongoing strength, liberating all prisoners in Kandahar jail. The well-planned operation freed 1200 prisoners, 400 of whom were Taliban prisoners-of-war, causing a major embarrassment for NATO in one of its operational centres in the country.[125]
On July 13, 2008, a coordinated Taliban attack was launched on a remote NATO base at Wanat in Kunar province. On August 19, French troops suffered their worst losses in Afghanistan in an ambush.[126] Later in the month, an airstrike which targeted a Taliban commander in Herat province killed 90 civilians.
Late August saw one of the largest operations by NATO forces in Helmand province, Operation Eagle's Summit, with the aim bringing electricity to the region.[127]
On September 3, the war spilled over on to Pakistani territory for the first time when heavily armed commandos, believed to be US Army Special Forces, landed by helicopter and attacked three houses in a village close to a known Taliban and Al-Qaeda stronghold. The attack killed between seven and twenty people. According to local residents, most of the dead were civilians. Pakistan responded furiously, condemning the attack. The foreign ministry in Islamabad called the incursion "a gross violation of Pakistan's territory".[128][129]
On September 6, in an apparent reaction to the recent cross-border attack, the federal government announced disconnection of supply lines to the allied forces stationed in Afghanistan through Pakistan for an indefinite period.[130]
On September 11, militants killed two U.S. troops in the eastern part of the country. This brought the total number of US losses to 113, making 2008 the deadliest year for American troops in Afghanistan since the start of the war.[131] The year was also the deadliest for several European countries in Afghanistan.
Total casualties for the year
By January 2009, the Taliban claimed that they had killed 5,220 foreign troops, downed 31 aircraft, destroyed 2,818 NATO and Afghan vehicles and killed 7,552 Afghan soldiers and police in 2008 alone. The Associated Press estimated that a total of 286 foreign military personnel were killed in Afghanistan in 2008.[132] Icasualties puts the total number of coalition soldiers killed in 2008 at 294.[18]
2009: U.S. Surge
Joint intelligence center
The Khyber Border Coordination Center between the U.S., Pakistan, and Afghanistan, at Torkham on the Afghan side of the Khyber Pass, has been in operation for nine months. But U.S. officials at the Khyber Center say language barriers, border disputes between Pakistani and Afghan field officers, and longstanding mistrust among all three militaries have impeded progress.[133]
Increase in US troops
In January, about 3,000 U.S. soldiers from the 3rd Brigade Combat Team of the 10th Mountain Division moved into the provinces of Logar and Wardak. The troops were the first wave of an expected surge of reinforcements originally ordered by George W. Bush and increased by Barack Obama.[134]
In mid-February, it was announced that 17,000 additional troops would be deployed to the country in two brigades and additional support troops; the 2nd Marine Expeditionary Brigade of about 3,500 from the 7,000 Marines, and the 5th Brigade, 2nd Infantry Division, a Stryker Brigade with about 4,000 of the 7,000 US Army soldiers.[135] The U.S. commander in Afghanistan, General McKiernan, had called for as many as 30,000 additional troops, effectively doubling the number of troops currently in the country.[136] In October 2009, there has been 55 American deaths, 8 on October 28 alone. 255 American deaths this year already, 43% increase of last year.
Kunduz Province Campaign
In April, German forces began stepping up PRT Kunduz' efforts to retake some rebellious areas in Kunduz province. Several operations of German and Afghan troops were still ongoing as of November 2009 with American forces eventually joining them. Insurgent militias suffered 488 casualties in this period. 60 coalition troops were wounded or killed.
Operation Khanjar and Operation Panther's Claw
We're doing this very differently. We're going to be with the people. We're not going to drive to work. We're going to walk to work.
— Brig. Gen. Lawrence D. Nicholson, commander of the 2nd Marine Expeditionary Brigade, July 2, 2009.[137]
On Thursday June 25, American Officials announced the launch of Operation Khanjar ("strike of the sword").[citation needed] About 4000 US Marines from the 2nd Marine Expeditionary Brigade [137] and 650 Afghan soldiers[citation needed] are currently involved in Operation Khanjar, which will be staged on the Helmand River. It is the biggest push since the Pentagon moved additional troops into the conflict earlier in 2009.[citation needed] Khanjar follows a British-led operation named Operation Panther's Claw in the same region[138] and is the first big push since US Gen. Stanley McChrystal took over as Allied commander.[citation needed] Officials call it the Marines' largest operation since the 2004 invasion of Fallujah, Iraq.[137]. Operation Panther's Claw was aimed to secure various canal and river crossings to establish a permanent International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) presence in the area.[139].
Initially, Afghan and American soldiers have been moving into towns and villages along the Helmand River[137] to secure the civilian population from the Taliban. The main objective of the operation is to push troops into insurgent strongholds along the river. After the United States takes and holds captured areas, security responsibilities will be transferred to the Afghan soldiers.[citation needed] A secondary aim was to bring security to the Helmand Valley in time for presidential elections, set to take place on August 20.
The first aggressive phase will last 36 hours, where the secondary aim will be achieved first. Key targets of the assault include the districts of Garmsir and Nawa[citation needed], which are towards the southern border with Pakistan.
Taliban's gains
On August 10, 2009, Stanley McChrystal, the newly appointed U.S. commander in Afghanistan, said that the Taliban has presently gained the upper hand and that the ISAF is not winning in the 8 year-old war. In a continuation of the Taliban's usual strategy of summer offensives[140], the militants have aggressively spread their influence into the north and west Afghanistan, and stepped up their attack in an attempt to disrupt August 20 presidential polls.[141] Calling the Taliban a "very aggressive enemy", he added that the U.S. strategy in the months to come is to stop their momentum and focusing on protecting and safeguarding the Afghan civilians, while also calling it "hard work".[142]
The Taliban's claim of disrupting August 20 elections is largely disputed, claiming over 135 incidents of violence, however media was asked to not report on any violent incidents[143], causing many outlets to hail the elections as a success, even though some estimates give the voter turn out as much less than the expected 70 per cent[144]. In southern Afghanistan where the Taliban holds the most sway, there was a low voter turnout and sporadic violence directed at voters and security personnel. The chief observer of the European Union election mission, General Philippe Morillon, said the election was "generally fair" but "not free".[145]
Western groups and election observers had had difficulty accessing the southern regions of Afghanistan, where at least 9 Afghan civilians and 14 security forces were killed in attacks intended to intimidate and scare voters.[146]. The Taliban released a video days after the elections, filming just up the road between Kabul and Kandahar, a major route in Afghanistan on election day, stopping buses, cars, and asking to see their fingers. The video went on to showing ten men who had voted, being talked to by a Taliban militant, they went on to say they may pardon the voters because of the Holy month of Ramadan[147]. The Taliban also attacked towns with rockets and other means of indirect fire. Amid claims of widespread fraud, both of the top contenders, Hamid Karzai and Abdullah Abdullah, claimed victory in the election. Reports also suggest that the turnout was lower than the last election, and there are fears that a results dispute can turn violent, even though both candidates vowed not to incite violence in case of a loss.[148]
After Karzai's alleged win of 54 per cent, which would prevent a run off with his rival, Abdullah Abdullah, over 400,000 votes had to be discounted for Karzai, and many more with hundreds of thousands of votes and polling ballots being accused of fraud. Making the real turnout of the elections much lower than the official numbers, many nations criticizing the elections as free but not fair.[149]
In September, the International Council on Security and Development released a map showing that the Taliban had a "permanent presence" in 80% of the country, with "permanent presence" defined by provinces that average one (or more) insurgent attack (lethal and non-lethal) per week.[150][151]
Supply lines to Afghanistan
Taliban attacks on supply lines through Pakistan
In November and December 2008, there were multiple incidents of major theft, robbery, and arson attacks against NATO supply convoys in Pakistan.[152][153][154] Transport companies south of Kabul have also been reported to pay protection money to the Taliban.[154][155] In an attack on November 11, 2008, Taliban fighters in Peshawar hijacked a convoy carrying NATO supplies from Karachi to Afghanistan. The militants took two military Humvees and paraded them in front of the media as trophies.[153]
The coalition forces bring 70 per cent of supplies through Pakistan every month, of a total of 2,000 truckloads in all.[155]
The area east of the Khyber pass in Pakistan has seen very frequent attacks. Cargo trucks and Humvees have been set ablaze by Taliban militants.[156] A half-dozen raids on depots with NATO supplies near Peshawar destroyed 300 cargo trucks and Humvees in December 2008.[156] The Taliban destroyed an iron bridge on the highway between Peshawar and the Khyber pass in February 2009.[157]
On December 30, 2008, Pakistani security forces shut down the supply line when they launched an offensive against Taliban militants who dominate the Khyber Pass region.[158] After three days of fighting, they declared the Khyber Pass open.[159]
The other supply route through Pakistan, via Chaman, was briefly shut down in early 2009. On Jan 10, tribesmen used vehicles to block the road to protest a raid by Pakistani counter-narcotics forces that left one villager dead. The protesters withdrew on January 14 after police promised to take their complaints to provincial authorities.[160]
Northern Distribution Network
In response to the increased risk of sending supplies through Pakistan, work began on the establishment of a Northern Distribution Network (NDN) through Russia and several Central Asian republics. Initial permission for the U.S. military to move troop supplies through the region was given on January 20, 2009, after a visit to the region by General Petraeus.[161] The first shipment along the NDN route left on February 20 from Riga, Latvia, then traveled 3,212 miles (5,169 km) to the Uzbek town of Termez on the Afghanistan border. U.S. commanders have stated their hope that 100 containers a day will be shipped along the NDN.[162] By comparison, currently 140 containers a day are shipped through the Khyber Pass.[163]
On May 11, 2009, Uzbekistan president Islam Karimov announced that the airport in Navoi, Uzbekistan was being used to transport non-lethal cargo into Afghanistan. Due to the still unsettled relationship between Uzbekistan and the United States following the 2005 Andijon massacre and subsequent expulsion of U.S. forces from Karshi-Khanabad airbase, U.S. forces were not involved in the shipment of supplies. Instead, South Korea's Korean Air, which is currently involved in overhauling Navoi's airport, officially handles logistics at the site.[164]
Originally only non-lethal resources were allowed on the NDN. In July 2009, however, shortly before a visit by President Obama to Moscow, Russian authorities announced that U.S. troops and weapons could use the country's airspace to reach Afghanistan.[165]
Some analyists worry that use of the NDN will come at the cost of increased Russian demands concerning missile defense and NATO enlargement, while others see no problems if the missile defense shield was scrapped. Additionally, human rights advocates are concerned that the U.S. is again working with the government of Uzbekistan, which is often accused of violating human rights.[166] Nevertheless, U.S. officials have promised increased cooperation with Uzbekistan, including further assistance to turn the Navoi airport into a major regional distribution center for both military and civilian ventures.[167][168]
Split with Pakistan
An unnamed senior Pentagon official told the BBC that at some point between July 12 and September 12, 2008, President George W. Bush issued a classified order to authorize U.S. raids against militants in Pakistan. Pakistan however said it would not allow foreign forces onto its territory and that it would vigorously protect its sovereignty.[169] In September, the Pakistan military stated that it had issued orders to "open fire" on American soldiers who crossed the Pakistan border in pursuit of militant forces.[170]
On September 25, 2008, Pakistani troops shot towards ISAF helicopters, which belonged to American troops. This caused confusion and anger in the Pentagon, which asked for a full explanation into the incident, and they denied that American choppers were in Pakistani airspace. Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari was quick to deny that shots were fired but instead insisted that the Pakistani troops shot flares to warn the Americans that they were in Pakistani airspace. This has added to the doubts that have been expressed by certain Pentagon and Bush Administration officials about the capabilities of the Pakistani Armed Forces to confront the militant threat.
This has all added to the split that occurred when American troops apparently landed on Pakistani soil to carry out an operation against militants in the North-West Frontier Province but ‘Pakistan reacted angrily to the action, saying 20 innocent villagers had been killed by US troops’.[171] On October 1, 2008, a suspected U.S. drone fired a missile against militants inside Pakistan’s North-West Frontier Province near the Afghan border. It is believed that six people died in the incident. Attacks of such have drawn a stiff response from Islamabad, accusing the United States of violating their airspace, although Americans have expressed frustration at the lack or failure of action by the Pakistani side against the militants held up on Pakistani soil.[neutrality is disputed] [172]
On December 30, 2008, Pakistani officials announced closure of the main supply line through Khyber Pass due to military operation against local militiants.[173]
Risk of a failed state
In November 2006, the U.N. Security Council warned that Afghanistan may become a failed state due to increased Taliban violence, growing illegal drug production, and fragile State institutions.[29] In 2006, Afghanistan was rated 10th on the failed states index, up from 11th in 2005. From 2005 to 2006, the number of suicide attacks, direct fire attacks, and improvised explosive devices all increased.[174] Intelligence documents declassified in 2006 suggested that Al Qaeda, Taliban, Haqqani Network and Hezb-i-Islami sanctuaries had by then increased fourfold in Afghanistan.[174] The campaign in Afghanistan successfully unseated the Taliban from power, but has been significantly less successful at achieving the primary policy goal of ensuring that Al-Qaeda can no longer operate in Afghanistan.[26]
BBC News released an article on June 19, 2007, interviewing six villagers of Asad Khyl in the north of Afghanistan where many homes had been destroyed by the Taliban in the civil war fought in the 1990s.[175] One of the villagers said that security in their village had "improved a bit" but that living conditions had not changed much. Another suggested that if the Taliban were invited to join a broad-based national government, there would be no need for foreign troops in the country at all. Another described Hamid Karzai as a puppet of the United States. Worsened corruption, poverty, and high inflation were also stated as key problems.[175]
In 2006, the U.S. Foreign Policy magazine and the U.S.-based "Fund for Peace" think-tank ranked Afghanistan in 10th place on their "failed state index". The authors said their index was based on "tens of thousands of articles" from various sources that they had gathered over several months in 2005. The score was based on 12 criteria that included: "uneven economic development along group lines", "legacy of vengeance - seeking group grievance", "widespread violation of human rights", "rise of factionalised elites", and "intervention of other states or external actors".[176]
In a recent interview, former head of U.S. troops in Iraq and now the head of U.S. Central Command, General David H. Petraeus, insisted that the Taliban are gaining strength. He cited the recent uptick in attacks in Afghanistan and in neighboring Pakistan. Petraeus also insisted that the challenges faced in Afghanistan are more complicated than the ones that were faced in Iraq during his tour and in order to turn around the recent events this would require removing militant sanctuaries and strongholds, which are widespread inside Afghanistan.[177]
On October 1, 2008, the top American general in Afghanistan, David McKiernan, warned that the situation in Afghanistan could get a lot worse. The international forces within Afghanistan have not been able to hold territory they have cleared because of the lack of troops. For this reason the general called for an extra three combat brigades (roughly 20,000 troops). Without this urgent rush of troops the Taliban would be able to get back into the communities that were once cleared by international troops. The general went on to say that things could get a lot worse before they get better.[178]
Observers also have argued that the mission in Afghanistan is hampered by a lack of agreement on objectives, a lack of resources, lack of coordination, too much focus on the central government at the expense of local and provincial governments, and too much focus on Afghanistan instead of the region.[179]
The CIA from a request by General Stanley McChrystal, the commander of NATO forces in Afghanistan, is planning to increase teams of operatives, including their elite paramilitary officers from Special Activities Division, with U.S. military special operations forces. This combination worked well in Iraq and is largely credited with the success of that surge.[180] The CIA is also increasing its campaign using Predator missile strikes on Al Qaeda in Pakistan. The number of strikes so far this year, 37, already exceeds the 2008 total, according to data compiled by the Long War Journal, which tracks strikes in Pakistan.[180]
Possible long-term U.S. role & military presence
Many of the thousands of U.S. troops in Afghanistan are positioned in what experts say are large, permanent bases.[181]
In February 2005, U.S. Senator John McCain called for the establishment of permanent U.S. military bases in Afghanistan[182], saying such bases would be "for the good of the American people, because of the long-term security interests we have in the region".[183]
He made the remarks while visiting Afghan President Hamid Karzai in Kabul as part of a five-member, bi-partisan Senate delegation travelling through the region for talks on security issues. The same delegation also included then-Senator Hillary Clinton, now U.S. Secretary of State.[182]
In mid-March, 2005, U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman General Richard Myers told reporters in Kabul that the U.S. Defense Department was studying the feasibility of such permanent military bases. At the end of March, the U.S. military announced that it was spending $83-million on its two main air bases in Afghanistan, Bagram Air Base north of Kabul and Kandahar Air Field in the south of the country.[183]
A few weeks after this series of U.S. statements, in April 2005, during a surprise visit to Kabul by U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, Afghan President Hamid Karzai hinted at a possible permanent U.S. military presence in Afghanistan, saying he had also discussed the matter with President Bush. Rumsfeld refused to say whether or not the U.S. wanted permanent American military bases in Afghanistan, saying the final decision would come from the White House.[184]
As of July 2008, hundreds of millions of dollars were being spent on permanent infrastructure for foreign military bases in Afghanistan, including a budget of $780-million to further develop the infrastructure at just the Kandahar Air Field base, described as "a walled, multicultural military city that houses some 13,000 troops from 17 different countries - the kind of place where you can eat at a Dutch chain restaurant alongside soldiers from the Royal Netherlands Army."[185] The Bagram Air Base, run by the U.S. military, was also expanding according to military officials, with the U.S military buying land from Afghan locals in different places for further expansion of the base.[185]
As of January 2009, the U.S. had begun work on $1.6 billion of new, permanent military installations at Kandahar.[186]
In February 2009, The Times reported that the U.S. will build two large new military bases in southern Afghanistan.[187] One will be built in Kandahar province near the Helmand border, at Maiwand - a place famous as the site of the destruction of a British army during the Second Anglo-Afghan War. The other new U.S. military base will be built in Zabul, a province now largely controlled by the Taliban and criminal gangs.[187]
Geo-strategic military build-up
The dramatic build-up of an indefinite American/American-led military presence in Afghanistan has unsettled some regional powers, including Russia. However Russia has agreed to let the United States and NATO to use its airspace for logistical purposes[185]
"Is it all to fight a number of Taliban - 10,000, 12,000 Taliban?" Zamir Kabulov, Russia's ambassador to Kabul, has questioned. "Maybe this infrastructure, military infrastructure, [is] not only for internal purposes but for regional also."[185]
Russia views the large and indefinite military build-up as a potential threat "because Afghanistan's geographical location is a very strategic one," Kabulov said. "It's very close to three main world basins of hydrocarbons: Persian Gulf, Caspian Sea, Central Asia." [185]
Other observers have also noted that through a stronger military presence in Afghanistan, the U.S. may be seeking to strengthen its own position in the region to counter increasingly warm relations among India, China and Russia.[184]
Along with its proximity to the vast Central Asian and Caspian Sea energy sources and being in the midsts of the regional powers of India, China, and Russia, Afghanistan also holds strategic significance given its border with Iran.[183][188]
Afghan resistance to permanent U.S. military bases
The idea of permanent U.S. military bases vexes many people in Afghanistan, which has a long history of resisting foreign invaders.[188]
In May 2005, riots and protests that had started over a false report in Newsweek of U.S. interrogators desecrating the Koran and turned into the biggest anti-U.S. protests in Afghanistan since the 2001 invasion included demands that the Kabul government reject U.S. intentions to create a permanent military presence in Afghanistan.[183]
The International Security Assistance Force
Operating under U.S. Army General Stanley A. McChrystal who commands all coalition forces in Afghanistan, the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) includes soldiers from 42 countries with U.S. troops making up about half its force.[4] ISAF had initially been established as a stabilization force by the United Nations Security Council on December 20, 2001, to secure Kabul. Its mandate did not extend beyond this area for the first few years.[189] On August 11, 2003, NATO assumed political command and coordination of ISAF.[189] On July 31, 2006, ISAF assumed command of the south of the country, and by October 5, 2006, also of the east Afghanistan.[190]
Summary of major troop contributions (over 300, July 23, 2009):[4]
ISAF total' 101,000 '[8]
United States - 68,000
United Kingdom - 9,500
Germany - 4,245
France - 3,070
Canada - 2,830
Italy - 2,795
Netherlands - 2,160
Poland - 2,035
Australia - 1,550[191]
Spain - 1,000
Romania - 990
Turkey - 820
Denmark - 700
Norway - 600
Belgium - 510
Sweden - 500
Bulgaria - 460
Czech Republic - 340
Croatia - 325
Hungary - 310
International reactions
Public opinion
Although the war was supported by most Americans, most people in the world oppose the war. In a 47-nation June 2007 survey of global public opinion, the Pew Global Attitudes Project found considerable opposition to war. Out of the 47 countries surveyed, 4 had a majority that favoured keeping foreign troops: the U.S. (50%), Israel (59%), Ghana (50%), and Kenya (60%).[192] In 41 of the 47 countries, pluralities want U.S. and NATO troops out of Afghanistan as soon as possible.[192] In 32 out of 47 countries, clear majorities want this war over as soon as possible. Majorities in 7 out of 12 NATO member countries say troops should be withdrawn as soon as possible.[192][193]
A smaller 24-nation Pew Global Attitudes survey in June 2008 similarly found that majorities or pluralities in 21 of 24 countries want the U.S. and NATO to remove their troops from Afghanistan as soon as possible. Only in 3 out of the 24 countries - the United States (50%), Australia (60%), and Britain (48%) - did public opinion lean more toward keeping troops there until the situation has stabilized.[194][195]
Since that June 2008 global survey, however, public opinion in Australia and Britain has also diverged from that in the U.S., and a majority of Australians and Britons now want their troops to be brought home from Afghanistan. A September 2008 poll found that 56% of Australians oppose the continuation of their country's military involvement in Afghanistan, while 42% support it.[196][197][198] A November 2008 poll found that 68% of Britons want their troops withdrawn within the next 12 months.[199][200][201] In the United States, a September 2008 Pew survey found that 61% of Americans wanted U.S. troops to stay until the situation has stabilized, while 33% wanted them removed as soon as possible.[202]
Public opinion at the beginning of the war also reflected this dichotomy between the United States and most other countries. When the invasion began in October 2001, polls indicated that about 88% of Americans and about 65% of Britons backed military action in Afghanistan.[203] On the other hand, a large-scale 37-nation poll of world opinion carried out by Gallup International in late September 2001, found that large majorities in most countries favoured a legal response, in the form of extradition and trial, over a military response to 9/11: Only in just 3 countries out of the 37 surveyed - the United States, Israel, and India - did majorities favour military action in Afghanistan. In 34 out of the 37 countries surveyed, the survey found many clear and sizeable majorities that did not favour military action: in the United Kingdom (75%), France (67%), Switzerland (87%), Czech Republic (64%), Lithuania (83%), Panama (80%), Mexico (94%), and other countries.[204][205] An Ipsos-Reid poll conducted between November and December 2001 showed that majorities in Canada (66%), France (60%), Germany (60%), Italy (58%), and the U.K. (65%) approved of U.S. airstrikes while majorities in Argentina (77%), China (52%), South Korea (50%), Spain (52%), and Turkey (70%) opposed them.[203]
Protests, demonstrations and rallies
The war has repeatedly been the subject of large protests around the world starting with the large-scale demonstrations in the days leading up to the official launch of U.S. Operation Enduring Freedom under George W. Bush in October 2001 and every year since.
Protesters consider the bombing and invasion of Afghanistan to be unjustified aggression. The deaths of thousands of Afghan civilians caused directly and indirectly by the U.S. and NATO bombing campaigns is also a major underlying focus of the protests.
The impact of armed conflict on civilians
Very few people in Afghanistan have been unaffected by the armed conflict there. Those with direct personal experience make up 60% of the population, and most others also report suffering a range of serious hardships. In total, almost everyone (96%) has been affected in some way – either personally or due to the wider consequences of armed conflict. See Afghanistan, Opinion survey 2009, by the International Committee of the Red Cross and Ipsos [206]
The issue of civilian casualties is recognized as a problem at the highest levels of ISAF command. In a September 2009 report, Gen. Stanley McChrystal wrote "Civilian casualties and collateral damage to homes and property resulting from an over-reliance on firepower and force protection have severely damaged ISAF's legitimacy in the eyes of the Afghan people." [207]
Casualties
In 2008, the number of coalition deaths in Afghanistan reached 1,000, and is now higher.[18][208]
Civilian casualties
There is no single official figure for the overall number of civilians killed by the war since 2001, but estimates for specific years or periods have been published by a number of organizations.
According to Marc W. Herold's Dossier on Civilian Victims of United States' Aerial Bombing at least 3,700 and probably closer to 5,000 civilians were killed by the end of 2002 as a result of U.S. bombing.[209] Herold's study omitted those killed indirectly, when air strikes cut off their access to hospitals, food or electricity. Also exempt were bomb victims who later died of their injuries. When there were different casualty figures from the same incident, in 90% of cases Professor Herold chose a lower figure.
Self-described neoconservative[210] Joshua Muravchik of the American Enterprise Institute questioned Professor Herold's study in an opinion article published in the neoconservative magazine The Weekly Standard, but did so entirely on the basis of one single incident that involved 25-93 deaths.[211]
In a pair of January 2002 studies, Carl Conetta of the Project on Defense Alternatives estimated that, at least 4,200-4,500 civilians were killed by mid-January 2002 as a result of the U.S. war and airstrikes, both directly as casualties of the aerial bombing campaign,[212] and indirectly in the humanitarian crisis that the war and airstrikes contributed to.[213]
A Los Angeles Times review of U.S., British, and Pakistani newspapers and international wire services found that between 1,067 and 1,201 direct civilian deaths were reported by those news organizations during the five months from October 7, 2001, to February 28, 2002. This review excluded all civilian deaths in Afghanistan that did not get reported by U.S., British, or Pakistani news, excluded 497 deaths that did get reported in U.S., British, and Pakistani news but that were not specifically identified as civilian or military, and excluded 754 civilian deaths that were reported by the Taliban but not independently confirmed.[214]
The UN Assistance Mission in Afghanistan (UNAMA) reported that 2,118 Afghan civilians were killed by armed conflict in 2008, the highest number since the end of the initial 2001 invasion. This represented an increase of about 40% over UNAMA's figure of 1,523 Afghan civilians killed in 2007.[215]
On March 15, 2009, in an interview with Margaret Warner of The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer, General David D. McKiernan, then commander of all foreign military forces in Afghanistan, claimed that 80% of civilian casualties in Afghanistan were caused by the Taliban. He added that "by the very nature of an insurgency", it "mixes in on purpose with the civilian population."[216] In contrast to that, the UN Assistance Mission in Afghanistan (UNAMA) attributed 55% of the civilian deaths it tracked in 2008 to anti-government forces, 39% to international-led military forces, while the remaining 6% could not be attributed because they died in crossfire or were killed by unexploded ordnance, for example.[215]
On May 11, 2009, U.S. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates abruptly replaced McKiernan with U.S. Army General Stanley A. McChrystal as the new U.S. commander of all foreign military forces in Afghanistan.[217] One of General McChrystal's first announcements was a sharp restrictriction on the use of airstrikes in an effort to reduce civilian casualties. Afghan leaders have long pleaded that foreign troops end airstrikes and nighttime raids of Afghan homes.[218]
Drug trade
In 2000, the Taliban had issued a ban on opium production, which led to reductions in Pashtun Mafia opium production by as much as 90%.[219] Soon after the 2001 U.S. led invasion of Afghanistan, however, opium production increased markedly.[220] By 2005, Afghanistan had regained its position as the world’s #1 opium producer and was producing 90% of the world’s opium, most of which is processed into heroin and sold in Europe and Russia.[221] Afghan opium kills 100,000 people every year worldwide.[222]
While U.S. and allied efforts to combat the drug trade have been stepped up, the effort is hampered by the fact that many suspected drug traffickers are now top officials in the Karzai government.[221] In fact, recent estimates by the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) estimate that 52% of the nation's GDP, amounting to $2.7 billion annually, is generated by the drug trade.[223] The rise in production has been linked to the deteriorating security situation, as production is markedly lower in areas with stable security.[224]
The poppy eradication policy propagated by the international community and in particular the United States, as part of their War on Drugs, has been a failure, exacerbated by the lack of alternative development projects to replace livelihoods lost as a result of poppy eradication. Rather than stemming poppy cultivation, poppy eradication has succeeded only in adding to the extreme poverty in rural areas and general discontent, especially in the south of Afghanistan.
The extermination of the poppy crops is not seen as a viable option, due to the fact that the sale of poppies constitute the livelihood of Afghanistan's rural farmers. Some 3.3 million Afghans are involved in producing opium.[225] Opium is more profitable than wheat and destroying opium fields could possibly lead to discontent or unrest amongst the indigent population.[226] Several alternatives to poppy eradication have been proposed, including controlled opium licensing for poppy for medicine projects.
Human rights abuses
There have been multiple accounts of human rights violations in Afghanistan.[227] The fallout of the U.S. led invasion, including a resurgence in Taliban forces, record-high drug production, and re-armed warlords, has led to a threat to the well-being and rights of hundreds of thousands of innocent Afghan citizens, according to Human Rights Watch.[228]
History of human rights abuses in Afghanistan
Afghanistan has suffered extensive human rights violations over the last twenty years. The subsequent civil war brought extensive abuses by the armed factions vying for power.[229] The Taliban rose to power in 1996 and ruled Afghanistan for five years until the U.S. attacks in 2001. They were notorious for their human rights abuses against women.[230]
Taliban
The increase in Taliban power has led to increased human rights violations against women in Afghanistan, according to the U.S. State Department.[231] According to Amnesty International, the Taliban commit war crimes by targeting civilians, including killing teachers, abducting aid workers and burning school buildings. Amnesty International said that up to 756 civilians were killed in 2006 by bombs, mostly on roads or carried by suicide attackers belonging to the Taliban.[232]
Former Afghan warlords
Former Afghan warlords and political strongmen were responsible for numerous human rights violations in 2003 including kidnapping, rape, robbery, and extortion.[233]
Controversy over torture
In March 2002, ABC News claimed top officials at the CIA authorized controversial, harsh interrogation techniques.[234] The Bush administration declared that al-Qaeda members captured on the battlefield were not subject to the Geneva Conventions as it was not a conventional war, and al-Qaeda members do not wear uniforms, as set by the convention.[235] Amnesty International stated on April 26, 2007, that a new deal to let Canadian officials visit enemy detainees in Afghanistan is aimed more at saving political face than keeping prisoners safe.[236]
The possible interrogation techniques included shaking and slapping, shackling prisoners in a standing position, keeping the prisoner in a cold cell and dousing them with water, and water boarding.[234] The U.S. operated a secret prison in Kabul where these techniques are claimed to have been employed.[237]
Allegations of unethical conduct or war crimes by the Taliban
NATO has alleged that the Taliban have used civilians as human shields. As an example, NATO pointed to the victims of NATO airstrikes in Farah province in May 2009 in which the Afghan government claimed up to 150 civilians were killed. NATO stated that it had evidence that the Taliban forced civilians into buildings likely to be targeted by NATO aircraft involved in the battle. US Lieutenant Colonel Greg Julian, a spokesman for NATO's Afghanistan commander, General David D. McKiernan, said of the Taliban's tactics, "This was a deliberate plan by the Taliban to create a civilian casualty crisis. These were not human shields; these were human sacrifices. We have intelligence that points to this. Patient after patient just kept telling the doctors their story and how they were forced by the Taliban to stay in these locations."[238]
White phosphorus use
White phosphorus has been condemned by human rights organizations as cruel and inhumane because it causes severe burns. There are cases that have been confirmed of white phosphorus burns on the bodies of civilians wounded in Afghanistan caused by clashes between U.S. and Taliban forces near Bagram. The U.S.A. claims at least 38 instances in which militants had used white phosphorus in weapons or attacks.[239] No independent report has confirmed the use of phosphorus by the Taliban. Military specialists, the Afghan government, and experts on the Taliban have said that insurgents have never been observed using white phosphorus. The only forces on the battlefield known to use it are the United States and NATO. In May 2009, Colonel Gregory Julian, a spokesman for the overall commander of U.S. and NATO forces in Afghanistan, General David McKiernan, confirmed that Western military forces in Afghanistan are using the chemical.[240][241][242]
Depleted Uranium Controversy
Reports of high uranium concentration in Afghani urine in 2003 fueled speculation that the coalition used depleted uranium weapons in Afghanistan.[243] However, further research in 2005 showed the isotope ratios to be more consistent with a natural (not depleted) uranium source.[244]
See also
- British forces casualties in Afghanistan
- Canadian Forces casualties in Afghanistan
- Civilian casualties of the War in Afghanistan (2001–present)
- Coalition casualties in Afghanistan
- Criticism of the War on Terrorism
- Foreign hostages in Afghanistan
- German Armed Forces casualties in Afghanistan
- International public opinion on the war in Afghanistan
- List of British gallantry awards for the War in Afghanistan
- List of Coalition aircraft losses in Afghanistan
- Military operations of the War in Afghanistan (2001–present)
- Protests against the invasion of Afghanistan
- U.S. government response to the September 11, 2001 attacks
- Wars in Afghanistan
References
- ^ Aunohita Mojumdar. "Outpost attack in Afghanistan shows major boost in militant strength | csmonitor.com". Csmonitor.com. Retrieved October 2, 2008.
{{cite web}}: Text "Correspondent of The Christian Science Monitor" ignored (help) - ^ Royal Household. "The Queen and the UK > Queen and the Armed Forces". Queen's Printer. Retrieved September 21, 2009.
- ^ Victoria (March 29, 1867), Constitution Act, 1867, III.15, Westminster: Queen's Printer, retrieved January 15, 2009
- ^ a b c d e - International Security Assistance Force Factsheet
- ^ [1]
- ^ a b c Congressional Research Services Report for Congress - U.S. Forces in Afghanistan - Updated July 15, 2008
- ^ a b RS22633 - U.S. Forces in Afghanistan - July 15, 2008
- ^ Entous, Adam; Steve Holland; Caren Bohan (October 9, 2009). "Taliban growth weighs on Obama strategy review". Washington: Reuters. Retrieved October 10, 2009.
U.S. intelligence assessment, showing the number of active fighters in the insurgency is now roughly 25,000
- ^ a b "A Sober Assessment of Afghanistan - washingtonpost.com". Washingtonpost.com. Retrieved October 2, 2008.
- ^ "Uzbek Fighters in Pakistan Reportedly Return to Afghanistan". Jamestown.org. Retrieved October 2, 2008.
- ^ Bill Roggio. "Taliban capture over 100 Pakistani soldiers in South Waziristan - The Long War Journal". Longwarjournal.org. Retrieved October 2, 2008.
- ^ http://www.mcclatchydc.com/227/story/77193.html
- ^ "Scores Killed in Fresh Kunduz Fighting". Foxnews.com. November 26, 2001. Retrieved October 2, 2008.
- ^ "Friendly fire kills 3 GIs". Post-gazette.com. Retrieved October 2, 2008.
- ^ Terry McCarthy/Kunduz. "A Volatile State of Siege After a Taliban Ambush - Printout - TIME". Time.com. Retrieved October 2, 2008.
- ^ http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/news/2001/12/mil-011209-29caacd9.htm
- ^ http://rawa.org/us-bomb.htm
- ^ a b c http://icasualties.org/oef/
- ^ http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2004/oef.casualties/index.html
- ^ http://www.mod.uk/NR/rdonlyres/B05C3C76-0E9A-45CF-91AF-6CC0DE0A7B7A/0/opherrick_casualtyfatality_31aug09.pdf
- ^ http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2008/12/28/wounded-troops.html
- ^ "83 Diggers injured in Afghanistan became invisible". The Australian. September 26, 2009. Retrieved September 27, 2009.
{{cite news}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter:|coauthors=(help) - ^ http://www.chinapost.com.tw/international/2007/07/05/114207/Contractor-deaths.htm
- ^ Eric Schmitt And Tim Golden (Published: May 17, 2008). "U.S. Planning Big New Prison in Afghanistan - [[New York Times]]". Nytimes.com. Retrieved October 2, 2008.
{{cite web}}: Check date values in:|date=(help); URL–wikilink conflict (help) - ^ "The Taliban Resurgence in Afghanistan".
- ^ a b "Afghanistan: and the troubled future of unconventional warfare By Hy S. Rothstein".
- ^ "Opium Harvest at Record Level in Afghanistan".
- ^ "Afghanistan opium at record high".
- ^ a b "Afghanistan could return to being a 'failed State,' warns Security Council mission chief".
- ^ "Osama bin Laden Wealthy Saudi exile is a terrorist mastermind".
- ^ a b Coll, Steve (2004). Ghost Wars: The Secret History of the CIA, Afghanistan, and Bin Laden, from the Soviet Invasion to September 10, 2001. The Penguin Press. ISBN 9781594200076. http://books.google.com/books?id=ToYxFL5wmBIC&client=firefox-a.
- ^ U.S. sought attack on al-Qaida, White House given plan days before Sept. 11
- ^ Bush team 'agreed plan to attack the Taliban the day before September 11'
- ^ India joins anti-Taliban coalition
- ^ U.S. 'planned attack on Taleban' from the BBC News, September 2001
- ^ Al-Qaida monitored U.S. negotiations with Taliban over oil pipeline
- ^ Attack and counter-attack
- ^ "CNN.com - Bush: bin Laden 'prime suspect' - September 17, 2001". Archives.cnn.com. Retrieved October 2, 2008.
- ^ "CNN.com: Transcript of President Bush's address".
- ^ "Freed aid workers describe Taliban jail rescue". Guardian Unlimited. November 16, 2001. Retrieved March 8, 2007.
- ^ "Why Bombing and Warnings Are Not Working". Commondreams.org. Retrieved October 2, 2008.
- ^ Nic Robertson and Kelly Wallace (October 21, 2001). "U.S. rejects Taliban offer to try bin Laden". CNN.com. Retrieved March 8, 2007.
- ^ "Bush rejects Taliban offer to hand Bin Laden over". Guardian Unlimited. October 14, 2001. Retrieved March 8, 2007.
- ^ "Security Council Resolutions 1368 (2001) and 1373 (2001): What They Say and What They Do Not Say, European Journal of International Law".
- ^ "BBC NEWS | World | Americas | Court rules on Guantanamo inmate". News.bbc.co.uk. June 24, 2008. Retrieved October 2, 2008.
- ^ "Andy Worthington: Guantanamo's Shambolic Trials: Pentagon Boss Resigns, Ex-Chief Prosecutor Joins Defense". Huffingtonpost.com. Retrieved October 2, 2008.
- ^ "Ods Home Page" (PDF). Daccessdds.un.org. Retrieved October 2, 2008.
- ^ "NATO in Afghanistan: The Issue of Legitimacy". Issi.org.pk. Retrieved October 3, 2008.
- ^ First In: An insiders account of how the CIA spearheaded the War on Terror in Afghanistan by Gary Schroen, 2005
- ^ Jawbreaker: The Attack on Bin Laden and AL Qaeda: A personal account by the CIA's field Commander by Gary Berntsen and Ralph Pezzulla, 2005
- ^ Ghost Wars: The Secret History of the CIA, Afghanistan, and Bin Laden, from the Soviet Invasion to September 10, 2001, by Steve Coll, 2004
- ^ "australianpolitics.com". Retrieved September 27, 2007.
- ^ "archives.cnn.com". Retrieved September 27, 2007.
- ^ Washington Post Editorial, John Lehman former Secretary of the Navy, October 2008
- ^ a b
"U.S. jets hit suspected bin Laden camp". Colby Free Press. October 15, 2001.
{{cite news}}:|access-date=requires|url=(help) - ^ a b
Refet Kaplan (November 5, 2001). "Massive American Bombing on Taliban Front Lines". Fox News Channel.
{{cite news}}:|access-date=requires|url=(help) - ^ a b
David Rohde (October 28, 2001). "Waging a Deadly Stalemate on Afghanistan's Front Line". New York Times.
{{cite news}}:|access-date=requires|url=(help) - ^
Pepe Escobar (December 7, 2001). "Taking a spin in Tora Bora". Asia Times.
{{cite news}}:|access-date=requires|url=(help) - ^ a b
Scott Peterson (December 4, 2001). "A view from behind the lines in the US air war: Special operatives are key to the success of American airstrikes in Afghanistan". Christian Science Monitor.
{{cite news}}:|access-date=requires|url=(help) - ^ a b New York Times, The Battle for Mazar-i-Sharif, November 10, 2001
- ^ a b c Cahlink, George. Building a Presence, December 15, 2002
- ^ "Special Warfare journal", "The Liberation of Mazar e Sharif: 5th SF group conducts UW in Afghanistan", June 1, 2002
- ^ a b Call, Steve. "Danger Close", ISBN 1585446246 2007. pp. 24-25
- ^ Wolfowitz, Paul, Speech on November 14, 2001
- ^ "Fronlines", Aug 02,2002
- ^ a b c d e Rebels: Mazar-i-Sharif is Ours
- ^ a b Opposition troops closing in on Mazari Sharif
- ^ Maloney, Sean M. Afghanistan: From here to eternity?, Spring 2004
- ^ a b Topeka Capital Journal, Taliban: Key city has fallen, November 10, 2001
- ^ a b Dolan, Chris J. "In War We Trust", 2005. p. 150
- ^ Harding, Luke. The Guardian, Fear of Bloodbath as Alliance advances on Kunduz, November 23, 2001
- ^ Khan, M. Ismail. DAWN, Mazar falls to Alliance: Taliban says they're regrouping, November 10, 2001
- ^ Crane, Conrad. Facing the Hydra: Maintaining Strategic Balance while Pursuing a Global War Against Terrorism, May 2002
- ^ Seattle Times, Boy lured by Taliban, now held as slave, July 29, 2002
- ^ Zia, Amir. Associated Press, "UN Reports Mazar-e-Sharif executions], November 12, 2001
- ^ Department of Defence Defend America: Photo Essay, December 26, 2001
- ^ Clandestine Radio Watch, Afghan Balkh radio from Balkh Province, Mazar-e Sharif, inDari Nov 10, 01 (via BBCM via DXLD 1-169)
- ^ The Guardian, Taliban lose grip on Mazar i Sharif, November 7, 2001
- ^ Feinberg, Cara. The American Prospect, Opportunity and Danger, November 15, 2001
- ^ "New Yorker.com". Retrieved September 27, 2007.
- ^ "msnbc.com". Retrieved September 27, 2007.
- ^ "news.bbc.co.uk". Retrieved September 27, 2007.
- ^ Alex Perry (April 8, 2007). "Inside the Battle at Qala-i-Jangi". Time Magazine. Retrieved April 9, 2007.
- ^ Not a Good Day to Die: The Untold Story of Operation Anaconda, Naylor, Sean (2005), Penguin Group, New York about Operation Anaconda; details, among other things, the actions of SAD Paramilitary officers during this chaotic 2002 battle in Afghanistan.
- ^ UN Security Council resolution 1378 (2001)
- ^ UN Security Council resolution 1386 (2001)
- ^ "Operation Anaconda costs 8 U.S. lives". CNN. March 4, 2002. Retrieved February 28, 2007.
- ^ "Operation Anaconda entering second week". CNN. March 8, 2002. Retrieved February 28, 2007.
- ^ "U.S. remains on trail of bin Laden, Taliban leader". CNN. March 14, 2002. Retrieved February 28, 2007.
- ^ Gall, Carlotta (November 13, 2004). "Asia: Afghanistan: Taliban Leader Vows Return". New York Times. Retrieved February 28, 2007.
- ^ "Leaflet War Rages in Afghan Countryside". Associated Press. February 14, 2003. Retrieved February 28, 2007.
- ^ Tohid, Owias (June 27, 2003). "Taliban regroups - on the road". Christian Science Monitor. Retrieved February 28, 2007.
- ^ a b c Tohid, Owias and Baldauf, Scott (May 8, 2003). "Taliban appears to be regrouped and well-funded". Christian Science Monitor. Retrieved February 28, 2007.
{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link) - ^ "globalsecurity.org". Retrieved September 27, 2007.
- ^ "news.bbc.co.uk". Retrieved September 27, 2007.
- ^ "news.bbc.co.uk". Retrieved September 27, 2007.
- ^ "news.bbc.co.uk". Retrieved September 27, 2007.
- ^ "centcom.mil". Retrieved September 27, 2007.
- ^ "news.bbc.co.uk". Retrieved September 27, 2007.
- ^ "defensenews.com". Retrieved September 27, 2007.
- ^ "news.bbc.co.uk". Retrieved September 27, 2007.
- ^ "mod.uk". Retrieved September 27, 2007.
- ^ "mod.uk". Retrieved September 27, 2007.
- ^ "mod.uk". Retrieved September 27, 2007.
- ^ "mod.uk". Retrieved September 27, 2007.
- ^ "Pentagon inquiry finds U.S. Marine unit killed Afghan civilians".
- ^ "Marines' Actions in Afghanistan Called Excessive".
- ^ "Marine Unit Is Told To Leave Afghanistan".
- ^ "At Least 100 Insurgents Killed in Latest Clashes".
- ^ "BBC NEWS | World | South Asia | Battle 'kills dozens of Taleban'". News.bbc.co.uk. Last Updated:. Retrieved October 2, 2008.
{{cite web}}: Check date values in:|date=(help)CS1 maint: extra punctuation (link) - ^ [2]Rodhde, David, "Foreign Fighters of Harsher Bent Bolster Taliban", The New York Times, October 30, 2007, accessed November 9, 2007
- ^ "BBC NEWS | South Asia | Afghan forces 'kill top militant'". News.bbc.co.uk. Last Updated:. Retrieved October 2, 2008.
{{cite web}}: Check date values in:|date=(help)CS1 maint: extra punctuation (link) - ^ .http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/asiapcf/11/10/afghanistan.nato.clashes/index.html
- ^ Norwegian State TV NRK1: "Dagsrevyen" News rapport Nov. 10th 2007 Template:No icon
- ^ ""Time is now right" for retaking Musa Qaleh - Browne". Defence News. British Ministry of Defence. December 7, 2007. Retrieved December 9, 2007.
- ^ Karen DeYoung, Jonathan Weisman (July 23, 2008). "Obama Shifts the Foreign Policy Debate". Washington Post. p. A08. Retrieved July 29, 2008.
- ^ CNN U.S. suspends supplier of arms to Afghanistan
- ^ CNN Arms dealer's dad wanted 'nice' doctor son
- ^ Nick Meo. "Hamid Karzai escapes as Taleban target military parade - Times Online". Timesonline.co.uk. Retrieved October 2, 2008.
- ^ "Marines launch assault in Afghanistan".
- ^ The Guardian. 'Bush announces withdrawal of 8,000 troops from Iraq' The Guardian. [3] Retrieved on 01-10-08
- ^ Telemark Battalion in new combat with Taliban, Aftenposten, May 27, 2008
- ^ BBC - Extra UK troops for Afghanistan, June 16, 2008
- ^ Brown in tribute to Afghan dead, June 9, 2008
- ^ "Insurgent attack frees hundreds from Kandahar prison".
- ^ "- Afghan ambush kills French troops - August 19, 2008".
- ^ "- UK troops in huge turbine mission - BBC - September 2, 2008".
- ^ Pakistan reacts with fury after up to 20 die in 'American' attack on its soil The Guardian Retrieved on 12-09-08
- ^ Pakistan fury over 'US assault' BBC Retrieved on 12-09-08
- ^ Pakistan cuts supply lines to Nato forces Retrieved on 12-09-08
- ^ US deaths in Afghanistan makes 2008 deadliest year Washington Times Retrieved on 14-09-08
- ^ Los Angeles Times, "Taliban Report Raises Eyebrows", January 6, 2009, p. 5.
- ^ U.S.-Funded Intelligence Center Struggles in Khyber Region, Candace Rondeaux, The Washington Post, January 12, 2009
- ^ Newest US troops in Afghanistan seeing combat in dangerous region south of Kabul (February 16, 2009). "Newest US troops in Afghanistan seeing combat in dangerous region south of Kabul". Chicago Tribune.
- ^ Obama OKs 17,000 more US troops for Afghanistan
- ^ "Obama OKs adding Afghanistan forces". USA Today. February 16, 2009.
- ^ a b c d "Marines Deploy on Major Mission". The Washington Post. July 2, 2009. Retrieved July 2, 2009.
- ^ "UK forces in major Afghan assault", BBC News, June 23, 2009
- ^ "3 SCOTS launch massive air assault". UK Ministry of Defence.
- ^ http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSSP513120070127
- ^ http://www.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idUSTRE57A30D20090811
- ^ http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124986154654218153.html#articleTabs%3Darticle
- ^ http://english.aljazeera.net/news/asia/2009/08/200981821718308671.html
- ^ http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,540820,00.html
- ^ http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSTRE57E0D620090822
- ^ http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090820/ap_on_re_as/as_afghanistan
- ^ http://english.aljazeera.net/news/asia/2009/08/200982485130209178.html
- ^ http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/8209279.stm
- ^ http://english.aljazeera.net/news/asia/2009/09/200991015456247534.html
- ^ Taliban Control Spreads in Afghanistan
- ^ http://www.longwarjournal.org/threat-matrix/2009/09/icos_rating_on_taliban_control.php
- ^ Militant attack burns NATO supply containers, CNN, 07-Dec-2008
- ^ a b Police: Militants destroy NATO trucks, Zein Basravi, CNN, 12-Dec-2008
- ^ a b Taleban tax: allied supply convoys pay their enemies, London Times, 12-Dec-2008
- ^ a b Attacks expose weakness of key Afghanistan supply route, AFP, 12-Dec-2008
- ^ a b Amid Taliban Rule, a NATO Supply Line Is Choked, Richard Oppel, NYT, 24-Dec-2008
- ^ Taliban Hits NATO Supply Route, Salman Masood, NYT February 3, 2009
- ^ Move against Taliban shuts US supply line, NYT, 30-Dec-2008
- ^ Pakistan Reopens Supply Route, NYT, AP wire story, January 2, 2009
- ^ Pakistan reopens NATO supply route, AP wire story, New York Times, October 14, 2009
- ^ U.S. secures new supply routes to Afghanistan, NYT, January 21, 2009
- ^ Daly, John CK (May 27, 2009). "Second-Chance Logistics". ISN Security Watch.
- ^ "Northern Distribution Network Delivers". EurasiaNet. March 18, 2009.
- ^ Tynan, Deirdre (May 11, 2009). "Karimov Gives Washington the Air Base it Needs for Afghan Operations". EurasiaNet.
- ^ Baker, Peter (July 3, 2009). "Russia Opens Route for U.S. to Fly Arms to Afghanistan". New York Times.
- ^ "Afghanistan's northern neighbours: Road blocks". The Economist. March 5, 2009.
- ^ "US Ambassador Norland Promises to Increase Cooperation with Tashkent". EurasiaNet. June 4, 2009.
- ^ "Ambassador Explores Commercial Developments in Navoi". U.S. Embassy in Uzbekistan. May 13, 2009.
- ^ 'Another US strike' hits Pakistan BBC Retrieved on 12-09-08
- ^ "Pakistan: Shoot GIs on cross-border raids—Pakistan—MSNBC.com". Msnbc.msn.com. September 16, 2008. Retrieved October 2, 2008.
- ^ BBC: World News. 'Pakistan fires on Nato aircraft'. BBC. [4] Retrieved on 30-09-08
- ^ Ahmad, Munir (October 1, 2008). "Suspected US missile strike kills 6 in Pakistan". The Guardian. Retrieved March 26, 2009.
- ^ BBC News: South Asia. 'Pakistan suspends Afghan supplies'. BBC
- ^ a b "One War We Can Still Win".
- ^ a b "Afghan villagers answer your questions".
- ^ "Sudan tops 'failed states index'".
- ^ The New York Times: International. 'Insurgents in Afghanistan Are Gaining, Petraeus Says' New York Times. [5]Retrieved on 01-10-08
- ^ Miami Herald: International. 'Afghan war could get worse, top U.S. commander warns' [6]Retrieved on 03-10-08
- ^ Afghanistan: Changing the Frame, Changing the Game. Harvard Kennedy School's Belfer Center
- ^ a b http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-afghan-intel20-2009sep20,0,1183243.story?page=2
- ^ After 9/11, U.S. policy built on world bases
- ^ a b 2005-voa8.cfm Senator Calls for Permanent US Military Bases in Afghanistan
- ^ a b c d Afghan riots bode ill for US long-term plans
- ^ a b Karzai Hints at Permanent U.S. Military Basing
- ^ a b c d e NATO Base In Afghanistan Gets Major Expansion
- ^ U.S. hopes to supply victory
- ^ a b British to play smaller role as US troops fight ‘losing battle’
- ^ a b Permanent U.S. bases? Afghans see an election issue
- ^ a b [7]
- ^ "afnorth.nato.int". Retrieved September 27, 2007.
- ^ "Global Operations". Department of Defence. Retrieved September 20, 2009.
{{cite web}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter:|coauthors=(help) - ^ a b c 47-Nation Pew Global Attitudes Survey p.24, p.116
- ^ Global Unease With Major World Powers
- ^ June 2008 Pew Global Attitudes Project Survey
- ^ 24-Nation Pew Global Attitudes Project Survey p.8, p.29
- ^ "Australians lose faith in Afghan war effort".
- ^ "Government losing support for Afghanistan campaign".
- ^ "Opposition mounts against Afghan war".
- ^ Britons call for troop withdrawal
- ^ Most Britons want troops out of Afghanistan: poll
- ^ Britons Would Leave Afghanistan in 2009
- ^ Views on Iraq and Afghanistan
- ^ a b "America and the War on Terror". AEI Public Opinion Study. Retrieved September 27, 2007. Published July 24, 2008. Cite error: The named reference "AEI" was defined multiple times with different content (see the help page).
- ^ "World Opinion Opposes the Attack on Afghanistan".
- ^ "Strange Victory: A critical appraisal of Operation Enduring Freedom and the Afghanistan war".
- ^ Afghanistan, Opinion survey 2009 , by ICRC and Ipsos
- ^ "COMISAF Initial Assessment (Unclassified)". Retrieved September 24, 2009.
- ^ "Escalation: Bad for Them, Bad for Us. UFPJ Afghanistan Fact Sheet No. 1". February 2009.
- ^ "Afghanistan's civilian deaths mount". Retrieved September 27, 2007.
- ^ http://www.foreignpolicy.com/story/cms.php?story_id=3602
- ^ "The Prof Who Can't Count Straight". Weeklystandard.com. Retrieved October 2, 2008.
- ^ ""Operation Enduring Freedom: Why a Higher Rate of Civilian Bombing Casualties?"".
- ^ ""Strange Victory: A critical appraisal of Operation Enduring Freedom and the Afghanistan war"".
- ^ http://web.archive.org/web/20020604082553/http://www.latimes.com/templates/misc/printstory.jsp?slug=la-060202bombs
- ^ a b ""Number of Afghan civilian deaths in 2008 highest since Taliban ouster, says UN"". February 2009.
- ^ Lehrer, Jim, "Interview with General McKiernan", The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer, Public Broadcasting Service, March 17, 2009.
- ^ Why the Pentagon Axed Its Afghanistan Warlord
- ^ US Will Restrict Afghan Air Strikes to Reduce Civilian Casualties
- ^ "unodc.org". Retrieved September 27, 2007.
- ^ "abcnews.go.com". Retrieved September 27, 2007.
- ^ a b "csmonitor.com". Retrieved September 27, 2007.
- ^ "World failing to dent heroin trade, U.N. warns". CNN.com. October 21, 2009.
- ^ "msnbc.msn.com". Retrieved September 27, 2007.
- ^ "unodc.org". Retrieved September 27, 2007.
- ^ "UN horrified by surge in opium trade in Helmand". The Guardian.
- ^ "Now on PBS". Retrieved July 21, 2008.
- ^ "Enduring Freedom:Abuses by U.S. Forces in Afghanistan".
- ^ "Afghanistan: Bush, Karzai, Musharraf Must Act Now To Stop Militant Abuses".
- ^ "The Taliban's War on Women: A Health and Human Rights Crisis in Afghanistan" (PDF).
- ^ "Who Are the Taliban?".
- ^ "Country Reports on Human Rights Practices".
- ^ "Taliban attack civilians to spread fear: Amnesty". Reuters. April 24, 2007. Retrieved December 9, 2007.
- ^ Afghanistan: Warlords Implicated in New Abuses July 29, 2003
- ^ a b "ABC News: CIA's Harsh Interrogation Techniques Described".
- ^ "The Geneva Conventions".
- ^ "Access deal won't ensure Afghans aren't tortured: Amnesty".
- ^ "U.S. Operated Secret "Dark Prison" in Kabul".
- ^ Carter, Sara A., and Bill Gertz, "Ousted Commander's Aide Blames Deaths On Taliban", Washington Times, May 12, 2009, p. 1.
- ^ Straziuso, Jason, (Associated Press) "U.S.: Afghan Militants Use White Phosphorus", Philadelphia Inquirer, May 12, 2009.
- ^ "EXCLUSIVE - Afghan girl's burns show horror of chemical strike". Reuters India. May 18, 2009.
- ^ "Concerns white phosphorus used in Afghan battle". Yahoo! News. May 10, 2009.
- ^ C. J. Chivers (April 19, 2009). "Pinned Down, a Sprint to Escape Taliban Zone". New York Times, Asia Pacific.
- ^ Alex Kirby (May 22, 2003). "Afghans' uranium levels spark alert". BBC.
- ^ Asaf Durakovic, The Quantitative Analysis of Uranium Isotopes in the Urine of the Civilian Population of Eastern Afghanistan after Operation Enduring Freedom (PDF)
- Notes
- Karon,Tony"Mazar-i Sharif is ours",http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,183885,00.html Nov 09,2001
- Frontline, PBS,http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/campaign/interviews/595.html Aug 02,2002
- The Liberation of Mazar-E Sharif: 5th SF (Special Forces) Group Conducts UW (unconventional warfare) in Afghanistan. Special Warfare 15:34-41 June 2002.
External links
- Troop Levels in Afghanistan Since 2001 - interactive map by The New York Times
- Afghan Elections Dossier, August 2009 - Radio France Internationale
- Afghanistan Conflict Monitor
- Rule of Law in Armed Conflicts Project: Afghanistan
- Afghanistan: Changing the Frame, Changing the Game - Harvard Kennedy School's Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs
- Casualties in Afghanistan & Iraq
- Casualty Monitor - Tracking the war in Afghanistan
- A 2-part story explaining the reasoning of the military campaign from the U.S./UK perspective
- PBS NOW Afghanistan: The Forgotten War
- Dispatches from a Special Operations Sailor Serving in Afghanistan on the Frontlines
- A collection of photo albums of Operation Enduring Freedom
- "Afghanistan and the "New Great Game"". Archived from the original on June 24, 2002. from the UK Royal College for Defense Studies, August 2001
- Afghanistan War Web Site: Comparison with Vietnam and Apocalypse Now
- Jihadi Groups, Nuclear Pakistan and the New Great Game from the U.S. Army War College, August 2001
- India joins anti-Taliban coalition from Janes Intelligence Review, May 2001
- Details of ISAF and PRT deployments in Afghanistan - 2006
- U.S.-Russia Cooperation on Afghanistan: An Exception or a Model? the Center for Strategic & International Studies, September 1, 2001
- Afghanistan Dispatch by Canadian
- Reports of U.S./NATO involements in Afghanistan
- Afghanistan: Europe's Forgotten War, from the European Council on Foreign Relations
- "Struggle for Kabul: The Taliban Advance." Icos report, December 2008
- "Breaking point: measuring progress in Afghanistan." Seema Patel and Steven Ross. Center for Strategic & International Studies (CSIS), February, 2007.
- “Afghan Autopsy” A Dig led by Christian Parenti. Truthdig.com (Nov 28, 2006).
- Neale, Jonathan. “Afghanistan: the case against the ‘good war’ ” International Socialism 120, October 2008.
- Ali, Tariq. "Afghanistan: Mirage of the good war" New Left Review (50), March-April 2008.
- Canadian Peace Alliance. Bring the troops home now: Why a military mission will not bring peace to Afghanistan. February 2007.
- Families for Peaceful Tomorrows. Afghanistan: Ending a Failed Military Strategy.
- The Impact of NATO forces in Afghanistan An analysis of the effects of the U.S. led occupation on the political and social climate of Afghanistan.
- Can Nato Survive Afghanistan A collection of articles examining the challenges facing NATO as it conducts its first mission outside the Euro-Atlantic arena in its nearly sixty-year history. Published by the Program in Arms Control, Disarmament, and International Security (ACDIS), University of Illinois, summer 2008.
- Friedman, George. "Strategic Divergence: The War Against the Taliban and the War Against Al Qaeda." Stratfor Global Intelligence. January 2009.
- Obama’s War: US Involvement in Afghanistan, Past, Present & Future, on Democracy Now!, February 23, 2009 (video and audio).
- Uwe D.: "randnotizen - Hundert Mann und ein Befehl" Als Berufssoldat in Afghanistan, als Mensch in der Heimat - ein Tagebuch zweier Welten. Diary-Documentation (Member of the German ISAF close protecion team 2002-2004, German).
- Since the Birth of the Taliban
- Can the U.S. Win in Afghanistan?
| Overview | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Casualties and losses | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Timeline |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Aftermath | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| War crimes | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Peace process | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Reactions | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Memorials | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||
| Participants |
| ||||||||
| Conflicts |
| ||||||||
| Related |
| ||||||||
- Wikipedia articles in need of updating from April 2008
- Articles with minor POV problems from March 2009
- Battles of the War in Afghanistan (2001–present)
- Battles of the War in Afghanistan (2001–present) involving the United States
- Battles of the War in Afghanistan (2001–present) involving the United Kingdom
- War in Afghanistan (2001–present)
- Wars involving Armenia
- Wars involving Australia
- Wars involving Austria
- Wars involving Azerbaijan
- Wars involving Belgium
- Wars involving Bulgaria
- Wars involving Canada
- Wars involving Croatia
- Wars involving Cyprus
- Wars involving Denmark
- Wars involving Egypt
- Wars involving Estonia
- Wars involving Finland
- Wars involving France
- Wars involving Georgia (country)
- Wars involving Germany
- Wars involving Greece
- Wars involving Hungary
- Wars involving Iceland
- Wars involving India
- Wars involving Ireland
- Wars involving Italy
- Wars involving Japan
- Wars involving Jordan
- Wars involving Latvia
- Wars involving Lithuania
- Wars involving Luxembourg
- Wars involving NATO
- Wars involving the Netherlands
- Wars involving New Zealand
- Wars involving Norway
- Wars involving Poland
- Wars involving Romania
- Wars involving Slovakia
- Wars involving Slovenia
- Wars involving Spain
- Wars involving Sweden
- Wars involving the Taliban
- Wars involving Turkey
- Wars involving the United Kingdom
- Wars involving the United States
- Conflicts in 2001
- Conflicts in 2002
- Conflicts in 2003
- Conflicts in 2004
- Conflicts in 2005
- Conflicts in 2006
- Conflicts in 2007
- Conflicts in 2008
- Conflicts in 2009
- Wars involving the Republic of Macedonia
- Wars involving the Czech Republic