Wednesday, September 14, 2005
Who helped Osama bin Laden escape?
Stratfor reports this morning that Afghan foreign ministry spokesman gave an interview on Pakistani television yesterday, in which he accused Hazrat Ali of helping Osama bin Laden escape from Tora Bora. From the Stratfor situation report($):
Global Security's profile on Ali tells us that he is one of "our" corrupt Afghan warlords:
The Karzai government has been trying to bring Ali in line under the Disarmament, Demobilization and Reintegration program, in which "warlords" join the central government's political and military structure.
So what might be said about this story, which has not yet been picked up by the Western MSM? If the accusation against Ali is true, then we have learned no lesson that we did not already know: corrupt warlords would rather be paid by both sides than by one side. And even if they only really want to be paid by the American side, they know that the paychecks will keep coming if Osama is at large, but they might stop coming if Osama is captured or killed. It is in at least the financial interest of most of Afghanistan's warlords to keep this thing going.
But we also have reason to believe that this might be disinformation. The interests of the Karzai government and the United States are not perfectly aligned. The Karzai government wants to survive and consolidate its power, and the United States shares that objective. The United States, however, also wants to capture Osama bin Laden. Toward that end, we are probably continuing to support Afghan militias who promise to go after bin Laden. That support almost certainly strengthens the periphery at the expense of Karzai's center, and that is against Karzai's best interests. Karzai also wants to capture bin Laden, but his motivation is to end American aid to the independant armies that still deprive the Kabul government of its monopoly on the use of force in Afghanistan. Failing that, it is in the interests of the Karzai government to pressure the United States into ending support for warlards like Hazrat Ali. If Kabul can show that Ali betrayed the United States by helping bin Laden escape from Tora Bora, we might well yank support whether or not we've caught bin Laden.
I am guessing that there is a huge argument between the State Department and the CIA about our support for Hazrat Ali, but nobody in the mainstream media has written a story about it.
UPDATE: A commenter reminded me that this Sunday's New York Times Magazine included an article on the subject of bin Laden's escape from Tora Bora. While mentioning Hazrat Ali, it does not finger him as having "helped" bin Laden's escape. A close reading of the NYT article does not, however, preclude that possibility.
Afghanistan's Foreign Ministry acknowledged that al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden had re-entered Afghan territory following his escape from Tora Bora in December 2001, ministry spokesman Lutfullah Mashal said in an interview to air on Pakistani satellite channel GEO TV the evening of Sept. 13. Mashal added that bin Laden had entered the Pakistani area of Parachanar from Tora Bora, but later returned to Afghanistan's Khost province. Mashal also said that the warlord Hazart [sic] Ali, whom U.S. military forces relied upon during their Tora Bora operation, aided bin Laden's escape in exchange for money.
Global Security's profile on Ali tells us that he is one of "our" corrupt Afghan warlords:
Hazrat Ali is considered the strongest power broker in Jalalabad and Nuristan in eastern Afghanistan. Backed by the United States against the Taliban, Hazrat Ali is the only power that really matters in Jalalabad. Supported by American military might and money, Ali represents a potent new force in post-Taliban Afghanistan, challenging a weak central government that has no choice but to work with him.
The Pentagon enlisted Ali's help to lead the ground battle against Osama bin Laden's fighters in nearby Tora Bora in the fall of 2001. A year later, his fighters accompanied US Special Forces based in Jalalabad. Ali's rivals say his gunmen routinely threaten anyone who disagrees with them that they will call down B-52 airstrikes from the Americans. Ali commands 18,000 fighters, making his force the largest in eastern Afghanistan. Six thousand of his soldiers are in Jalalabad and surrounding Nangahar province.
Hazrat Ali is a member of the minority-dominated Northern Alliance and a member of the small Pashai tribe. He succeeded in wresting control of Jalalabad from two Pashtun rivals Mohammed Zaman Ghun Shareef and Abdul Qadir in the center of Afghanistan's Pashtun belt. The Pashai Ali is commonly described in Jalalabad by the Pashtun insult Shurrhi, which translates roughly to "ignorant mountain man." He is regarded as someone who has brought the primitive code of the mountains to the more civilized city on the plains, Jalalabad. Ali was favored by the Americans over Jalalabad's two other major figures because he was Northern Alliance and not Pashtun, rendering him a more reliable partner.
The Karzai government has been trying to bring Ali in line under the Disarmament, Demobilization and Reintegration program, in which "warlords" join the central government's political and military structure.
So what might be said about this story, which has not yet been picked up by the Western MSM? If the accusation against Ali is true, then we have learned no lesson that we did not already know: corrupt warlords would rather be paid by both sides than by one side. And even if they only really want to be paid by the American side, they know that the paychecks will keep coming if Osama is at large, but they might stop coming if Osama is captured or killed. It is in at least the financial interest of most of Afghanistan's warlords to keep this thing going.
But we also have reason to believe that this might be disinformation. The interests of the Karzai government and the United States are not perfectly aligned. The Karzai government wants to survive and consolidate its power, and the United States shares that objective. The United States, however, also wants to capture Osama bin Laden. Toward that end, we are probably continuing to support Afghan militias who promise to go after bin Laden. That support almost certainly strengthens the periphery at the expense of Karzai's center, and that is against Karzai's best interests. Karzai also wants to capture bin Laden, but his motivation is to end American aid to the independant armies that still deprive the Kabul government of its monopoly on the use of force in Afghanistan. Failing that, it is in the interests of the Karzai government to pressure the United States into ending support for warlards like Hazrat Ali. If Kabul can show that Ali betrayed the United States by helping bin Laden escape from Tora Bora, we might well yank support whether or not we've caught bin Laden.
I am guessing that there is a huge argument between the State Department and the CIA about our support for Hazrat Ali, but nobody in the mainstream media has written a story about it.
UPDATE: A commenter reminded me that this Sunday's New York Times Magazine included an article on the subject of bin Laden's escape from Tora Bora. While mentioning Hazrat Ali, it does not finger him as having "helped" bin Laden's escape. A close reading of the NYT article does not, however, preclude that possibility.
2 Comments:
By 
, at
Wed Sep 14, 10:12:00 AM:
Compare with 9/11/05 NYT Sunday Mag piece by Mary Anne Weaver on OBL,s probable escape from Tora Bora.
By 
Counter Trey, at
Wed Sep 14, 11:48:00 AM:
Great post TH. I guess there's a reason his name ends in "rat."
