How the US Funds the Taliban

5 posts / 0 new
Last post
EndGamePlayer's picture
Status: Platinum Member (Offline)
Joined: Sep 2 2008
Posts: 546
How the US Funds the Taliban

I found this link on:

How the US Funds the Taliban

By Aram Roston

This article appeared in the November 30, 2009 edition of The Nation.

November 11, 2009

Taliban fighters in an undisclosed location in Afghanistan. Reuters Photos<br/>

Reuters Photos

Taliban fighters in an undisclosed location in Afghanistan.

On October 29, 2001, while the Taliban's rule over Afghanistan was under assault, the regime's ambassador in Islamabad gave a chaotic press conference in front of several dozen reporters sitting on the grass. On the Taliban diplomat's right sat his interpreter, Ahmad Rateb Popal, a man with an imposing presence. Like the ambassador, Popal wore a black turban, and he had a huge bushy beard. He had a black patch over his right eye socket, a prosthetic left arm and a deformed right hand, the result of injuries from an explosives mishap during an old operation against the Soviets in Kabul.

But Popal was more than just a former mujahedeen. In 1988, a year before the Soviets fled Afghanistan, Popal had been charged in the United States with conspiring to import more than a kilo of heroin. Court records show he was released from prison in 1997.

Flash forward to 2009, and Afghanistan is ruled by Popal's cousin President Hamid Karzai. Popal has cut his huge beard down to a neatly trimmed one and has become an immensely wealthy businessman, along with his brother Rashid Popal, who in a separate case pleaded guilty to a heroin charge in 1996 in Brooklyn. The Popal brothers control the huge Watan Group in Afghanistan, a consortium engaged in telecommunications, logistics and, most important, security. Watan Risk Management, the Popals' private military arm, is one of the few dozen private security companies in Afghanistan. One of Watan's enterprises, key to the war effort, is protecting convoys of Afghan trucks heading from Kabul to Kandahar, carrying American supplies.

Welcome to the wartime contracting bazaar in Afghanistan. It is a virtual carnival of improbable characters and shady connections, with former CIA officials and ex-military officers joining hands with former Taliban and mujahedeen to collect US government funds in the name of the war effort.

In this grotesque carnival, the US military's contractors are forced to pay suspected insurgents to protect American supply routes. It is an accepted fact of the military logistics operation in Afghanistan that the US government funds the very forces American troops are fighting. And it is a deadly irony, because these funds add up to a huge amount of money for the Taliban. "It's a big part of their income," one of the top Afghan government security officials told The Nation in an interview. In fact, US military officials in Kabul estimate that a minimum of 10 percent of the Pentagon's logistics contracts--hundreds of millions of dollars--consists of payments to insurgents.

Understanding how this situation came to pass requires untangling two threads. The first is the insider dealing that determines who wins and who loses in Afghan business, and the second is the troubling mechanism by which "private security" ensures that the US supply convoys traveling these ancient trade routes aren't ambushed by insurgents.

A good place to pick up the first thread is with a small firm awarded a US military logistics contract worth hundreds of millions of dollars: NCL Holdings. Like the Popals' Watan Risk, NCL is a licensed security company in Afghanistan.

What NCL Holdings is most notorious for in Kabul contracting circles, though, is the identity of its chief principal, Hamed Wardak. He is the young American son of Afghanistan's current defense minister, Gen. Abdul Rahim Wardak, who was a leader of the mujahedeen against the Soviets. Hamed Wardak has plunged into business as well as policy. He was raised and schooled in the United States, graduating as valedictorian from Georgetown University in 1997. He earned a Rhodes scholarship and interned at the neoconservative think tank the American Enterprise Institute. That internship was to play an important role in his life, for it was at AEI that he forged alliances with some of the premier figures in American conservative foreign policy circles, such as the late Ambassador Jeane Kirkpatrick.

Wardak incorporated NCL in the United States early in 2007, although the firm may have operated in Afghanistan before then. It made sense to set up shop in Washington, because of Wardak's connections there. On NCL's advisory board, for example, is Milton Bearden, a well-known former CIA officer. Bearden is an important voice on Afghanistan issues; in October he was a witness before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, where Senator John Kerry, the chair, introduced him as "a legendary former CIA case officer and a clearheaded thinker and writer." It is not every defense contracting company that has such an influential adviser.

But the biggest deal that NCL got--the contract that brought it into Afghanistan's major leagues--was Host Nation Trucking. Earlier this year the firm, with no apparent trucking experience, was named one of the six companies that would handle the bulk of US trucking in Afghanistan, bringing supplies to the web of bases and remote outposts scattered across the country.

At first the contract was large but not gargantuan. And then that suddenly changed, like an immense garden coming into bloom. Over the summer, citing the coming "surge" and a new doctrine, "Money as a Weapons System," the US military expanded the contract 600 percent for NCL and the five other companies. The contract documentation warns of dire consequences if more is not spent: "service members will not get food, water, equipment, and ammunition they require." Each of the military's six trucking contracts was bumped up to $360 million, or a total of nearly $2.2 billion. Put it in this perspective: this single two-year effort to hire Afghan trucks and truckers was worth 10 percent of the annual Afghan gross domestic product. NCL, the firm run by the defense minister's well-connected son, had struck pure contracting gold.

MarkM's picture
Status: Platinum Member (Offline)
Joined: Jul 22 2008
Posts: 855
Re: How the US Funds the Taliban

The same techniques that brought some temporary semblance of order in Iraq.  Pay them not to kill us. Makes perfect sense to me.

EndGamePlayer's picture
Status: Platinum Member (Offline)
Joined: Sep 2 2008
Posts: 546
Re: How the US Funds the Taliban

Yeap - keep the presses hot!

rowmat's picture
Status: Gold Member (Offline)
Joined: Nov 15 2008
Posts: 358
"God is on your side" - Zbigniew Brzezinski

"He wanted to arm the Mujihadeen without revealing Americas role..."

Al Qaeda was created by the U.S. in the late 1970's (specifically by Zbigniew Brzezinski and the CIA) and along with the Taliban have been funded by the U.S. for years.

The following photos show Barak Obama's current foreign policy advisor, Zbigniew Brzezinski, with Osama Bin Laden (aka Tim Osman) around 1980.

Bin Laden was a CIA asset at least up until 911, after that he was scapegoated for the 911 attacks. (refer to ex FBI whistleblower, Sibel Edmonds, testimony of August 2009)

Note that in the following document Bin Laden's CIA alias was 'Tim Osman'.

Also note that Bin Laden is referred to as a 'US Government Public Official'.

This relates to a visit Bin Laden made to the U.S. to discuss weapons requirements.

The CIA are currently overseeing Karzai's brother's opium/heroin operations which they have been supporting over the past few years.

Incidently Al Qaeda is Arabic for 'the base'.

The CIA used the name 'Al Qaeda' to name the computer database they used when training the Mujihadeen and Bin Laden to fight the Russians.

This is all well documented though very few Americans have any idea about this at all.

Now ask yourself this question.

How did an Arab in a cave in Afghanistan manage to get NORAD to stand down on September 11th, 2001?

Farmer Brown's picture
Farmer Brown
Status: Martenson Brigade Member (Offline)
Joined: Nov 23 2008
Posts: 1503
Re: "God is on your side" - Zbigniew Brzezinski

The notion that the US created the Taliban, funded it, or was partnered with Bin Laden is a common yet completely untrue misconception.

The CIA funded the Mujahadeen during the 1980's to thwart USSR plans in Afghanistan.  The Mujahadeen was a collection of disparate Afghan tribes, united in the common them of defeating the Russians.  

The Taliban was formed and founded by private Saudi Arabia sheiks.  They were thorough and ambitious - funding 12,000 madrassas along the Afghan-Pakistan border in those years, enough to brainwash a whole generation of youngsters.  When the Taliban became powerful enough, they at times cooperated with the regular Mujahadeen forces, but were never considered by them to be true "Afghans".  The Taliban were and still are considered an outside force in Afghanistan, and like all outside forces, are not trusted.  

Likewise, Afghans never accepted OBL because he was Saudi, not Afghan.  Again, Afghans really don't care who you are or where you're from - if you're not Afghan, you're just another outsider that probably deserves to die.  It was natural for OBL to team up with the Taliban.  Since they were both rejected by the Afghans, they immediately had something besides radical Islam in common.  

OBL was a laughing stock among Afghans and the Taliban for much of the war.  Those under his command were poor fighters, not respected, and often dismissed.  It wasn't until what many consider a very lucky encounter (for his part) against the Russians outside Jalalabad, that OBL gained any respect.  And many argue that he took this small victory and turned it, using clever PR to make it bigger than it was and make himself more important, into his launching pad for his "hero status".  

Anyway, the main point is that the US didn't fund the Taliban.  The US barely knew who the Taliban were, much less how to fund them.  Few knew much about the Taliban.  Even the Pakistani's, under whose watchful eye they operated, didn't quite grasp the implications of their movement.  The US funded the Mujahadeen, which is a name given to several groups of different Afghan tribes all fighting against the Russians.

The only person in Afghanistan who thinks he fought with/for the Mujahadeen, is OBL.  The Mujahadeen would would be embarrassed to have their reputation diluted by an foreigner, especially a Saudi.   And they sure as heck didn't need any help from a guy that couldn't shoot his way out of a paper bag.  OBL wants to be linked with the Mujahadeen, because it gives him more legitimacy.

For some very good info on all this, I recommend "Charlie WIlson's War" and  "Ghost Wars", for starters.

Edited to add the following:  When talking about Pakistan, one really needs to divide it into it's two-headed parts.  There was (during the 1980's) the military/government Pakistani government, and the secret intelligence forces of the Pakistani government.  The Intelligence Forces did fund the Taliban.  Their strategy was to form a radical terrorist movement to a) help keep Afghanistan contained, and b) to have ready recruits to send to Kashmir and perpetuate terrorist acts against the Indians.  Since all US funds (and all Saudi funds - the Saudis agreed to match US donations dollar for dollar) had to go through Pakistan in order to give the US cover lest the Russians see direct evidence of their support, it is quite likely that the Pakistani Intelligence Forces diverted some of these monies to fund Talibani madrassas.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Login or Register to post comments