September 8, 2021 • 32 mins
The situation in Afghanistan is dominating headlines. But how much sense does it make to you? The Taliban, ISIS K, TTP, Al Qaeda - does it feel like you’ve missed the chance to understand what’s going on? We have the answer. In this special edition we unravel who is who, where they’ve come from, what they want and, crucially, as we mark the 20th anniversary of 9/11, what it means for our safety.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Adnan Sarwaw (00:00):
Before we begin, this is a podcast about terrorism, which
means we do talk about acts of terror and extreme
violence, sometimes in quite a lot of detail. So you
might find some of the following material upsetting. Hello, I'm
Adnan Sarwaw. This is a special edition of Taking Apart
Terror. You've probably heard something about this.
Speaker 2 (00:22):
Kabul is falling now.
Speaker 3 (00:24):
Afghans are thronging to Kabul's airport.
Adnan Sarwaw (00:26):
As well as this.
Speaker 4 (00:27):
There has been a suicide bombing at Kabul airport in
Afghanistan where (inaudible) .
Adnan Sarwaw (00:32):
The world looked on in shock as the Taliban tore
through Afghanistan in the wake of the Western forces departure.
Then in horror as suicide bombers, detonated their devices outside
the main airport. But who are the Taliban and what are
their aims? It wasn't them that were responsible for the
bombings. It was something called ISIS- K or ISIS Khorasan,
a name most of us were hearing for the first
(00:54):
time. Our aim with Taking Apart Terror is to explain
how terrorist groups work, what they do and why. So
in this special program, we're going to try and unravel
the current situation in Afghanistan. As we face the 20th
anniversary of the 9/ 11 attacks, understand what it means
for the country, the region and the world. Or as
we are calling this edition, Afghanistan
(01:16):
become more dangerous? We've gathered together a panel, all of
whom have specialist knowledge of Afghanistan. Its past, its present,
and have some handle on its future. So we can
get going with this as quickly as possible, I'm going to ask you
to introduce yourselves and tell us where you are. Starting
with USAF.
Suddaf Chaudry (01:36):
Hi, I'm I'm Suddaf Chaudry. I'm an investive journalist currently in Kabul.
Adnan Sarwaw (01:40):
And Emerita.
Emerita Torres (01:42):
Hi, my name is Emerita Torres. I'm a senior research
fellow at the Soufan Center. We're an independent nonprofit center
focused on global security.
Adnan Sarwaw (01:50):
Cool. Nabi.
Nabi Sahak (01:51):
Nabi Sahak, I'm an independent researcher currently in Washington, DC.
Adnan Sarwaw (01:57):
And Shiraz.
Dr. Shiraz Maher (01:58):
I'm Dr. Shiraz Maher. I'm a lecturer in the Department
of War Studies at Kings College, London.
Adnan Sarwaw (02:02):
First of all, we are going to establish who the
Taliban are. Shiraz, we know the name of this group,
but not everybody really knows exactly what the group is or where
they came from. Could you help us with that?
Dr. Shiraz Maher (02:14):
Yeah, the Taliban really follow on from the defeat and withdrawal
of the Soviet Union from Afghanistan in the 1980s. The
Taliban were an actor in the civil war that followed.
They were able to take Kabul and a large part
of the country, but not in its entirety. They've never
held this amount of territory before. But they took Kabul
(02:37):
in 1996 and in fact were quite brutal and dramatic
in the way that they captured the capital at that
time. So the Taliban arriving as it were, the gates
of Kabul, then entering Kabul, why there was so much
consternation around that, why there was so much trepidation, why
there was that crush at the airport. But if you
(02:59):
were looking at the messaging coming out from the Taliban, they
were also trying to say, " Look, we're, we're different." And
quite careful to show that they weren't going to march
into Kabul this time, the way they had done in 1996.
Adnan Sarwaw (03:11):
Emerita, if we could just open that up, how have
they managed to take over so quickly when the West withdrew?
Emerita Torres (03:17):
We were over 20 years training, funding, and equipping the
Afghan forces and the Taliban just really steamrolled. I think
it has to do with the Taliban gaining power. Attacks
have increased. They've taken control over more provinces throughout the
country over time. As the US was seeking to depart,
decreasing troops, decreasing support over time and negotiating directly with
(03:41):
the Taliban without the Afghan government. We also saw that
there were negotiated surrenders taking place between the Taliban and
local Afghan government officials. So that really sort of created
a clear path for the Taliban to take over Kabul.
Adnan Sarwaw (03:56):
What do you think their aim is, Emerita?
Emerita Torres (03:58):
Well, for the Taliban, it's governance, it's global recognition. They
are quite happy that the US is now out. It's
a victory for them to control their country. So I
see this as their long term political win.
Adnan Sarwaw (04:15):
Nabi, you've you've lived through this two decades ago. Can
you tell us, why did you leave Afghanistan?
Nabi Sahak (04:22):
I left right after 9/ 11 attacks happened. So it
was a time of chaos. It was a time similar to what
we're witnessing today, really, in a general sense, where Taliban
were overthrown by the US. So there was a vacuum
(04:44):
and people were hoping to find better lives. I was
one of those people who left with thousands others.
Adnan Sarwaw (04:53):
So just to check I've got this right, okay. So
Taliban had been fighting against the government. So just a
little bit of a history here. The Russians invade Afghanistan. The Mujahideen
fight them. There's a power vacuum after the Russians leave.
The Taliban are formed and then they shelter Al- Qaeda.
We'll get onto Al- Qaeda later. Al- Qaeda are the
people, including Osama bin Laden, who perpetrated 9/ 11. That's
(05:16):
the reason the Western forces invaded in the first place.
That's when you left. Before that you were serving with
the Afghan army fighting against the Taliban. In this latest
iteration of all this, we've seen the Taliban storm through
the country, and people have been asking, why didn't the
Afghan army put up much of a fight?
Nabi Sahak (05:34):
That is unfortunate that such a statement goes around, that
the Afghan soldiers didn't fight. It's the furthest thing from
the truth. If you just really go back, not even to 2001,
not even to 2010. If you just go back to 2015
with the takeover of Ghani, the transition from Karzai.
Adnan Sarwaw (05:57):
So hang on. That was the change over from Hamid Karzai to
Ashraf Ghani as president after the 2015 election, right?
Nabi Sahak (06:04):
As a matter of fact, I was in Kabul when
that transition occurred. I was in an advisory capacity, so
I was witnessing everything. The morale and the boost and
the confidence for a new Afghanistan, because people were definitely
complaining and were tired from the corruption under the Karzai
(06:24):
government. There was a revived hope and revived energy. That
explains why 50, 000 soldiers gave their lives from 2015 until
now. To say that they didn't fight is not true.
Adnan Sarwaw (06:41):
Okay. So Suddaf, we've learned a little bit about what the history was. What is it
like right now? I mean, you're in Kabul.
Suddaf Chaudry (06:48):
Right now the best way to describe it is uncertainty.
The Taliban don't seem to have very much control. They
really want to ascertain some kind of image that they
really have got a handle on things. I was one
of the first reporters to ask at the press conference
about the significant number of ISIS Khorasan that had infiltrated at the
(07:10):
airport. The Taliban here did not want to discuss it.
In fact, they said that it was a hyped up
situation by the Americans to deflect how they hadn't been
able to manage any real semblance of control at the
airport. But the reality was that ISIS was there way before the
Taliban took control a couple of weeks ago. They were
(07:32):
recruiting heavily in safe houses across the city. They had
really engaged in Kabul a significant time ago. So reality
is people are not just dealing with economic uncertainty in
Kabul. They're dealing with a significant threat level that is
not being really thought about by the governance.
Adnan Sarwaw (07:52):
Shiraz, we hear all these names. Suddaf was just mentioning
one there. We hear ISIS- K, we hear TTP. Who
are these people?
Dr. Shiraz Maher (08:02):
It's been claimed by Islamic State or their chapter in
Afghanistan, often referred to as IS- K or ISIS Khorasan,
which is of course the historic name for a province that covers
most of modern day Afghanistan. The Southern parts of the
stans, which are to the north and Northeastern parts of Iran as
(08:23):
well. Look, it is a local chapter. It's a franchise,
if you want to call it that. This is a
kind of tried and tested model that these groups use
where they are proliferating through localized chapters in their areas.
You mentioned the TTP as well. That's the Tehrik- i- Taliban
Pakistan or better known as the Pakistani Taliban. It's worth
(08:47):
saying between all of these groups, the sort of big
fault line within jihadist movements is fundamentally how they regard
their relationship with power. How do they want to interact
with established structures of power, whether that's in their own
country, if they're not in power. Or in the case
of Taliban now, for example, with the international system. Do
(09:08):
you have an office in Doha? Do you want recognition
at the UN? These are the most, you could say materially
significant in terms of what distinguishes these groups.
Adnan Sarwaw (09:19):
Thank you. Emerita, what's the relationship between ISIS- K and the
Taliban? Would you say that their aims sometimes overlap?
Emerita Torres (09:28):
They're really archenemies and rivals, and they compete over resources.
They're somewhat ideologically different. ISIS has a much more extreme
interpretation of Islam than the Taliban, I would say. Violence
from ISIS- K really creates a headache for the Taliban. Because
they promise that their victory in the country will bring
Afghanistan finally to peace. But what we're seeing is not
(09:52):
the case right now and ISIL- K in the meantime
is trying to seek to remain relevant, to rebuild its
ranks with the focus on recruitment, training, new supporters, trying
to attract the ranks of the Taliban who are rejecting
the peace process.
Adnan Sarwaw (10:08):
Suddaf, I mean, you're on the ground. Do you think
the Taliban will be able to defeat Daesh? Or will
they need international government to come in and help them?
Suddaf Chaudry (10:18):
I think they will be able to defeat Daesh. It's if and
when they want to. They were using the American base
here as a deflection to say that the ISIS was supposed
to be managed by the Americans because the attack was
on that side of the airport. But now there are
no Western troops here. Any danger that takes place and
the attacks takes place, they are fully responsible for that.
(10:40):
They are looking for safe houses. They're looking for ISIS
Khorasan members disguised as Taliban. The way they search them
is very different to any other person going about their
daily routine. So they are doing their best in terms
of street checks. Body checks, they are doing very well
at that. But I just don't think they actually have a
(11:02):
strategy in place to deal with the recruitment drive. The
people that are in higher up positions in Isis Khorasan, they
are still not being located. I know that's a significant stress,
which I was told by a confidential source that is
becoming a stressful situation for them. They are trying to
target the people who are making the decisions. At this
(11:24):
point that remains quite a confusing task for them because they
don't know which direction to go to. Because they were actually
quite surprised how quickly they moved into Kabul. I think
in terms of having optics internationally, they need to really
create security in this country, and they really will not
allow another attack. They have made it clear to me
(11:44):
when I spoke to them last that, " We will do whatever
it takes to remove this. But right now we don't
see it as a significant threat." But I also think
that's very carefully controlled language being used by the Taliban, because they're
very cautious in how they speak to the media. Because
what transpired at the airport was even a surprise to them.
Adnan Sarwaw (12:05):
So we've got this incredibly complex situation where you've got
one extremist group actually acting as a disruptor for another
one. Emerita, maybe this is a good time to add Al-
Qaeda into the mix. The headlines have all been about
the Taliban and ISIS- K, Daesh- K. What about Al-
Qaeda? They're done?
Emerita Torres (12:22):
Not at all. Al- Qaeda's been weakened over time, but
certainly not defeated. It's been quietly growing a presence regionally.
When we think about pre- 9/ 11, there was around,
I don't know, 400 fighters who pledge allegiance to Al-
Qaeda and today we seen between 30 and 40, 000 members that
boasts affiliates around the world. So certainly not. Their survival
(12:44):
strategy has been creating branches around the world. Not just
in, in the Middle East, in the Sahil, in Somalia,
et cetera. So Al-Qaeda's certainly alive and well, and there's
an enduring determination there. So we should be very careful
about Al- Qaeda and what it's up to. Now that
they have the potential to work and have safe haven
(13:07):
in Afghanistan, that's going to be a bigger threat for
us, not just for the United States, but for the
Western world.
Adnan Sarwaw (13:15):
Okay. So now we've got three definite groups. Names. We
all know we've got the Taliban, Al- Qaeda and the
many names of ISIS. ISIS- K, Daesh, whatever you want
to call them. So you've got Taliban, Al- Qaeda, and
ISIS. But for a lot of us, we don't know
much more than the names. Shiraz, can you give us
a quick guide? What are these groups thinking? What are they
trying to do and how do they relate to each other?
Dr. Shiraz Maher (13:36):
There's probably two key points, right? Al Qaeda starts this
process of what you'd call global jihad, fighting the world
in an attempt to have sort of extra territorial jihadi
aims and aspirations. I think Al Qaeda through what we
can see in places such as Mali and in Northern
Syria has been on a journey, in essence, to recoil
(13:59):
a little bit and to move back towards what might
be called the localized jihadi campaigns that we saw in the
1990s in Algeria or with the Libyan Islamic fighting group.
And to an extent that Taliban as well in the
1990s. So you can say in a sense that jihadism
has reverted to a localized kind of aspiration where these
(14:23):
actors are seeking to govern within the kind of confines
of the nation states in which they're operating. So you
could almost say it's like an Islamo- nationalism, if we
want to call it that. Islamic state remains the last,
you could say, or the only at the moment of
the global jihad movements, which still regularly talks about conquering
(14:45):
Rome and Constantinople and having its members March through the
streets of Paris in conquest. I mean, that kind of
iconography. So when you strip it all down, ultimately this
comes down to your understanding about your relationship or your
group's relationship with power. The Islamic State would accuse the Taliban
(15:07):
of heresy, of betrayal, to have negotiated with the United
States to seek diplomatic and international recognition to work within
the internationalist system. It's all anathema to Islamic State. So there
are these gradations. I think if you put the Taliban
at that spectrum now of the Islamo- nationalist movement and
(15:30):
Islamic State at the global jihad end of the spectrum,
where Al- Qaeda sits today is probably still the most
interesting question. Because yes, it is on a journey. It
is becoming pragmatic in what it wants to do, but
pragmatism doesn't mean moderation. I suppose, if those were the
two poles, the Taliban and Islamic State on our spectrum,
(15:50):
then Al- Qaeda's kind of floating somewhere between the two.
Adnan Sarwaw (15:55):
And Nabi?
Nabi Sahak (15:56):
Taliban has a duality. One is their policy folks sitting
in Qatar or in Islamabad, if you will, taking policy guidance.
Then there's the everyday Talib. The guy who fights. If
you really strip it down, they're not ideologically very different
(16:17):
from ISIS or Al- Qaeda because they still do go
back to this classic idea that there is no borders
in the Islamic caliphate. The ummah, the whole of the
Muslim community are one. Somebody's mentioned that the ISIS were
looking down upon the Taliban when they started negotiating with
(16:39):
the US. That's the political story we hear. But then
you hear Al- Qaeda and its affiliates group all congratulating
the Taliban warmly on their victory. What does it say?
It says we share something in common. I believe that
Taliban are the most important actor when it comes to
these groups.
Adnan Sarwaw (16:58):
Suddaf, I spoke to the Taliban myself last, last week
and they said it's going to be okay for female
journalists. This is Taliban 2. 0. What would you say
(17:21):
to that?
Suddaf Chaudry (17:22):
That simply is not correct. The reporter that interviewed the
Taliban live on air on TOLO just left for the
fear of her life last week. That was their indication
to the international community and to the local population that
they were willing to work with female journalists. The reality,
that is not correct. My female counterparts here, local journalists
(17:45):
in Afghanistan, do not feel safe to report on the
field. They cannot do a live on a street in
Kabul because they will be attacked by the Taliban. There
is no support for them. For foreign journalists such as
myself, there is incredible support. They had an off the
record meeting with us and my male counterparts asking us
(18:06):
how we can work with them and if there's any support we need
on the ground. Within the end of the meeting, we
were all given paperwork to show any Taliban member on
the street that we are freely able to move across
Kabul and even the provinces without receiving any threats or
any backlash. But Afghan journalists do not get the same
(18:27):
level of security. They are really putting women at the
back in terms of whether it be education, journalism. Doctors
are leaving. This Taliban contingent does not support women in
the reality. It's not what we're seeing on the ground.
Adnan Sarwaw (18:45):
Shiraz, Suddaf is saying that she is not seeing any
of this new Taliban, but you think they're going to
do things differently this time.
Dr. Shiraz Maher (18:52):
It's clear to me that the Taliban does regard this
as a moment and an opportunity. So I think the Taliban will
look now to reach out at some level. You will
probably see this duality of approach. So the way they
treat Afghanis, try to run their society. I think we will see
(19:12):
some regression back to what we might call the old
Taliban. But there's certainly a slicker version that's sitting there
that's outward facing that is trying to suggest this is a
more moderate, it's a more sort of thinking movement now
than it has been in the past. You can see
that with this very savvy English speak spokesman who's been
put up on Al Jazeera several times since the Taliban's
(19:35):
come back. It's a shock to see.
Adnan Sarwaw (19:37):
Well, talking about spokespeople or PR and propaganda, there's an
obvious media opportunity right now, isn't there? 20 years since 9/
11. Do you think they're going to take advantage of that?
Speaker 3 (19:48):
The Taliban are, of course, they're happy. They are cheering
the us withdrawal. They are in a sense intelligently trolling
the United States. Taliban's got a lot to do right
now, right? So they are confronted with the challenge of
actually governing and it's not the most exhilarating thing, or I think
(20:11):
that lends itself most readily to propaganda. I don't think
they've got anything to necessarily gain out of making hay
or celebrating 9/ 11 two decades on.
Adnan Sarwaw (20:23):
And Nabi.
Nabi Sahak (20:24):
They were fully engaged in propaganda once they had one
or two districts. Then when they provincial capitals, the propaganda
went through the roofs. So their past records show that
they rely on propaganda heavily, and they have had much
success. So for anyone to think that they're not going to
(20:44):
exploit this one, to show the world that Taliban really
want to remove American memory from that landscape. Now they
also get a lot of support from some of the
regional actors. I think in the way to cause humiliation
for the US and for the West in general. The
(21:06):
incidents that occurred at the airport, the broader aspects really
had to do with political behind the scene staging. The
US was not to leave clean.
Adnan Sarwaw (21:18):
Suddaf, is this anniversary important?
Suddaf Chaudry (21:21):
The Taliban are trying to really remove the American footprint
here. So I'm not quite sure whether they will be
really focusing on 9/ 11 here because they want to
remove the American stamp from Afghanistan. Also away from the
Taliban, Afghans here are actually really quite tired of the
(21:43):
significant pull the Americans have had and the damage that
they've done to the country. If you ask somebody that
wasn't even born during 9/ 11, but they are still
very aware of the damage that that event caused the
country and their parents. I think in Taliban are very
strategic here. They're trying to look at their comms for
that day to see how should they really approach that.
(22:05):
I think to be honest with you, they're going to
be very strategic. I don't think it's going to be
a significant focus.
Adnan Sarwaw (22:10):
Emerita, what do you think?
Emerita Torres (22:12):
This is a huge boon for just the global jihadis.
Movement in general, I would agree with Suddaf that I
think the Taliban is going to be very strategic about
this. They want the US footprint off of Afghanistan soil,
and they need some level of Western cooperation, of US
cooperation, of international cooperation. So I think they're going to
play this very strategically, but at the same time, foreign
(22:33):
fighters, Al- Qaeda, ISIS, other terrorist groups are going to
really, I see potentially pose a threat on 9/ 11
and after that, because they see this as a huge
victory, huge propaganda, huge recruitment tool and an empowerment of
their soldiers.
Adnan Sarwaw (22:49):
So what's emerging here is a really fascinating picture of
a process that is moving really quickly and is very
complicated and nobody can predict what's going to happen next.
But let's try. The one question that many people are
probably asking is what does this mean for the safety
of the world? Has the risk increased? Shiraz, are we
(23:09):
in more danger?
Speaker 3 (23:11):
I've been saying to everyone in the context of these
debates, that's not a question you can ask. It doesn't
have an answer. Because what metrics are we going to
use to judge, are we safer? Do I think parts
of Afghanistan will become slightly more accommodating and become slightly
(23:31):
more permissive environment for unsavory actors for terrorists to train
and so on? Yes, I think that's always been one
of the worries, having these safe havens where attack planning
and so on can take place. However, is it in the Taliban's
interest to allow a group to really proliferate in their
(23:54):
territory today that wants to pull off another 9/ 11
tomorrow? Of course not. My opinion, that the jihadist movement
more generally, of which the Taliban is one part, has
learned over the last two decades that if you can
avoid sucking the West into a war in your local
region, that localism aspect of the jihadist current, then you've
(24:15):
generally got a pretty good ability to sustain a project
there and a governance project there. So the Taliban really has
something that it's always craved. It's holding more territory now
than it ever has done. So they would be incredibly
foolish. That doesn't prevent wild cards, right? It doesn't prevent
people who may wish to use that territory and go
(24:36):
and do something that Taliban has no oversight of. So it's
the classic academic answer, six of one and half a
dozen of the other.
Adnan Sarwaw (24:44):
I think you're right. The Taliban have managed to get
something they didn't think they were going to get, and
they don't want it broken. Emerita, what do you think? Do you think we're
going to get another 9/ 11?
Emerita Torres (24:54):
I think we are less safe. I think the Kabul
attack is an example. I mean, it was a target,
and ISIS- K was able to take advantage of that.
The withdrawal will have an immense impact in terms of
global security, US security. The, the threats will no longer
be coming from the Taliban, but we have ISIS- K,
we have sort of a witch's brew in the region,
Afghanistan, Pakistan, that I think could really be threatening to
(25:18):
global security. I also think that without boots on the
ground intelligence, counter terrorism operations are certainly taking a hit.
So now there's going to be this over the horizon
or offshore counter terrorism approach that's going to be very
different from what we're used to. So I think that's
also going to provide some groups with the operational space
to recruit, to train, and to plot attacks.
Adnan Sarwaw (25:45):
And Nabi?
Nabi Sahak (25:45):
We don't know whether the world will be safe, less safe, or more safe given
the Taliban's policy statements and given some of the contradictions
that have already been surfacing with those statements. While it's
a bad day for the technocrats in Kabul, for the
academia, for the artist, for the scholars, and for the
(26:09):
international community. But when you go to the provinces where
majority of the people live, when you go to Kandahar
today, when you go to Ghazni and you go to
Laghman. You go to all these remote regions where the
war was mostly taking its toll. Those regions are celebrating.
Now, is Afghanistan going to be safe economically is a
(26:30):
very different question. Is Afghanistan going to be safe strategically,
regionally? Those are different questions. But in terms of your
question, will there be another 911? I think that is
a one million dollar question and events are to unfold it.
Adnan Sarwaw (26:47):
It's probably more than a million dollars for that question.
Finally, Suddaf, I'm going to ask you to do something
you're told not to do in interviews and that's speculate.
I mean, you're in Kabul right now. What are your
instincts telling you about the immediate future? What does it
look like?
Suddaf Chaudry (27:02):
I think it's not what we think it will be.
I think the Taliban will give us many surprises along
the road. I have been here just under a month.
Really, I speak to them every day. They are very
committed to bring Afghanistan into an Islamic Emirate, but they're one
that can engage with the international community. That's what they're
(27:24):
proposing. But I also know this will come at a
great sacrifice to the people here. Already people are seeing
major drawbacks. I mean, the amount of people that have
left, this is going to cause a significant challenge for
Afghanistan in terms of economically, strategically, they're going to be
many roadblocks along the way. But I also think there
(27:47):
is some semblance of hope. The Taliban are not interested
in being completely destructive. They know that they need this
country to function and with that they need international support.
It's just how they play that. If they can really get
some control in all the provinces, if they can get
the engagement from say, the corporate end, to what is
(28:10):
going on in Afghanistan, they could be a functioning state.
But I also know this is going to take many,
many years.
Adnan Sarwaw (28:18):
Emerita, what do you think?
Emerita Torres (28:19):
A really important question and factor to think about is
how countries will engage with Afghanistan moving forward. I think
from a US and a Western perspective, it's going to
be really interesting to think about the kind of leverage
that we may have with Afghanistan being ruled by the
Taliban in terms of thinking around human rights and humanitarian
(28:40):
issues and the like, because we still have some level
of political leverage and level of financial leverage. Because the
US still has sanctions on the Taliban. The UN also has
sanctions on the Taliban, and there's certainly going to be
an interest in the flow of money and goods coming
into the country. I think that's something that's going to
be important for the Taliban in thinking about its own political
(29:01):
future and the future of its economy, et cetera. So
I think that's going to be really important moving forward.
I also wonder what the role of the UN will
be in this process in thinking about, the past UNAMA,
the UN mission in Afghanistan, and also just the future
of terrorism and the counter terrorism operations that will take
(29:23):
place moving forward. I think it's going to be really important to
see what the Russians will do and what the Chinese will
do and the Iranians and the like and how that's going
to boil and manifest. The United States and the global
community has invested so much in Afghanistan and the future of
Afghanistan. We withdrew, but we can't turn our backs because
the last thing we won is a failed state. Afghanistan
(29:44):
is in a volatile region, and thinking about counter terrorism,
it's really important that we maintain some level of operation
and eyes and ears to understand what's happening. Then I'll
say also on the humanitarian side, I mean, you have
Afghan refugees traveling across the country. This is not going
to be something that we forget about overnight or five
or 10 years. This is going to be a consistent issue that we'll
(30:07):
have to tackle.
Adnan Sarwaw (30:08):
Shiraz, as we all need to think about what's going to
happen next, right? Because it really does affect everyone.
Dr. Shiraz Maher (30:13):
We should care because we've been in there for the
last two decades. That reason alone is a reason to
care. But look, I mean, what has happened, the reasons
we went in, these have all been incredibly consequential. 9/
11 has shaped the world in many, many different ways.
(30:34):
I wouldn't say it changed everything, but we lived with
all of the various consequences day to day. So Afghanistan matters
for that reason.
Adnan Sarwaw (30:44):
Nabi I know you don't live there anymore, but it
is your country and you've devoted your life to try
and understand conflict and making other people understand it. So
can you tell us, what do we need to remember?
Nabi Sahak (30:54):
Afghanistan matters for historical reasons. Whenever it's abandoned or bullied
or attempts were made to control it. The history's plain.
The end results are bad. For Afghanistan itself, primarily, and
then secondarily for the region. And now given the interconnected
(31:19):
nature of the world, bad for the world. So when
you look at historically, all these people have come and
have established artificial roots there without really getting to the
truth of the land, the truth of the culture, the
truth of the people. Who really wins Afghanistan over matters.
If left to its own, who's going to win it? Russia,
(31:42):
China, India, or a collectivity of groups like ISIS and Al-
Qaeda and others coming? Because ultimately Afghanistan is a landlocked
country. It relies on international world. So whomever uses it is
going to have to be careful because it has ramification
for the whole world.
Adnan Sarwaw (32:04):
I'd like to thank Suddaf Chaudry, Emerita Torres, Nabi Sahak,
and Shiraz Maher for their insight into this complex and
dynamic situation happening in Afghanistan right now for our special
edition of Taking Apart Terror. Search for us wherever you
get your podcasts. If you're enjoying the series, please do
leave as a star rating and a review. It makes
(32:25):
a huge difference to how many people find us. Of
course, follow or subscribe so you don't miss an episode.
I'm Adnan Sarwaw. Till the next time, goodbye.
Before we begin, this is a podcast about terrorism, which
means we do talk about acts of terror and extreme
violence, sometimes in quite a lot of detail. So you
might find some of the following material upsetting. Hello, I'm
Adnan Sarwaw. This is a special edition of Taking Apart
Terror. You've probably heard something about this.
Speaker 2 (00:22):
Kabul is falling now.
Speaker 3 (00:24):
Afghans are thronging to Kabul's airport.
Adnan Sarwaw (00:26):
As well as this.
Speaker 4 (00:27):
There has been a suicide bombing at Kabul airport in
Afghanistan where (inaudible) .
Adnan Sarwaw (00:32):
The world looked on in shock as the Taliban tore
through Afghanistan in the wake of the Western forces departure.
Then in horror as suicide bombers, detonated their devices outside
the main airport. But who are the Taliban and what are
their aims? It wasn't them that were responsible for the
bombings. It was something called ISIS- K or ISIS Khorasan,
a name most of us were hearing for the first
(00:54):
time. Our aim with Taking Apart Terror is to explain
how terrorist groups work, what they do and why. So
in this special program, we're going to try and unravel
the current situation in Afghanistan. As we face the 20th
anniversary of the 9/ 11 attacks, understand what it means
for the country, the region and the world. Or as
we are calling this edition, Afghanistan
(01:16):
become more dangerous? We've gathered together a panel, all of
whom have specialist knowledge of Afghanistan. Its past, its present,
and have some handle on its future. So we can
get going with this as quickly as possible, I'm going to ask you
to introduce yourselves and tell us where you are. Starting
with USAF.
Suddaf Chaudry (01:36):
Hi, I'm I'm Suddaf Chaudry. I'm an investive journalist currently in Kabul.
Adnan Sarwaw (01:40):
And Emerita.
Emerita Torres (01:42):
Hi, my name is Emerita Torres. I'm a senior research
fellow at the Soufan Center. We're an independent nonprofit center
focused on global security.
Adnan Sarwaw (01:50):
Cool. Nabi.
Nabi Sahak (01:51):
Nabi Sahak, I'm an independent researcher currently in Washington, DC.
Adnan Sarwaw (01:57):
And Shiraz.
Dr. Shiraz Maher (01:58):
I'm Dr. Shiraz Maher. I'm a lecturer in the Department
of War Studies at Kings College, London.
Adnan Sarwaw (02:02):
First of all, we are going to establish who the
Taliban are. Shiraz, we know the name of this group,
but not everybody really knows exactly what the group is or where
they came from. Could you help us with that?
Dr. Shiraz Maher (02:14):
Yeah, the Taliban really follow on from the defeat and withdrawal
of the Soviet Union from Afghanistan in the 1980s. The
Taliban were an actor in the civil war that followed.
They were able to take Kabul and a large part
of the country, but not in its entirety. They've never
held this amount of territory before. But they took Kabul
(02:37):
in 1996 and in fact were quite brutal and dramatic
in the way that they captured the capital at that
time. So the Taliban arriving as it were, the gates
of Kabul, then entering Kabul, why there was so much
consternation around that, why there was so much trepidation, why
there was that crush at the airport. But if you
(02:59):
were looking at the messaging coming out from the Taliban, they
were also trying to say, " Look, we're, we're different." And
quite careful to show that they weren't going to march
into Kabul this time, the way they had done in 1996.
Adnan Sarwaw (03:11):
Emerita, if we could just open that up, how have
they managed to take over so quickly when the West withdrew?
Emerita Torres (03:17):
We were over 20 years training, funding, and equipping the
Afghan forces and the Taliban just really steamrolled. I think
it has to do with the Taliban gaining power. Attacks
have increased. They've taken control over more provinces throughout the
country over time. As the US was seeking to depart,
decreasing troops, decreasing support over time and negotiating directly with
(03:41):
the Taliban without the Afghan government. We also saw that
there were negotiated surrenders taking place between the Taliban and
local Afghan government officials. So that really sort of created
a clear path for the Taliban to take over Kabul.
Adnan Sarwaw (03:56):
What do you think their aim is, Emerita?
Emerita Torres (03:58):
Well, for the Taliban, it's governance, it's global recognition. They
are quite happy that the US is now out. It's
a victory for them to control their country. So I
see this as their long term political win.
Adnan Sarwaw (04:15):
Nabi, you've you've lived through this two decades ago. Can
you tell us, why did you leave Afghanistan?
Nabi Sahak (04:22):
I left right after 9/ 11 attacks happened. So it
was a time of chaos. It was a time similar to what
we're witnessing today, really, in a general sense, where Taliban
were overthrown by the US. So there was a vacuum
(04:44):
and people were hoping to find better lives. I was
one of those people who left with thousands others.
Adnan Sarwaw (04:53):
So just to check I've got this right, okay. So
Taliban had been fighting against the government. So just a
little bit of a history here. The Russians invade Afghanistan. The Mujahideen
fight them. There's a power vacuum after the Russians leave.
The Taliban are formed and then they shelter Al- Qaeda.
We'll get onto Al- Qaeda later. Al- Qaeda are the
people, including Osama bin Laden, who perpetrated 9/ 11. That's
(05:16):
the reason the Western forces invaded in the first place.
That's when you left. Before that you were serving with
the Afghan army fighting against the Taliban. In this latest
iteration of all this, we've seen the Taliban storm through
the country, and people have been asking, why didn't the
Afghan army put up much of a fight?
Nabi Sahak (05:34):
That is unfortunate that such a statement goes around, that
the Afghan soldiers didn't fight. It's the furthest thing from
the truth. If you just really go back, not even to 2001,
not even to 2010. If you just go back to 2015
with the takeover of Ghani, the transition from Karzai.
Adnan Sarwaw (05:57):
So hang on. That was the change over from Hamid Karzai to
Ashraf Ghani as president after the 2015 election, right?
Nabi Sahak (06:04):
As a matter of fact, I was in Kabul when
that transition occurred. I was in an advisory capacity, so
I was witnessing everything. The morale and the boost and
the confidence for a new Afghanistan, because people were definitely
complaining and were tired from the corruption under the Karzai
(06:24):
government. There was a revived hope and revived energy. That
explains why 50, 000 soldiers gave their lives from 2015 until
now. To say that they didn't fight is not true.
Adnan Sarwaw (06:41):
Okay. So Suddaf, we've learned a little bit about what the history was. What is it
like right now? I mean, you're in Kabul.
Suddaf Chaudry (06:48):
Right now the best way to describe it is uncertainty.
The Taliban don't seem to have very much control. They
really want to ascertain some kind of image that they
really have got a handle on things. I was one
of the first reporters to ask at the press conference
about the significant number of ISIS Khorasan that had infiltrated at the
(07:10):
airport. The Taliban here did not want to discuss it.
In fact, they said that it was a hyped up
situation by the Americans to deflect how they hadn't been
able to manage any real semblance of control at the
airport. But the reality was that ISIS was there way before the
Taliban took control a couple of weeks ago. They were
(07:32):
recruiting heavily in safe houses across the city. They had
really engaged in Kabul a significant time ago. So reality
is people are not just dealing with economic uncertainty in
Kabul. They're dealing with a significant threat level that is
not being really thought about by the governance.
Adnan Sarwaw (07:52):
Shiraz, we hear all these names. Suddaf was just mentioning
one there. We hear ISIS- K, we hear TTP. Who
are these people?
Dr. Shiraz Maher (08:02):
It's been claimed by Islamic State or their chapter in
Afghanistan, often referred to as IS- K or ISIS Khorasan,
which is of course the historic name for a province that covers
most of modern day Afghanistan. The Southern parts of the
stans, which are to the north and Northeastern parts of Iran as
(08:23):
well. Look, it is a local chapter. It's a franchise,
if you want to call it that. This is a
kind of tried and tested model that these groups use
where they are proliferating through localized chapters in their areas.
You mentioned the TTP as well. That's the Tehrik- i- Taliban
Pakistan or better known as the Pakistani Taliban. It's worth
(08:47):
saying between all of these groups, the sort of big
fault line within jihadist movements is fundamentally how they regard
their relationship with power. How do they want to interact
with established structures of power, whether that's in their own
country, if they're not in power. Or in the case
of Taliban now, for example, with the international system. Do
(09:08):
you have an office in Doha? Do you want recognition
at the UN? These are the most, you could say materially
significant in terms of what distinguishes these groups.
Adnan Sarwaw (09:19):
Thank you. Emerita, what's the relationship between ISIS- K and the
Taliban? Would you say that their aims sometimes overlap?
Emerita Torres (09:28):
They're really archenemies and rivals, and they compete over resources.
They're somewhat ideologically different. ISIS has a much more extreme
interpretation of Islam than the Taliban, I would say. Violence
from ISIS- K really creates a headache for the Taliban. Because
they promise that their victory in the country will bring
Afghanistan finally to peace. But what we're seeing is not
(09:52):
the case right now and ISIL- K in the meantime
is trying to seek to remain relevant, to rebuild its
ranks with the focus on recruitment, training, new supporters, trying
to attract the ranks of the Taliban who are rejecting
the peace process.
Adnan Sarwaw (10:08):
Suddaf, I mean, you're on the ground. Do you think
the Taliban will be able to defeat Daesh? Or will
they need international government to come in and help them?
Suddaf Chaudry (10:18):
I think they will be able to defeat Daesh. It's if and
when they want to. They were using the American base
here as a deflection to say that the ISIS was supposed
to be managed by the Americans because the attack was
on that side of the airport. But now there are
no Western troops here. Any danger that takes place and
the attacks takes place, they are fully responsible for that.
(10:40):
They are looking for safe houses. They're looking for ISIS
Khorasan members disguised as Taliban. The way they search them
is very different to any other person going about their
daily routine. So they are doing their best in terms
of street checks. Body checks, they are doing very well
at that. But I just don't think they actually have a
(11:02):
strategy in place to deal with the recruitment drive. The
people that are in higher up positions in Isis Khorasan, they
are still not being located. I know that's a significant stress,
which I was told by a confidential source that is
becoming a stressful situation for them. They are trying to
target the people who are making the decisions. At this
(11:24):
point that remains quite a confusing task for them because they
don't know which direction to go to. Because they were actually
quite surprised how quickly they moved into Kabul. I think
in terms of having optics internationally, they need to really
create security in this country, and they really will not
allow another attack. They have made it clear to me
(11:44):
when I spoke to them last that, " We will do whatever
it takes to remove this. But right now we don't
see it as a significant threat." But I also think
that's very carefully controlled language being used by the Taliban, because they're
very cautious in how they speak to the media. Because
what transpired at the airport was even a surprise to them.
Adnan Sarwaw (12:05):
So we've got this incredibly complex situation where you've got
one extremist group actually acting as a disruptor for another
one. Emerita, maybe this is a good time to add Al-
Qaeda into the mix. The headlines have all been about
the Taliban and ISIS- K, Daesh- K. What about Al-
Qaeda? They're done?
Emerita Torres (12:22):
Not at all. Al- Qaeda's been weakened over time, but
certainly not defeated. It's been quietly growing a presence regionally.
When we think about pre- 9/ 11, there was around,
I don't know, 400 fighters who pledge allegiance to Al-
Qaeda and today we seen between 30 and 40, 000 members that
boasts affiliates around the world. So certainly not. Their survival
(12:44):
strategy has been creating branches around the world. Not just
in, in the Middle East, in the Sahil, in Somalia,
et cetera. So Al-Qaeda's certainly alive and well, and there's
an enduring determination there. So we should be very careful
about Al- Qaeda and what it's up to. Now that
they have the potential to work and have safe haven
(13:07):
in Afghanistan, that's going to be a bigger threat for
us, not just for the United States, but for the
Western world.
Adnan Sarwaw (13:15):
Okay. So now we've got three definite groups. Names. We
all know we've got the Taliban, Al- Qaeda and the
many names of ISIS. ISIS- K, Daesh, whatever you want
to call them. So you've got Taliban, Al- Qaeda, and
ISIS. But for a lot of us, we don't know
much more than the names. Shiraz, can you give us
a quick guide? What are these groups thinking? What are they
trying to do and how do they relate to each other?
Dr. Shiraz Maher (13:36):
There's probably two key points, right? Al Qaeda starts this
process of what you'd call global jihad, fighting the world
in an attempt to have sort of extra territorial jihadi
aims and aspirations. I think Al Qaeda through what we
can see in places such as Mali and in Northern
Syria has been on a journey, in essence, to recoil
(13:59):
a little bit and to move back towards what might
be called the localized jihadi campaigns that we saw in the
1990s in Algeria or with the Libyan Islamic fighting group.
And to an extent that Taliban as well in the
1990s. So you can say in a sense that jihadism
has reverted to a localized kind of aspiration where these
(14:23):
actors are seeking to govern within the kind of confines
of the nation states in which they're operating. So you
could almost say it's like an Islamo- nationalism, if we
want to call it that. Islamic state remains the last,
you could say, or the only at the moment of
the global jihad movements, which still regularly talks about conquering
(14:45):
Rome and Constantinople and having its members March through the
streets of Paris in conquest. I mean, that kind of
iconography. So when you strip it all down, ultimately this
comes down to your understanding about your relationship or your
group's relationship with power. The Islamic State would accuse the Taliban
(15:07):
of heresy, of betrayal, to have negotiated with the United
States to seek diplomatic and international recognition to work within
the internationalist system. It's all anathema to Islamic State. So there
are these gradations. I think if you put the Taliban
at that spectrum now of the Islamo- nationalist movement and
(15:30):
Islamic State at the global jihad end of the spectrum,
where Al- Qaeda sits today is probably still the most
interesting question. Because yes, it is on a journey. It
is becoming pragmatic in what it wants to do, but
pragmatism doesn't mean moderation. I suppose, if those were the
two poles, the Taliban and Islamic State on our spectrum,
(15:50):
then Al- Qaeda's kind of floating somewhere between the two.
Adnan Sarwaw (15:55):
And Nabi?
Nabi Sahak (15:56):
Taliban has a duality. One is their policy folks sitting
in Qatar or in Islamabad, if you will, taking policy guidance.
Then there's the everyday Talib. The guy who fights. If
you really strip it down, they're not ideologically very different
(16:17):
from ISIS or Al- Qaeda because they still do go
back to this classic idea that there is no borders
in the Islamic caliphate. The ummah, the whole of the
Muslim community are one. Somebody's mentioned that the ISIS were
looking down upon the Taliban when they started negotiating with
(16:39):
the US. That's the political story we hear. But then
you hear Al- Qaeda and its affiliates group all congratulating
the Taliban warmly on their victory. What does it say?
It says we share something in common. I believe that
Taliban are the most important actor when it comes to
these groups.
Adnan Sarwaw (16:58):
Suddaf, I spoke to the Taliban myself last, last week
and they said it's going to be okay for female
journalists. This is Taliban 2. 0. What would you say
(17:21):
to that?
Suddaf Chaudry (17:22):
That simply is not correct. The reporter that interviewed the
Taliban live on air on TOLO just left for the
fear of her life last week. That was their indication
to the international community and to the local population that
they were willing to work with female journalists. The reality,
that is not correct. My female counterparts here, local journalists
(17:45):
in Afghanistan, do not feel safe to report on the
field. They cannot do a live on a street in
Kabul because they will be attacked by the Taliban. There
is no support for them. For foreign journalists such as
myself, there is incredible support. They had an off the
record meeting with us and my male counterparts asking us
(18:06):
how we can work with them and if there's any support we need
on the ground. Within the end of the meeting, we
were all given paperwork to show any Taliban member on
the street that we are freely able to move across
Kabul and even the provinces without receiving any threats or
any backlash. But Afghan journalists do not get the same
(18:27):
level of security. They are really putting women at the
back in terms of whether it be education, journalism. Doctors
are leaving. This Taliban contingent does not support women in
the reality. It's not what we're seeing on the ground.
Adnan Sarwaw (18:45):
Shiraz, Suddaf is saying that she is not seeing any
of this new Taliban, but you think they're going to
do things differently this time.
Dr. Shiraz Maher (18:52):
It's clear to me that the Taliban does regard this
as a moment and an opportunity. So I think the Taliban will
look now to reach out at some level. You will
probably see this duality of approach. So the way they
treat Afghanis, try to run their society. I think we will see
(19:12):
some regression back to what we might call the old
Taliban. But there's certainly a slicker version that's sitting there
that's outward facing that is trying to suggest this is a
more moderate, it's a more sort of thinking movement now
than it has been in the past. You can see
that with this very savvy English speak spokesman who's been
put up on Al Jazeera several times since the Taliban's
(19:35):
come back. It's a shock to see.
Adnan Sarwaw (19:37):
Well, talking about spokespeople or PR and propaganda, there's an
obvious media opportunity right now, isn't there? 20 years since 9/
11. Do you think they're going to take advantage of that?
Speaker 3 (19:48):
The Taliban are, of course, they're happy. They are cheering
the us withdrawal. They are in a sense intelligently trolling
the United States. Taliban's got a lot to do right
now, right? So they are confronted with the challenge of
actually governing and it's not the most exhilarating thing, or I think
(20:11):
that lends itself most readily to propaganda. I don't think
they've got anything to necessarily gain out of making hay
or celebrating 9/ 11 two decades on.
Adnan Sarwaw (20:23):
And Nabi.
Nabi Sahak (20:24):
They were fully engaged in propaganda once they had one
or two districts. Then when they provincial capitals, the propaganda
went through the roofs. So their past records show that
they rely on propaganda heavily, and they have had much
success. So for anyone to think that they're not going to
(20:44):
exploit this one, to show the world that Taliban really
want to remove American memory from that landscape. Now they
also get a lot of support from some of the
regional actors. I think in the way to cause humiliation
for the US and for the West in general. The
(21:06):
incidents that occurred at the airport, the broader aspects really
had to do with political behind the scene staging. The
US was not to leave clean.
Adnan Sarwaw (21:18):
Suddaf, is this anniversary important?
Suddaf Chaudry (21:21):
The Taliban are trying to really remove the American footprint
here. So I'm not quite sure whether they will be
really focusing on 9/ 11 here because they want to
remove the American stamp from Afghanistan. Also away from the
Taliban, Afghans here are actually really quite tired of the
(21:43):
significant pull the Americans have had and the damage that
they've done to the country. If you ask somebody that
wasn't even born during 9/ 11, but they are still
very aware of the damage that that event caused the
country and their parents. I think in Taliban are very
strategic here. They're trying to look at their comms for
that day to see how should they really approach that.
(22:05):
I think to be honest with you, they're going to
be very strategic. I don't think it's going to be
a significant focus.
Adnan Sarwaw (22:10):
Emerita, what do you think?
Emerita Torres (22:12):
This is a huge boon for just the global jihadis.
Movement in general, I would agree with Suddaf that I
think the Taliban is going to be very strategic about
this. They want the US footprint off of Afghanistan soil,
and they need some level of Western cooperation, of US
cooperation, of international cooperation. So I think they're going to
play this very strategically, but at the same time, foreign
(22:33):
fighters, Al- Qaeda, ISIS, other terrorist groups are going to
really, I see potentially pose a threat on 9/ 11
and after that, because they see this as a huge
victory, huge propaganda, huge recruitment tool and an empowerment of
their soldiers.
Adnan Sarwaw (22:49):
So what's emerging here is a really fascinating picture of
a process that is moving really quickly and is very
complicated and nobody can predict what's going to happen next.
But let's try. The one question that many people are
probably asking is what does this mean for the safety
of the world? Has the risk increased? Shiraz, are we
(23:09):
in more danger?
Speaker 3 (23:11):
I've been saying to everyone in the context of these
debates, that's not a question you can ask. It doesn't
have an answer. Because what metrics are we going to
use to judge, are we safer? Do I think parts
of Afghanistan will become slightly more accommodating and become slightly
(23:31):
more permissive environment for unsavory actors for terrorists to train
and so on? Yes, I think that's always been one
of the worries, having these safe havens where attack planning
and so on can take place. However, is it in the Taliban's
interest to allow a group to really proliferate in their
(23:54):
territory today that wants to pull off another 9/ 11
tomorrow? Of course not. My opinion, that the jihadist movement
more generally, of which the Taliban is one part, has
learned over the last two decades that if you can
avoid sucking the West into a war in your local
region, that localism aspect of the jihadist current, then you've
(24:15):
generally got a pretty good ability to sustain a project
there and a governance project there. So the Taliban really has
something that it's always craved. It's holding more territory now
than it ever has done. So they would be incredibly
foolish. That doesn't prevent wild cards, right? It doesn't prevent
people who may wish to use that territory and go
(24:36):
and do something that Taliban has no oversight of. So it's
the classic academic answer, six of one and half a
dozen of the other.
Adnan Sarwaw (24:44):
I think you're right. The Taliban have managed to get
something they didn't think they were going to get, and
they don't want it broken. Emerita, what do you think? Do you think we're
going to get another 9/ 11?
Emerita Torres (24:54):
I think we are less safe. I think the Kabul
attack is an example. I mean, it was a target,
and ISIS- K was able to take advantage of that.
The withdrawal will have an immense impact in terms of
global security, US security. The, the threats will no longer
be coming from the Taliban, but we have ISIS- K,
we have sort of a witch's brew in the region,
Afghanistan, Pakistan, that I think could really be threatening to
(25:18):
global security. I also think that without boots on the
ground intelligence, counter terrorism operations are certainly taking a hit.
So now there's going to be this over the horizon
or offshore counter terrorism approach that's going to be very
different from what we're used to. So I think that's
also going to provide some groups with the operational space
to recruit, to train, and to plot attacks.
Adnan Sarwaw (25:45):
And Nabi?
Nabi Sahak (25:45):
We don't know whether the world will be safe, less safe, or more safe given
the Taliban's policy statements and given some of the contradictions
that have already been surfacing with those statements. While it's
a bad day for the technocrats in Kabul, for the
academia, for the artist, for the scholars, and for the
(26:09):
international community. But when you go to the provinces where
majority of the people live, when you go to Kandahar
today, when you go to Ghazni and you go to
Laghman. You go to all these remote regions where the
war was mostly taking its toll. Those regions are celebrating.
Now, is Afghanistan going to be safe economically is a
(26:30):
very different question. Is Afghanistan going to be safe strategically,
regionally? Those are different questions. But in terms of your
question, will there be another 911? I think that is
a one million dollar question and events are to unfold it.
Adnan Sarwaw (26:47):
It's probably more than a million dollars for that question.
Finally, Suddaf, I'm going to ask you to do something
you're told not to do in interviews and that's speculate.
I mean, you're in Kabul right now. What are your
instincts telling you about the immediate future? What does it
look like?
Suddaf Chaudry (27:02):
I think it's not what we think it will be.
I think the Taliban will give us many surprises along
the road. I have been here just under a month.
Really, I speak to them every day. They are very
committed to bring Afghanistan into an Islamic Emirate, but they're one
that can engage with the international community. That's what they're
(27:24):
proposing. But I also know this will come at a
great sacrifice to the people here. Already people are seeing
major drawbacks. I mean, the amount of people that have
left, this is going to cause a significant challenge for
Afghanistan in terms of economically, strategically, they're going to be
many roadblocks along the way. But I also think there
(27:47):
is some semblance of hope. The Taliban are not interested
in being completely destructive. They know that they need this
country to function and with that they need international support.
It's just how they play that. If they can really get
some control in all the provinces, if they can get
the engagement from say, the corporate end, to what is
(28:10):
going on in Afghanistan, they could be a functioning state.
But I also know this is going to take many,
many years.
Adnan Sarwaw (28:18):
Emerita, what do you think?
Emerita Torres (28:19):
A really important question and factor to think about is
how countries will engage with Afghanistan moving forward. I think
from a US and a Western perspective, it's going to
be really interesting to think about the kind of leverage
that we may have with Afghanistan being ruled by the
Taliban in terms of thinking around human rights and humanitarian
(28:40):
issues and the like, because we still have some level
of political leverage and level of financial leverage. Because the
US still has sanctions on the Taliban. The UN also has
sanctions on the Taliban, and there's certainly going to be
an interest in the flow of money and goods coming
into the country. I think that's something that's going to
be important for the Taliban in thinking about its own political
(29:01):
future and the future of its economy, et cetera. So
I think that's going to be really important moving forward.
I also wonder what the role of the UN will
be in this process in thinking about, the past UNAMA,
the UN mission in Afghanistan, and also just the future
of terrorism and the counter terrorism operations that will take
(29:23):
place moving forward. I think it's going to be really important to
see what the Russians will do and what the Chinese will
do and the Iranians and the like and how that's going
to boil and manifest. The United States and the global
community has invested so much in Afghanistan and the future of
Afghanistan. We withdrew, but we can't turn our backs because
the last thing we won is a failed state. Afghanistan
(29:44):
is in a volatile region, and thinking about counter terrorism,
it's really important that we maintain some level of operation
and eyes and ears to understand what's happening. Then I'll
say also on the humanitarian side, I mean, you have
Afghan refugees traveling across the country. This is not going
to be something that we forget about overnight or five
or 10 years. This is going to be a consistent issue that we'll
(30:07):
have to tackle.
Adnan Sarwaw (30:08):
Shiraz, as we all need to think about what's going to
happen next, right? Because it really does affect everyone.
Dr. Shiraz Maher (30:13):
We should care because we've been in there for the
last two decades. That reason alone is a reason to
care. But look, I mean, what has happened, the reasons
we went in, these have all been incredibly consequential. 9/
11 has shaped the world in many, many different ways.
(30:34):
I wouldn't say it changed everything, but we lived with
all of the various consequences day to day. So Afghanistan matters
for that reason.
Adnan Sarwaw (30:44):
Nabi I know you don't live there anymore, but it
is your country and you've devoted your life to try
and understand conflict and making other people understand it. So
can you tell us, what do we need to remember?
Nabi Sahak (30:54):
Afghanistan matters for historical reasons. Whenever it's abandoned or bullied
or attempts were made to control it. The history's plain.
The end results are bad. For Afghanistan itself, primarily, and
then secondarily for the region. And now given the interconnected
(31:19):
nature of the world, bad for the world. So when
you look at historically, all these people have come and
have established artificial roots there without really getting to the
truth of the land, the truth of the culture, the
truth of the people. Who really wins Afghanistan over matters.
If left to its own, who's going to win it? Russia,
(31:42):
China, India, or a collectivity of groups like ISIS and Al-
Qaeda and others coming? Because ultimately Afghanistan is a landlocked
country. It relies on international world. So whomever uses it is
going to have to be careful because it has ramification
for the whole world.
Adnan Sarwaw (32:04):
I'd like to thank Suddaf Chaudry, Emerita Torres, Nabi Sahak,
and Shiraz Maher for their insight into this complex and
dynamic situation happening in Afghanistan right now for our special
edition of Taking Apart Terror. Search for us wherever you
get your podcasts. If you're enjoying the series, please do
leave as a star rating and a review. It makes
(32:25):
a huge difference to how many people find us. Of
course, follow or subscribe so you don't miss an episode.
I'm Adnan Sarwaw. Till the next time, goodbye.
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
My Favorite Murder with Karen Kilgariff and Georgia Hardstark
My Favorite Murder is a true crime comedy podcast hosted by Karen Kilgariff and Georgia Hardstark. Each week, Karen and Georgia share compelling true crimes and hometown stories from friends and listeners. Since MFM launched in January of 2016, Karen and Georgia have shared their lifelong interest in true crime and have covered stories of infamous serial killers like the Night Stalker, mysterious cold cases, captivating cults, incredible survivor stories and important events from history like the Tulsa race massacre of 1921. My Favorite Murder is part of the Exactly Right podcast network that provides a platform for bold, creative voices to bring to life provocative, entertaining and relatable stories for audiences everywhere. The Exactly Right roster of podcasts covers a variety of topics including historic true crime, comedic interviews and news, science, pop culture and more. Podcasts on the network include Buried Bones with Kate Winkler Dawson and Paul Holes, That's Messed Up: An SVU Podcast, This Podcast Will Kill You, Bananas and more.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com