IS THE TALIBAN BEING FUNDED BY THE US

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:02):
The World Unexplained, a podcast that explores the unusual beliefs, conspiracies, customs, rituals,
and traditions from around the world. This is your host,
doctor Carlos.

Speaker 2 (00:27):
Have you ever wondered what your furry friend is really thinking? Well,
let me introduce to you my new book, Dog Psychology
by doctor Carlos Vasquez. As a psychology professor with over
ten years experience, I've unlocked the secrets of the canine psyche.
I will teach you how to understand your dog's body language,
to code their barks and wines, solved behavioral puzzles, and

(00:48):
strengthen your pond like never before. With Dog Psychology, you'll
see the world through your dog's eyes. Don't just be
a dog owner, become a dog whisperer. So go get
Dog Psychology by doctor Carlos Vasquez, available now on Kendre,
paperback on Amazon. True that were funding the Taliban, Well,

(01:17):
there's been a claim going around that USIP paid one
hundred and thirty thousand dollars to Mohamed Cassam Jhalimi, identified
as a former Taliban member and a minister in the
pre twenty twenty one Afghan government. Now, when I say,
are we funding the Taliban? I meant the us The
stems from report by the newest department DOGE, the Department
of Government Efficiency established under the Trump edmin which questioned

(01:42):
these USIP expenditures over the past ten years, totally around
thirteen million dollars. Halimi's pass association with the Taliban during
its first regime was between ninety six and two thousand
and one. His later role as a government official are documented,
but the purpose of the payment remains unclear. It's not
explicitly stated that this money went to fund the Taliban

(02:03):
as an active organization, or is their evidence that supported
their operations directly. So right now it's speculation, but we
are seeing these rumors flying around the internet. USIP established
by Congress in nineteen eighty four as a non parson
institute to promote peace building. Now we've seen other departments
in the government that were under the auspices of names

(02:26):
like this, peace building and things of that nature that
have other neferious reasons behind them. Now, this particular institute
receives federal funding and is barred by a law from
accepting private donations for its programs, which limits its financial autonomy.
Its activities typically involve research, mediation, and training, not direct

(02:50):
operational funding of groups like the Taliban. However, payments were
made to individuals with historical Taliban ties for other purposes
such as peace negotiations or analysis. This could be why
people have misconstruted as funding the Taliban lobbying to keep
drugs flowing. This is another theory that's going on. The

(03:12):
assertion that USIP lobbied the Taliban to maintain Afghanistan's drug trade,
particularly opium, which accounts for a significant portion of global supply,
is a little complex, though Afghanistan has been the world's
leading opium producer and the Taliban have historically profited from it,
and a lot of people living in Afghanistan have as well.

(03:33):
The estimates of their annual earnings range from forty million
to four hundred million dollars. Considering the level of poverty
in Afghanistan, sadly, not very much money is needed to
really have a good life there, if it's possible. After
taking power in twenty twenty one, the Taliban imposed a
poppy cultivation ban in April twenty twenty two, drastically reducing

(03:56):
output from about one hundred and thirty thousand hector in
Hellman to under one thousand in twenty twenty three. USIP publications,
such as articles written by William Byrd, argue that this ban,
while effective and cutting production, imposes severe economic and humanitarian
costs on Afghan farmers. Again, this is where they were
making a lot of their money, potentially destabilizing the region

(04:20):
and the Taliban's rule. Now Bird warns Warrens that without
alternative livelihoods are development, the band could drive poverty, migration,
and unrest. Not that the drug trade should persist for
its own sake, however, But what he's alluding to here
the analysis critique the band sustainability, not advocate for continued

(04:41):
drug production. So there's a flying line here. We have
to be careful because some are twisting the narrative of
lobbying to keep drugs flowing, and it gets complicated. Like
I said, is he really pushing for them to keep
drugs flowing or is it more about trying to find
a replacement to stay the economic situation? There the narrative

(05:03):
alignce with skepticism towards US institutions. We've seen this by
figures like Mike Bentz, who I like, I think he
has a lot of things that are really interesting that
he's discovered, but sometimes their speculation more so than fact.
Historical contexts like the US spending eight point six billion
dollars from two thousand and two to twenty seventeen to
curb Afghanistan's drug trade with limited success or early posts

(05:28):
with two thousand and one reluctance to eradicate poppy fields
to avoid alienating farmers feeds suspicion of mixed motives. But
we don't want to conflate the peace building supposed role
with direct support for drugs or insurgency stretches the evidence
the Taliban's own ban contradicts the idea that they were
persuaded to key production high. Now you may argue, well,

(05:49):
they did the ban so they can get the money
knowing that this would happen, or maybe this is the
whole rude It's possible, anything's possible. Conclusion, Well, the claim
is just not fully substantiated. Payments to a former Taliban
official affiliate did occur, but their purpose and impact on
the Taliban as a group are unclear. Critiques of the

(06:10):
opium ban exists in USIP's work, but they focus on
economic fallout not lobbying for drug So again it's how
we're looking at this thing. They can both be there,
and they can both be true. The accusation seems to
blend a little bit of fact and a little bit
of inference or speculation reflecting distrust in the US policy
more than a proven conspiracy, but without concrete documentation, And

(06:33):
hopefully they can find it if it is true, and
we can end this ridiculous proposal. We'll see what those
comes up with, and I'm sure with the Secretary of
Defense and the President and others, maybe they can find
a way to do what they want to do in
removing the Taliban. Possibly. I have no idea what their
end goal is with Afghanistan, but I'd be curious to

(06:55):
see what they can find as they continue to do
their auditing and research into these things. It'll be fascinating. Nonetheless,