Taliban Terrorizes Its Way Across Pakistan
Militants Expand Their Power Into Mountainous Region Far From Traditional Strongholds
-
-
Photo
Pakistani Taliban militants publicly flog an alleged narcotic smuggler in Charbagh in Pakistan's troubled Swat valley on Dec. 15, 2008. (AP)
-
Photo
Local people gather around what remains of a police station allegedly destroyed by a Taliban militant suicide attack in the Mingora district of Pakistan's troubled Swat valley on Dec. 29, 2008. (AP PHOTO)
-
Photo
In this Oct. 21, 2008 file photo, a World Food Program warehouse allegedly set fire by Pakistani Taliban militants burns, as a crowd gathers in Kanju in Pakistan's troubled Swat valley. (AP PHOTO)
-
-
Photo Essay
Pakistan: Soldiers & Refugees
A two-month military offensive in the Bajur tribal region displaces thousands.
-
Fast Facts
Pakistan
Learn about the people, economy and history.
The deteriorating situation in the former tourist haven comes despite an army offensive that began in 2007 and an attempted peace deal. It is especially worrisome to Pakistani officials because the valley lies outside the areas where al Qaeda and Taliban militants have traditionally operated and where the military is staging a separate offensive.
"You can't imagine how bad it is," said Muzaffar ul-Mulk, a federal lawmaker whose home in Swat was attacked by bomb-toting assailants in mid-December, weeks after he left. "It's worse day by day."
The Taliban activity in northwest Pakistan also comes as the country shifts forces east to the Indian border because of tensions over last month's terrorist attacks in Mumbai, potentially giving insurgents more space to maneuver along the Afghan frontier.
Militants began preying on Swat's lush mountain ranges about two years ago, and it is now too dangerous for foreign and Pakistani journalists to visit. Interviews with residents, lawmakers and officials who have fled the region paint a dire picture.
A suicide blast killed 40 people Sunday at a polling station in Buner, an area bordering Swat that had been relatively peaceful. The attack underscored fears that even so-called "settled" regions presumptively under government control are increasingly unsafe.
The 3,500-square-mile Swat Valley lies less than 100 miles from the capital, Islamabad.
A senior government official said he feared there could be a spillover effect if the government lost control of Swat and allowed the insurgency to infect other areas. Like nearly everyone interviewed, the official requested anonymity for fear of reprisal by militants.
Officials estimate that up to a third of Swat's 1.5 million people have left the area. Salah-ud-Din, who oversees relief efforts in Swat for the International Committee of the Red Cross, estimated that 80 percent of the valley is now under Taliban control.
Swat's militants are led by Maulana Fazlullah, a cleric who rose to prominence through radio broadcasts demanding the imposition of a harsh brand of Islamic law. His appeal tapped into widespread frustration with the area's inefficient judicial system.
Most of the insurgents are easy to spot with long hair, beards, rifles, camouflage vests and running shoes. They number at most 2,000, according to people who were interviewed.
In some places, just a handful of insurgents can control a village. They rule by fear: beheading government sympathizers, blowing up bridges and demanding women wear all-encompassing burqas.
They have also set up a parallel administration with courts, taxes, patrols and checkpoints, according to lawmakers and officials. And they are suspected of burning scores of girls' schools.
In mid-December, Taliban fighters killed a young member of a Sufi-influenced Muslim group who had tried to raise a militia against them. The militants later dug up Pir Samiullah's corpse and hung it for two days in a village square - partly to prove to his followers that he was not a superhuman saint, a security official said on condition of anonymity.
A lawmaker and the senior Swat government official said business and landowners had been told to give two-thirds of their income to the militants. Some local media reported last week that the militants have pronounced a ban on female education effective in mid-January.
Several people interviewed said the regional government made a mistake in May when it struck a peace deal with the militants. The agreement fell apart within two months but let the insurgents regroup.
The Swat insurgency also includes Afghan and other fighters from outside the valley, security officials said.
Any movement of Pakistani troops from the Swat Valley and tribal areas to the Indian border will concern the United States and other Western countries, which want Pakistan to focus on the al Qaeda threat near Afghanistan.
On Friday, Pakistani intelligence officials said thousands of troops were being shifted toward the border with India, which blames Pakistani militants for terrorist attacks in Mumbai last month that killed 164 people. But there has been no sign yet of a major buildup near India.
"The terrorists' aim in Mumbai was precisely this - to get the Pakistani army to withdraw from the western border and mount operations on the east," said Ahmed Rashid, a journalist and author who has written extensively about militancy in the region.
"The terrorists are not going to be sitting still. They are not going to be adhering to any sort of cease-fire while the army takes on the Indian threat. They are going to occupy the vacuum the army will create."
Residents and officials from the Swat Valley were critical of the army offensive there, saying troops appeared to be confined to their posts and often killed civilians when firing artillery at suspected militant targets.
The military has deployed some 100,000 troops through the northwest.
A government official familiar with security issues estimated that some 10,000 paramilitary and army troops had killed 300 to 400 militants in Swat since 2007, while about 130 troops were killed. Authorities have not released details of civilian casualties, and it was unclear if they were even being tallied.
The official, who insisted on anonymity because of the issue's sensitivity, disputed assertions that militants had overrun the valley, but said a spotty supply line was hampering operations. He said the army had to man some Swat police stations because the police force there had been decimated by desertions and militant killings.
A Swat militant boasted that "we are doing our activities wherever we want, and the army is confined to their living places."
"They cannot move independently like us," said the man, who was reached over the phone and gave his name as Muzaffarul Haq. He claimed the Swat militants had no al Qaeda or foreign connections, but that they supported all groups that shared the goal of imposing Islamic law.
"With the grace of Allah, there is no dearth of funds, weapons or rations," he said. "Our women are providing cooked food for those who are struggling in Allah's path. Our children are getting prepared for jihad."
© MMVIII The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.



No, and neither does the right wing. They have a lot in common.
It''s like Colin Powell said right after 9/11, "Pakistan has sent out more terrorists than anyplace else".
Let ''em live with what they spawned.
Posted by LordSunTzu at 09:57 PM : Dec 29, 2008
Not unless they were Taliban/muslim.
If Bush the moron had just finished the job with the Taliban instead of diverting resources into stealing Iraq''s oil, this disaster would not be happening.
Undismayed by his failure to destroy the Taliban, but somehow openly contemptuous of bin Laden, Bush turned his attention and American military assets to Iraq. After six long years, Bush turned back to Afghanistan, now to find a resurgent Taliban in charge of much of Afghanistan AND too much of Pakistan.
This is what is termed a "policy failure". But when the Afghan disaster is traceable directly to lack of due diligence and a mammoth hubris, the Bush failure is criminal neglect of office.
---
If Afghan and Pakistan liberals champion policies of social justice-- empowering the poor to chart their own economic course, of course the Taliban would not.
If Afghan and Pakistan liberals represent the freedom to dissent and value civil liberties, of course the Taliban would not.
If Afghan and Pakistan liberals oppose foolish wars of conquest in Iraq and elsewhere, this might endanger the future caliphate, so of course, the Taliban would not.
If Afghan and Pakistan liberals champion the right of all nationalities, both genders and all faiths to have equal rights under the law, of course, the Taliban would not.
In fact, the GOP and its abjectly corrupt camp followers share a lot with the Taliban, including a distaste for free elections and vigorous efforts to register all voters.
Fundamentally, the GOP-- like the Taliban-- is the enemy of democracy and the rule of law, since one of its most recent prophets explicitly stated, "Extremism in defense of liberty is no vice."
LordSunTzu said, "would the taliban tolerate liberals???"
---
And finally, the most recent GOP occupant of the White House is the individual who, in November, 2005-- facing an assembly of his own party members critical of his NSA spying program-- bristled like a teenager caught drinking after curfew.
"Stop throwing the Constitution in my face!" he shouted. "It''s just a GD)((#@*! piece of paper!"
---
Advance to what? The West does not witness consistently to the Christian religious principles you suppose it to embody.
Aside from the fact the United States of America never was ordained as a Puritan colony, to make it into one would convert the West to the theocratic state Puritans (and at least some Islamists) favor.
But the real problem with supposing Westerners embody Christian virtue is pointed out by G.K. Chesterton, "Christianity has not been tried and found wanting; it has been found difficult and not tried."
Posted by CaribouBarbi at 12:56 AM : Dec 30, 2008
How true and you know what is funny the neocon party still says it has nothing to be sorry for.
But fine they were warned in 2006 to moderate or they would be moderated. They didn''t listen and lost control of both houses. They were warned again through 2007 and 2008 to moderate or they would be broken. They didn''t listen so we took the White House and even more congress seats away. Now they are being warned again moderate or die.
I wonder if they will listen.
They know how to "get er done"! Can''t think of a greater bunch of guys to "fix" Pakistan, and as they are heading to the war zone--we can all sing "bring in the clowns"!
Way to go, Bush. Worst president ever.
Oh, jamesm12341, I''ll give you the benefit of the doubt and figure you''re being picky. There is no song entitled "Bring In the Clowns" but there is one titled "SEND In the Clowns". It was written by Stephen Sondheim for his musical "A Little Night Music." The best-known performance was by Judy Collins, though Barbra Streisand did a good cover of it, too.
Paste this into your browser:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zvzUdM29_uA
It can be expected that the Taliban might take over Pakistan which would mean war with India. And with the US bogged down in Afghanistan, like Russia was in the 1980''s (we never learn from history!), it is obvious that the "terrrrrorists" which the once-Great Emperor Bush vowed to everyone he would destroy (Emperor Bush II was good at making promises he never kept!), are stronger than ever.
Such is the legacy of a idiot like the once-Great Emperor Bush II and the foreign policy of VP Darth Vader Cheney.
SIG HEIL, WHAT DO YOU MEAN "ONCE-GREAT"!!!, BUSH!!!
Maybe it would be best if the Taliban took over. We could then use the pretext of securing their nuclear weapons to wipe the Taliban and alQaeda off the face of the map once and for all. Once trapped in Pakistan they would have no place to run as they have enemies on all 4 borders. A day without islamic terrorists would truly be a sunny, wonderful day!
CaribouBarbi at 12:56 AM : Dec 30, 2008
alphaa10000 at 01:50 AM : Dec 30, 2008
alphaa10000 at 02:02 AM : Dec 30, 2008
Puritan9 at 02:07 AM : Dec 30, 2008
alphaa10000 at 02:08 AM : Dec 30, 2008
alphaa10000 at 02:30 AM : Dec 30, 2008
antoniof123 at 08:58 AM : Dec 30, 2008
creeper00 at 11:27 AM : Dec 30, 2008
walt1944 at 11:44 AM : Dec 30, 2008
jbrown88881 at 12:22 PM : Dec 30, 2008
babooph at 01:18 PM : Dec 30, 2008
... and one stupid one.
Neo269 at 01:23 PM : Dec 30, 2008
President Obama is to oversee the order of approximately 40,000 American troops transfered into Afganistan to prosecute the war to a conclusion. You can be sure it will be BLOODY and COSTLY and will be WORSE before the assessments come in. Politically, the Middle East will be host to a new Initiative to Create the State of Palestine next to Israel while the Taliban and Al Quaeda are pressed into an enclave in northern Pakistan to sue to end the conflict or be wiped out.
Unlike Bush promising "to end the conflict at a time and place of our choosing" September 14, 2001.....President Barack Hussein Obama will do the job BUSH refused to do and prosecute the war to a conclusion.
-
by nincomp
January 1, 2009 2:15 AM EST
- Non-Muslims want Egypt as a model for all Islamic countries, where they own the government that does all the dirty work for them like suppressing the people and no opposition to them. Pakistan has proven to be difficult despite all the tries by West to be like egypt and it''s because of the will power of people. You can keep on calling this talibization or whatever your "analysts" tell you but this is the will of people that can''t be defeated.
-
Reply to this comment
-
See all 32 Comments