So it is easy to skip stories like Azam Ahmed's "Taliban Making Military Gains in Afghanistan, " which appeared in the Sunday paper yesterday, the gist of which is the Taliban is resurgent:
At a time when an election crisis is threatening the stability of the government, the Taliban’s increasingly aggressive campaign is threatening another crucial facet of the American withdrawal plan, full security by Afghan forces this year.
“They are running a series of tests right now at the military level, seeing how people respond,” one Western official said, describing a Taliban effort to gauge how quickly they could advance. “They are trying to figure out: Can they do it now, or will it have to wait” until after the American withdrawal, the official added, speaking on the condition of anonymity because the coalition has officially ceded security control.
Interviews with local officials and residents in several strategic areas around the country suggest that, given the success of their attacks, the Taliban are growing bolder just two months into the fighting season, at great cost to Afghan military and police forces.
In Kapisa, a verdant province just north of Kabul that includes a vital highway to northern Afghanistan, insurgents are openly challenging and even driving away the security forces in several districts. Security forces in Tagab District take fire daily from the Taliban, who control everything but the district center. Insurgents in Alasay District, northeast of Kabul, recently laid siege to an entire valley for more than a week, forcing hundreds of residents and 45 police officers to flee. At least some of the local police in a neighboring district have cut deals with the Taliban to save themselves.To give you an idea of how dire the loss of authority in Kapisa is, Bagram Airfield, the seat of U.S. power in Afghanistan, lies just outside the boundaries of the province.
This morning Carlotta Gall and Taimoor Shah report in "After Losing Province in 2010, Afghan Taliban Strike Back" that the Taliban, in addition to bold moves north of Kabul, are simultaneously making an audacious move to assert control of Kandahar:
In an annual public statement over the weekend for the holiday of Eid al-Fitr, the Taliban’s supreme leader, Mullah Muhammad Omar, reiterated his determination to re-establish an Islamic emirate in Afghanistan. The proof was borne out by a multifront offensive in Kandahar involving hundreds of Taliban fighters that was seemingly timed to take advantage of Eid al-Fitr, which closes the holy month of Ramadan.The question is not if but when the Taliban returns to power. The situation is similar to when the Soviets pulled out. The contested presidential election pitting candidates Abdullah Abdullah and Ashraf Ghani against one another is likely to devolve into some form of armed conflict. The Taliban will sweep in with the promise of restored order. Then, very soon, we will have an Islamic State stretching from northern Syria up to the border of Iran before picking back up in Afghanistan and running all the way to the Pakistan's Federally Administered Tribal Areas. The pressure on Iran will be enormous.
This morning Jodi Rudoren and Ben Hubbard in "Despite Gains, Hamas Sees a Fight for Its Existence and Presses Ahead" have a useful synopsis of where we are with the war raging between Israel and Hamas in Gaza:
With large sections of Gaza devastated and the Palestinian death toll topping 1,000, Hamas waffled over the weekend on the United Nations’ calls for a “humanitarian pause” in hostilities. It said Saturday night that such a pause was unacceptable as long as Israeli troops maintained positions and limited operations inside Gaza, then hours later declared its own pause without conditions, a bewildering back-and-forth that made it difficult to glean a clear strategy.
Politically isolated after breaks with Syria, Iran and especially Egypt, and its effort at reconciling with the Palestinian factions that rule the West Bank having failed to bear fruit, Hamas has all but given up on governing Gaza to focus on the battlefield. Israelis have expressed outrage that thousands of tons of concrete built a vast network of tunnels rather than schools or hospitals, but that argument has little traction in Gaza, where many see violence as the only language that works.
Though weary of war, many Gazans see the so-called resistance as the only possible path to pressing Israel and Egypt to open border crossings, and to ending Israel’s “siege” on imports and exports and naval “blockade.” Hamas and its backers in Qatar and Turkey have also been calling for a seaport and airport in the coastal enclave.
“The only option left for us was to defend ourselves and to make Israel bleed the way that we have been bleeding all these years,” said Ahmed Yousef, a former Hamas official who remains close to its leaders. “It is not acceptable to go back to a situation where we are being squeezed to death and where the whole society is being paralyzed.”
Faraj al-Loul, a plumber shopping for vegetables on Sunday in a Gaza City market, echoed the opinions of many residents interviewed who said life had become so miserable that they were willing to suffer the high costs of war if it could bring change.
“We want a cease-fire, of course, but it has to be based on the demands of the resistance,” he said. “If they refuse to open the crossings, then we’ll all become martyrs, God willing.”Michael Gordon provides a summary, "Even Gaza Truce Is Hard to Win, Kerry Is Finding,"
of the U.S. Secretary of State's shuttle diplomacy last week to secure a ceasefire between Israel and Hamas. It does not look good. Israel reacted negatively to the tentative agreement that Kerry concocted, which would have locked in a week-long ceasefire during which negotiations over an "enduring solution" to Gaza's myriad crises would begin.
After five days of marathon diplomacy in Egypt and Israel, Mr. Kerry presented Mr. Netanyahu with a confidential draft, titled “Framework for Humanitarian Cease-Fire in Gaza.”
A version of the document, which was presented on Friday, stated that a seven-day cease-fire was to be established by Sunday.
Two days later, talks would begin in Cairo between Israel and the Palestinians on achieving an “enduring solution” to the crisis in Gaza, a phrase that Hamas could read as the lifting of the economic embargo and that Mr. Netanyahu could interpret as the neutralization of the group’s military threat to Israel.
The draft, which was obtained by The New York Times, noted that the parties would “refrain from conducting any military or security targeting of each other.” But it did not explicitly call on Israel to stop sealing the tunnels during the humanitarian pause. Those operations have continued during recent cease-fire efforts, creating anger on the Palestinian side.Clearly, this favored the Israelis because it gave them a way to stop their slaughter of innocents while maintaining the status quo ante. Everyone knows that Israel will never allow Gaza to open its borders. So they could have played the bargaining charade, deescalated the violence in Gaza and then when talks inevitably foundered and Hamas resumed its rocketry, Israel could have responded in a way that was not based on military overkill.
That Israel interpreted Kerry's proposal as pro-Hamas is a bad sign, a mark of a nation seriously out of whack. Netanyahu's government appears to be pushing for genocide in Gaza in order to stop the rockets. The political situation favors Israel. Hamas' siding with the Salafis in Syria isolated it from Iran and Hezbollah. Morsi's ouster by the military in Egypt eliminated the group's chief benefactor. In the United States, there is no politician who will stand up to Israel.
Expect the slaughter of Palestinians to continue.
No comments:
Post a Comment