Talk:Republican insurgency in Afghanistan

Editing of "Foreign Involvement" section

A large number of users have asked me to provide reasons for my editing of the "Foreign Involvement" section. It is advised that users first read this section and explain their reasons for reverting my contributions before resorting to threats of sanctions, in line with Wikipedia's own rules for editing that can be found here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Edit_warring.

Firstly, the statement that claimed Sheikh Rasheed said the "top leaders" of the Taliban were trained uses an article from Hindustan Times as a source. Hindustan Times is known for having a clear bias against Pakistan and occasionally providing misleading and sometimes false information, as is mentioned by Media Bias/Fact Check: https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/hindustan-times/. Sheikh Rashid's claim could not be found on any other website nor does Hindustan Times provide the video clip of him saying the statement. Therefore, the statement cannot be added to this article unless a neutral source can be found to back the claim.

Secondly, the line "Pakistan's special forces assisted the Taliban in attacking the resistance." is misleading. The source itself clearly mentions that the allegation of Pakistan's special forces in Panjshir is a claim of Afghan MP Zia Arianjad whereas this article is shown that the allegation is a fact. Therefore, I changed the wording of that line to clearly show that it is an allegation of Zia Arianjad instead of a factual statement. Amaan4210 (talk) 00:40, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

Well, you could have done a bit of research before reverting. It literally took me 60 seconds to find the video recording: [1] (at 01:15). — kashmīrī ^TALK 00:21, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

That is true, I could not find the video before. However, the article of Hindustan Times is still declaring false information. Nowhere does Sheikh Rasheed state that the Taliban were "trained" in Pakistan, only claiming that some of the members grew up there. Therefore, the Hindustan Times article is still not a good enough source to restore the deleted paragraph. The full video of his interview can be found here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0gpfGY6_5Hg —Amaan4210 (talk) 00:53, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

I haven't clicked on MediaBias website because it is considered unreliable on Wikipedia. The India Today link (another reliable source) provided by Kashmiri use the term "harboured" which is not exactly different than "trained". Overall it supports interpretation by Hindustan Times. Your own video link starting from 19:00 shows Rashid saying that Pakistan provided them education, and he use the word "taleem" which can also mean "training"[2] and then the video at 19:16 quotes Rashid as saying "kayi ye Taliban leader jo Top hein..." That means the Hindustan Times's report is entirely correct but your every single claim here is misleading. Georgethedragonslayer (talk) 02:52, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

Rashid says the Taliban leaders were brought up and educated in Pakistan, and some might still be studying in Pakistan (this was Pakistan's 'service'), while on the other hand India was funding terrorism in Afghanistan. In this context, "taleem" means education and not combat training as you are implying. Urdu speakers are welcome to chime in.

As for India Today and Hindustan Times, both have a history of sloppy and unreliable reporting when it comes to Pakistan (as does Indian media in general). For example, recently both of them misquoted a Pakistani diplomat who was speaking on a TV show (India Today, Hindustan Times), and were later proven to be wrong by fact checkers. Cipher21 (talk) 10:23, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

Just a side-note: Just because fact-checkers have proven that stories pushed by certain news sites are false does not mean that the entire news site is untrustworthy. For example, most Western media supported stories during the First Libyan Civil War and Syrian Civil War which were later proven to be fake news. In another case, not so long ago, it was proven that a renowned journalist for Der Spiegel, a well-regarded German newspaper, had literally invented most of his stories. These incidents do not mean that we suddenly have to label The New York Times or Spiegel as completely useless sources. As pointed out above, the Indian media discussed here has also recived international acclaim for some of their reporting. Applodion (talk) 12:36, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

References

News sources can be considered reliable or unreliable in only certain contexts or topics. It's pretty clear that Indian media on the topic of Afghanistan and Pakistan are grossly unreliable as a whole due to repeated bad and false reporting on subjects related to them. Hiding behind awards is just appealing to authority instead of looking at their work on the subject and determining the merits from there. TranceGusto (talk) 08:23, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

End

Seem like we have several sources calling the conflict finished, with a Taliban decisive victory [3], [4], [5], [6]. Do we have similar sources saying the conflict is continuing?--Aréat (talk) 18:53, 18 September 2021 (UTC)

[7] For a name, the conflict is ongoing and the situation fluid. 2405:204:322D:3A66:E5C7:9BB0:1F63:6276 (talk) 04:29, 19 September 2021 (UTC)

Decisive would be overstating it. But account to the New York Times there was no sign of fighting when they visited. --Kathy262 (talk) 06:23, 19 September 2021 (UTC)

They did note that the NRF was still holding out in the mountains, even interviewing one of their members. Just because fighting has ceased for now does not mean the conflict is over, at least not until the NRF is gone. Applodion (talk) 10:29, 19 September 2021 (UTC)

Yes. The mentioned NYT link verifies this. Georgethedragonslayer (talk) 06:43, 20 September 2021 (UTC)

Should we change the name into "Panjshir pocket" or "Panjshir campaign"? This was until now not a prolonged conflict by far. Sgnpkd (talk) 18:14, 20 September 2021 (UTC)

Pakistan 3

Why is Pakistan still listed as a belligerent, when it has been clarified and well established, that they were fake news. We have users on this talk page, literally implying India Today as being one of the greatest newspapers. It doesn't take a genius to realise that this was a rumour started by Indian Media or at least a rumour which started on Social Media and then propagated through Indian Media, and now turned into a fact through Wikipedia, and abundance of references have been cited refuting this, and considering the fact that the soft vote clearly showed that more users were opposed to the references cited, it really shouldn't be on here. :
>> Taimoor Ahmed^{(Send a Message?)} 17:55, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

Please read the source. There were fake news, yes, but also reports by much more credible sources, including some governments and people from Panjshir. Applodion (talk) 22:53, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

@Applodion: Who are these "credible" sources, that don't go against WP:QS? Both references cited were refuted. I see no reason for them to be there, and if there are "credible" sources then why not provide those and replace it with the references which have been clearly refuted. :
>> Taimoor Ahmed^{(Send a Message?)} 15:34, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

The claims by the NRF and other Panjshiris were never refuted. The claims by Iran were not disproven. No one has disproven the statements of Babak Taghvaee and Panjshir governor Kamaluddin Nezami either. Applodion (talk) 15:57, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

@Applodion: Please ping me, when you respond. Also how are they reliable sources? I think it was you who said that the media was consistently monitoring/reporting on Panjshir? Yet the only "sources" you have, after Indian Media being utterly refuted, is one 1. (Without disrespect) a government mouthpiece, and 2. An Iranian newspaper/journalist - which can be argued as a circular reference. I have yet to see any reliable source actually bringing proof that Pakistan had engaged in this conflict. All these so called "sources" are WP:QS.  :
>> Taimoor Ahmed^{(Send a Message?)} 16:30, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

@Taimoorahmed11: I said that the media focus on Panjshir compared to the Hazara revolts in central Afghanistan; overall the reporting by international media on this conflict is quite lacking. Anyway, your view of these sources is your view. The Indian media's claims have not been "utterly refuted"; the only refuted thing was the claims about some fake video, and this video was never used as a source for this article. When Afghan sources (including locals in the conflict zone), the Iranian government, an expert (who, btw, is Iranian but has no good relationship with the Iranian government), and Indian media are all claiming something, such claims cannot be dismissed outright. Applodion (talk) 21:13, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

@Applodion: I'm sorry but this is incredible! Again, it doesn't take a genius to figure out that this was still a rumour which has been turned into a fact. Both references, India Today and "The Week", rely on a former Iranian MP, who fails to, just like the newspapers fail to, provide any sort of proof that any sort of Pakistani Airforce or military was a part of this conflict. The "proof" that was given was broadcast on air on Indian news channels as addendum to these headlines. It doesn't take a genius to put two and two together to understand that 1. This was unconfirmed rumour that Indian Media rushed to "report" on, hence why whenever you search "Pakistan" and "Panjshir", users only get Indian Newspapers, not even Iranian newspapers, where the story originates from, and 2. In a bid to provide "proof" when they realised that actually word of mouth has no value, Indian Media just rushed to publish any "proof" they were receiving, hence why we got clips of video games, and other unrelated clips being passed of as "Pakistani Airforce". There was no fact checking! This is all a shambles.

I don't understand what's so difficult here? Under WP:Verifiability#Sources that are usually not reliable, it states:

Questionable sources are those that have a poor reputation for checking the facts, lack meaningful editorial oversight, or have an apparent conflict of interest.

Such sources include websites and publications expressing views that are widely considered by other sources to be extremist or promotional, or that rely heavily on unsubstantiated gossip, rumor or personal opinion. Questionable sources should be used only as sources for material on themselves, such as in articles about themselves; see below. They are not suitable sources for contentious claims about others.

This is literally an example of it 🧐. They are unreliable and unsuitable, as they have, on many occasions, published and propagated fake news against Pakistan and especially here they are not verifiable and certainly not neutral. So no it's not "my view". It is a question of verifiability, which you are trying to play down, for whatever reason. :
>> Taimoor Ahmed^{(Send a Message?)} 01:13, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

@Taimoorahmed11: Please first read the refs in the "foreign involvement" section; the Indian media refs provided in the infobox are not the only ones supporting Pakistani involvement, as I explained above. Personally, I regard the Indian media refs as the least important sources here. Applodion (talk) 11:59, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

@Taimoorahmed11: You say that yet you made zero efforts to remove the paragraph which cites only Indian newspapers - not to mention that only two references in the infobox are Indian Newspapers, and here you are strongly defending them, but you have the audacity to say: "Personally, I regard the Indian media refs as the least important sources here." I mean if it's 'too much' for you to handle - I'll make some edits? On top of that, let's say you're being honest about your above statement - the only two references are 1. TOLONews and 2. The Europa website - which isn't even meant to be a reference as it is a motion waiting to be discussed (?) - so theoretically it's a circular reference - nothing here is presented as facts. So what you're telling me is that you will base this entire accusation on an article written by ToloNews, which has already been discussed in the previous sections? I mean that's great "proof" there. :
>> Taimoor Ahmed^{(Send a Message?)} 17:57, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

@Taimoorahmed11: Look, I am not "strongly defending" the Indian sources. I am just plainly stating that your arguments about them being unreliable are your opinion, and your arguments do not suffice to cause their removal. The sourcing of the Pakistani involvement was discussed in depth in a discussion above, where the counter-arguments mostly boiled down to "I don't think that x source is reliable" without firmly proving that; so far, you do the same. You just claim that whatever source is stating that Pakistan is involved in unreliable or a "circular reference" without actually proving it. Your concern about the bias and sensationalism showcased by some Indian outlets is certainly valid; however, just because Indian news have pushed some fake news stories does not mean all their stories are trash. My point about the Indian sources being less important was not a comment about their reliabilty; it was based on the fact that we literally have Afghans in Panjshir who claim that Pakistani drones bombed the NRF. These are biased people, sure, but essentially eyewitnesses. The main reason why the claims about Pakistani involvement should be included (mind you, claim; the article goes out of its way to state that Pakistani involvement in not confirmed) is the sheer number of sources saying that Pakistan is involved. If it were only some, we could ignore it. But with so many? We have to mention it.
And again: No, Indian sources are not inherently unreliable. No, the Iranian government is not inherently unreliable. No, locals in Afghanistan are not inherently unreliable. The same goes for ToloNews: So far, the only people claiming that ToloNews is unreliable are those who just say that all sources alledging Pakistani involvement are unreliable, always without any firm proof. Applodion (talk) 18:26, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

@Applodion: I forgot that this ridiculous discussion still existed. No you are defending it. How can you even deny that at this stage? I'm literally saying that give better references, yet you're choosing to defend existing ones. You are out here basing this entirely Indian Media - and yes it is! Tell me how many references are not Indian Media? :::::::::I am just plainly stating that your arguments about them being unreliable are your opinion, and your arguments do not suffice to cause their removal ~ Oh so articles being full of fake news, propaganda, bias, and rumour-turned facts doesn't hit the criteria of them being removed? 😂 - what a joke this is!

"I don't think that x source is reliable" I am literally losing my patience at this point. IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH ME OR MY OPINION! Are you living under a rock, or are you a genuine shill for Indian Media?

is involved in unreliable or a "circular reference" without actually proving it. Oh so claiming the Europa website to be reference when for 1. It's a motion being presented, NOT facts, 2. Is a "reference" that came out a week later after all this propaganda with Wikipedia backing it, only for Wikipedia to turn around and use the Europa Website to strengthen this propaganda - that isn't a circular reference? Unbelievable. :
>> Taimoor Ahmed^{(Send a Message?)} 23:07, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

@Taimoorahmed11: You are clearly convinced of your own view of things, but that does not change the simple fact that your arguments are not good enough to warrant the removal of sources. You have still not adressed the fact that many sources besides Indian media say the same (i.e. Iran, analysts, and Afghans), and that just because some Indian news sites are crap does not mean that we cannot use Indian media at all. You have not proven that the Indian news references used in this article are full of lies - you only point at other Indian reports which are not cited here, and say that we thus have to disregard all Indian media. You also have no proof whatsoever that any of these so-called "circular sources" are actually circular. If "came out a week later after all this propaganda with Wikipedia backing it" is a reason to regard a source as circular, we would have to nuke Wikipedia because by that logic every source since Wikipedia's start would be "circular". Applodion (talk) 23:24, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

End Date

It seems the fighting has pretty much stopped, with the resistance leaders having fled Afghanistan. Here are two sources which basically say that the conflict has come to an end with the departure of the leaders:

https://www.tribuneindia.com/news/world/panjshir-resistance-folds-up-for-now-saleh-reportedly-in-tajikistan-massoud-in-france-315178

https://nationalinterest.org/blog/middle-east-watch/after-renegade-province%E2%80%99s-fall-panjshir-resistance-leaders-surface-tajikistan

Note that the sources say the conflict has transferred from military clashes, what this article is about, to political dispute, which this article isn't about. I think this conflict should be given an end date. This post is for discussion; with these sources, what do you think? 2601:85:C101:C9D0:5ED:6FC:9C0D:DA4D (talk) 21:26, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

Most sources concur that a large number of militants and civilians have fled into the mountains; until these people actually surrender, we should not declare the conflict over. Applodion (talk) 22:55, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

I agree. This article seems to be grasping at any scrap of information to make it look like an active military conflict is still ongoing. For instance the infobox and description mention that militias are resisting the taliban in other provinces even though there haven't been any reports of fighting for weeks. - 85.94.240.45

That's because the media only cared about Panjshir. The only sources reporting the Hazara revolts were insiders / academics who have covered the Afghanistan conflict for years. The latter only release updates every few weeks or so, however, meaning we have no idea what is going on in central Afghanistan at the moment. Applodion (talk) 10:29, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

Islamic State - Khorasan Province

Hello, I'm PatriotMapperCDP. I believe that we should add the Islamic State - Khorasan Province to the belligerents section either as a third and seperate side or part of the National Resistance Front of Afghanistan side separated by the '----' thing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by PatriotMapperCDP (talk • contribs) 19:19, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

PatriotMapperCDP Do you have reliable sources saying ISKP have been involved in the conflict? BSMRD (talk) 19:29, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

• User:BSMRD, the following sources show events related to IS-KP and the Taliban that have taken place in Afghanistan during the Panjshir conflict. https://asia.nikkei.com/Politics/International-relations/Afghanistan-turmoil/Afghan-chaos-mounts-as-ISIS-K-tries-to-tarnish-Taliban-triumph https://edition.cnn.com/world/live-news/afghanistan-news-taliban-refugees-08-26-21-intl https://www.jpost.com/breaking-news/large-explosion-at-abbey-gate-at-the-kabul-airport-report-677790 https://www.thedailybeast.com/explosion-reported-outside-kabul-airport https://www.cnn.com/2021/08/26/asia/afghanistan-kabul-airport-blast-intl/index.html https://www.nytimes.com/2021/08/27/us/politics/marines-kabul-airport-attack.html https://www.foxnews.com/live-news/live-updates-taliban-gain-more-ground-in-afghanistan-as-they-close-in-on-kabul#post-444 https://www.thestar.com.my/news/nation/2021/08/28/taliban-claims-to-have-caught-two-malaysians-fighting-for-is-k-in-kabul https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2021/08/27/ambitious-new-isis-k-leader-becomes-talibans-wanted-enemy-kabul/ https://www.ndtv.com/world-news/taliban-provincial-governor-mullah-neda-mohammad-vows-to-fight-isis-2531541 https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2021/9/18/afghanistan-several-reported-dead-jalalabad-blasts User:PatriotMapperCDP (talk)

PatriotMapperCDP Not what I meant. Do you have evidence of ISKP fighting in Panjshir? We already have an article about the Islamic State-Taliban conflict. BSMRD (talk)

BSMRD Not that I can find, however we did show ISKP as part of the War in Afghanistan (2001-2021) and the Islamic State-Taliban conflict. On top of this, we have covered battles outside Panjshir and inside Panjshir, so it wouldn't be unreasonable to show it in the infobox. On top of this, there is potential for ISKP to fight in Panjshir (https://www.outlookindia.com/website/story/world-news-explained-the-warlords-that-will-decide-future-course-of-civil-war-in-afghanistan/393801). PatriotMapperCDP (talk)

Disputed U.S. Statement

Despite U.S. intelligence that Massoud and Saleh have fled Panjshir shortly after September 6th, there is just way too much evidence that has proven this claim is inaccurate. The videos and images of NRF fighters along with Massoud show that the intelligence is disputed, and not a clear confirmation, especially as Tajikistan rejects this claim, I will try to post a source for this. PanjshirLions (talk) 05:25, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/resistance-leaders-massoud-saleh-still-afghanistan-diplomat-says-2021-09-08/ PanjshirLions (talk) 05:27, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

https://mobile.twitter.com/NRFmojahed/status/1438552975769849856 PanjshirLions (talk) 05:29, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

https://mobile.twitter.com/NRFmojahed/status/1437586321959231489 PanjshirLions (talk) 05:31, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

Tense change

Should the tense be changed to past tense? Both leaders of the resistance have left Afghanistan and there is no more conflict. See here. —  Melofors  TC 19:40, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

It would need more than a report in the Tribune. Although not reliable, at Twitter there are reports of the fight continuing (adopting guerrilla tactics), and resistance leaders pledging to continue the fight. Also talk of biding their time (winter is approaching) and establishing supply lines. So we need more reliable sources. Esowteric + Talk + Breadcrumbs 19:57, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

Still seems to be a crackdown at least: Taliban Brutally Executes Child Whose Father They Suspected To Be Resistance Member in International Business Times. --Kathy262 (talk) 06:11, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 26 September 2021

In the section "Timeline", "Taliban siege of Panjshir valley" here is my proposed prose:

A journalist from Foreign Policy revealed that leaders of the Afghan resistance alongside with former senior figures of the toppled Ghani administration are regrouping with the aim of forming a government in exile.

It contains enough informations it needs. El Boulboul (talk) 20:58, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

References

 Not done for now: I don't think this is noteworthy at this point, as nothing has actually happened. People discussing maybe forming a government in exile is quite different than actually forming a government in exile. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 10:53, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

Time to call this one a Taliban win

All the international media are no longer challenging it. I think it is time to call it. Also, witht he Taliban victory here, it effectively ends the greater Afghanistan Conflict spawned when the Sovs invaded it. We're all out, the Taliban have taken over unchallenged. Any new Afghanistan Conflict is, well, it would be something brand new. It is time to put that article to bed too. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.185.246.108 (talk) 14:46, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

Off-topic. This is an encyclopedia article related to people killing each other in relation to sociopolitical control; it is not a sports show. Boud (talk) 15:40, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

See Talk:Panjshir conflict#Tense change. —  Melofors  TC 04:16, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

Massoud and Salah Tajikistan false

There was a major incorrection in the statement that Massoud and Saleh fled. This is false as countries like Tajikistan have confirmed they did not flee, and the "U.S." intelligence has been proven false too as images of Ahmad Massoud leading prayers came out as well as other videos. If Amrullah Saleh left it was to get help from the international Community, which there's no solid proof he did. Also Ahmad Massoud did not flee Panjshir, he's staying there no matter what, and if he did the resistance could likely collapse. Major Source: https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/resistance-leaders-massoud-saleh-still-afghanistan-diplomat-says-2021-09-08/ PanjshirLions (talk) 05:11, 2 October 2021 (UTC)

Also there have been some ridiculously false claims such as Massoud fleeing to France. This Is extremely unlikely and he as well as Saleh declared they will be fighting till the death. PanjshirLions (talk) 05:15, 2 October 2021 (UTC)

Test PanjshirLions (talk) 05:22, 2 October 2021 (UTC)

Note: Wikipedia is glitching and it stopped allowing me to post, but I will continue to work on the problem. PanjshirLions (talk) 05:23, 2 October 2021 (UTC)

Note: I am also having a hard time posting sources but will continue to work on the issue PanjshirLions (talk) 05:25, 2 October 2021 (UTC)

https://www.farsnews.ir/en/news/14000620000590/Srce-Ahmad-Massd-Sill-in-Afghanisan PanjshirLions (talk) 05:25, 2 October 2021 (UTC)

The propaganda seriously needs to stop, the resistance just released in interview on france news PanjshirLions (talk) 08:30, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

The old sources were refuting old claims about Massoud and Saleh having fled into exile. You need newer sources to refute the new claims. Applodion (talk) 23:26, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

I have updated the article with newer NRF denials, although also added that most experts agree that Saleh and Massoud have relocated to Tajikistan. Applodion (talk) 23:38, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

Alright I will gather some new resources PanjshirLions (talk) 07:19, 6 October 2021 (UTC)

https://amp.france24.com/en/tv-shows/the-interview/20211005-taliban-not-victorious-in-afghanistan-s-panjshir-region-parallel-govt-official-says PanjshirLions (talk) 03:20, 7 October 2021 (UTC)

"Ali Maisam Nazary added that Ahmad Massoud, the leader of the anti-Taliban NRF, "is inside the country", is not planning on leaving Afghanistan, and is "going to continue resistance until we achieve freedom and we achieve victory." PanjshirLions (talk) 03:22, 7 October 2021 (UTC)