Center President Frank Gaffney asserts that sharia supremacism is the primary animating force behind our enemies as he appears on Fox Business to preview President Trump’s Afghanistan address.
Center VP for Research and Analysis Clare Lopez appears on Neil Cavuto’s show on Fox Business Network to hold the President to account: “what is the core US national security interest in Afghanistan?”
The Islamic State (IS) has claimed responsibility for the July 31st attack on the Iraqi embassy in Afghanistan’s capital, Kabul. The attack initiated with an explosion outside the embassy gates by a suicide bomber followed by gunmen entering the compound and engaging in a four hour battle with Afghan security forces. Authorities say that the fighting ceased once all assailants had been killed though some reports claim gunfire continued long after Afghan forces declared the scene secure.
While the attack was still ongoing, IS declared responsibility via its Amaq News Agency. The casualty count remains unclear at this time though Afghan authorities say there are no fatalities among police officers and embassy staff. IS, however, claims that 27 people have been killed, including seven policemen. The building itself suffered significant damage.
The Iraqi Embassy is located outside what is known as the Green Zone, which is heavily guarded and home to many foreign embassies. With the recent victory in Mosul and its lack of security, the Iraqi Embassy reportedly did express concern over possible retaliation from IS.
The attack comes in light of IS’s loosening grip on its territories in the Middle East, specifically with the fall of Mosul and increasing pressure on Raqqa.
In Mosul, IS’s prospects are bleak. Since the group gained control over Mosul in 2014, the city developed into one of its most central strongholds in Iraq. In October 2016, the Iraqi forces launched an offensive to take back the city and after almost ten months of intensive fighting, their mission proved successful. Earlier this month, Haider al-Abadi, the Iraqi Prime Minister, announced the collapse of IS in Mosul and deemed the nine month long battle against the terrorist group for the city a success, though this success is not without its casualties. Over 900,000 people have been displaced and thousands killed. According to the UN, repairing the damage inflicted on Mosul will cost over $1 billion.
This pattern of long-term fighting and desolation is also seen in Raqqa, IS’s de facto capital in Syria. The city is currently home to over 2,000 IS fighters though their hold on the city is diminishing. Since the U.S.-backed Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) launched their offensive to take back the city in June, they claim to have captured 40% of the city. Additionally, U.S. Deputy Commander Dirk Smith states that there have not been any “significant counterattacks” from IS.
As IS continues to lose its foothold in Iraq and Syria, it will look to expand its influence and presence elsewhere. While Afghanistan’s history with ties to terrorism points to IS growth in the country, in all likelihood this will not be the case. Since IS’s arrival in Afghanistan, reportedly as early as 2014, its success in the country has significantly faltered due to backlash from the Taliban as well as Afghan and international forces.
U.S. forces in Afghanistan say they are determined to halt IS spread as illustrated with their dropping of a Massive Ordinance Air Blast Bomb (MOAB) on IS cells in April, killing at least 90 IS fighters. The Pentagon believes that there are less than 1,000 IS fighters still remaining in the country. Earlier this month, a U.S. drone strike killed Abu Sayed, the leader of IS in Afghanistan. General John Nicholson states that U.S. forces will “be relentless” in their pursuit against IS and asserts that “there are no safe havens in Afghanistan” for the group.
Since IS’s 2014 declaration of a caliphate over Iraq and Syria, it has lost over 60% of its territories and 80% of its monetary sustenance. Faced with looming defeat and mounting resistance, IS’s July 31st attack in Kabul serves as both a distraction from the group’s failures but also as a sign of its persistent strength in the region.
The July 31st siege on Iraq’s Embassy in Kabul is intended to communicate that, despite IS’s shortcomings in the Middle East, it has proven itself capable of rallying and conducting attacks in other areas, Kabul being no exception.
As IS continues to be backed into a corner, its next move is unclear; however, it is unlikely that the group will relent or disband, and reasonable to assume that it will attempt to shift its focus to other areas where it can begin to reestablish a foothold. However, where IS chooses to establish this foothold is equally unclear.
Some foreign fighters may try to return to Europe and conduct solo attacks. Others may seek out Libya, Afghanistan, or other regions with an IS presence. If IS were to relocate to Afghanistan, it would face many obstacles, as mentioned above, though this has never stopped the group before.
During this year alone, IS has reportedly conducted 280 attacks resulting in at least 2,019 causalities illustrating that we have not seen the last of the Islamic State.
Update: Death toll has surpassed 150.
The morning of Wednesday, May 31, marks another terrorist attack in Kabul. The explosion near the German embassy killed at least 90 people and wounded 400. It remains unclear whether the embassy was the intended target.
A recorded 50 people were killed in an attack at a hospital in March. In November a suicide bomber struck a Shia mosque.
As Afghanistan’s capital, Kabul is more at risk to be attacked because of the assets it holds such as its many foreign embassies and military entities. Regardless of how susceptible the capital may be, the reoccurrence of violence there is concerning.
According to the NATO-led Resolute Support mission in Kabul, the vehicle holding the bomb was heading toward the Green Zone, home to many foreign embassies, but was stopped by Afghan forces before it could enter.
Not only is the target unclear, but the group responsible remains unclear. The Taliban and IS are the two prime suspects though the Taliban have denied any involvement with the bomb and IS has yet to comment.
The Taliban denying their participation could be a result of the high number of civilian casualties. Their policy on civilian casualties has varied over time depending on their strategic situation. Given the Taliban’s ongoing competition with Islamic State, it may be the case that the Taliban does not wish to take credit for large civilian casualties as part of an effort to portray themselves as being the more restrained and strictly sharia adherent of the jihadists groups. They may also wish to emphasize that their conflict is with foreign entities and the Afghan government rather than civilians.
It is also possible the Taliban would deny responsibility because they view the Kabul bombing as a failure since the explosive did not reach the intended target.
However, there is strong evidence pointing towards Taliban involvement. The Taliban are in the midst of what is known as its annual spring offensive. Their goal is to cleanse Afghanistan of foreign invaders and other enemies. The bombing in Kabul was no doubt targeted towards a foreign embassy. While the exact embassy is yet to be determined, the attack certainly fits the criteria for a Taliban-directed attack.
Additionally, Kabul residents reported an increase in Taliban infiltration into the city just days before the bombing further indicating likeliness of their responsibility for the attack.
Regardless of whether the Taliban is to blame, the bombing in Kabul highlights key concerns in Afghan leadership and stability. The fact that such a powerful bomb could successfully detonate in what is considered a secure area not only points toward the major security failing but also the weaknesses of the Afghan government.
Presently, the Afghan government has lost control over a third of the country to insurgent groups, primarily the Taliban. Moreover, Afghanistan holds the largest concentration of US recognized terrorist groups than anywhere else in the world. These groups are well organized and pose a large threat to the government, including the Taliban. In 2015, the Taliban controlled a recorded 1/5 of the country and likely had influence over half of it. This number has only increased with time.
As insurgencies continue to expand their footprint in Afghanistan, it is important to recognize the dangers they pose.
As these insurgencies grow stronger, the government’s capacity to fight back grows weaker. The struggles of the military, such as their deep-seated corruption and NATO related combat operations, to fight insurgents as well as the Afghan government’s waning influence leaves the state vulnerable. It is clear that if the Afghan government wishes to win back control of Afghanistan, they must re-strategize their approach.
On March 19th an Afghan soldiers opened fire on U.S. coalition troops at a military base in the Helmand province, an area heavily contested by the Taliban. Three U.S. soldiers were wounded and the perpetrator killed. The Taliban did not claim responsibility, but praised the attacker.
This was the first green-on-blue attack this year, which are attacks by Afghan soldiers on U.S. and coalition forces. First reported green-on-blue attacks occurred in 2008, but it was not until 2012 that these attacks reach their peak of 44. At that point they accounted for 15% of all U.S. and NATO combat deaths in Afghanistan. The next year these attacks declined to 13 and continued the downward path reaching only two attacks in 2016. Taliban has claimed that their infiltrators in Afghan military have perpetrated these attacks.
Quantifying green-on-blue attacks is difficult in part because ISAF does not report on attacks unless soldiers have been wounded or killed, so unsuccessful or prevented attacks are not included in calculations. There remains a debate over to degree to which Green-on-Blue attacks are the results of religious or cultural conflicts between Afghan and Coalition service members, or the result of a campaign of Taliban infiltration.
Turning Afghan military personnel over to their side has been a serious effort by the Taliban. The jihadist group’s now deceased leader, Mullah Omar described in 2012 a “Call and Guidance, Luring and Integration” department, designed to encourage Afghan army and security personnel to defect to the Taliban. It’s not entirely clear how successful this effort has been, although there have been some notable defections. In November 2016 a group of 41 Afghan National Army soldiers surrendered and turned their entire base in the Chora District over to the Taliban.
Defections and desertions are the result of low morale in the Afghan military it’s military suffering from high casualty rates and low reenlistment numbers. As of November 2016 the army is at 87% of its strength and has likely grown weaker because the Taliban was able to expand control in the country.
Low morale stems at least in part from the corruption within its officers’ corps. For example, corruption among army commanders in the Helmand province caused military operations to stall and led to mass desertions. The problem extends to the army supply chain, which had to be taken over by U.S. because the Afghan military could not supply its soldiers properly. In interviews some Afghan soldiers even cited corrupt officers as the main reason for leaving.
One of the likely reasons for the decline in Green-on-Blue attacks is the decline in the number of U.S. and NATO troops present in Afghanistan to serve as targets. The number of coalition troops has steadily decreased since 2012 when attacks reached their pinnacle.
As of October, 2016 the U.S. coalition forces numbered about 10,000, compared to about 100,000 in 2010.
The most recent green-on-blue attack took place as the U.S. prepares to deploy 300 Marines to bolster the Afghan army’s fight in Helmand. The Pentagon no doubt must consider the possibility that the return of U.S. troops in substantial numbers to the theater might well be accompanied by a commensurate increase in green-on-blue attacks.
Green-on-blue attacks, when factored into preexisting problems of desertion and endemic corruption, drive a wedge between ISAF and Afghan forces. Exploiting this space is of substantial strategic value for the Taliban. The Taliban’s recent gains clearly illustrate that Afghan forces are largely incapable of defeating the Taliban without substantial closer support from the western coalition, which western military planners know comes as a substantial cost.
On March 8th, four Islamic State terrorists attacked a military hospital in Kabul killing over 30 people and wounding over 50. The group included two suicide bombers who detonated upon entering the hospital. The attack lasted several hours and it was not until mid-afternoon that Afghan forces were able to begin clean-up operations.
The IS attack on a military hospital, which is located in Kabul’s heavily guarded diplomatic center and near two civilian hospitals, shows that the Afghan army will likely be unable to defeat the Islamic terrorists alone in the foreseeable future.
IS began operating in Afghanistan in 2014 when members of Pakistan and Afghan Taliban began pledging allegiance to the organization. This occurred the same year that the U.S. and NATO officially ended the ISAF combat operations in the country.
The Islamic State has successfully carried out attacks on politicians, sectarian demonstrators, and foreign consulates. They have also been in constant conflict with the Taliban whose members have been carrying out their own terrorist attacks.
Since NATO combat operations ended the number of attacks has risen. Most of these attacks have been perpetrated by the Taliban. The jihadists have gone so far as to attack NATO military bases still in the country, with one such attack at the Bagram air-base last year killing 4 soldiers.
The NATO troops that were attacked in Bagram were part of “Resolute Support.” The alliances new Afghanistan mission, provides security assistance and training to Afghan forces. The mission suffers from endemic problems within the country’s armed forces however. This is most visible in problems with the military supply chain where corrupt practices have left soldiers with little to no access to water, food, or ammunition.
The corruption within the Afghan army has made it difficult to supply the army with the necessary equipment and hindered combat operations to the point where U.S. troops had to be deployed.
In the Helmand province the fight against the Taliban has been stymied by corruption among high ranking Afghan commanders. The corruption made it difficult to supply troops and led to desertions. U.S. responded to the developments in Helmand by sending around 300 Marines to help the Afghans fight back the jihadists in January, 2017.
This may not be enough because as of November 2016 Taliban controlled much of the Afghan countryside while the Afghan army is holding onto the cities. The USFOR-A (The U.S. army command in Afghanistan) report from August, 2016 the Taliban controls only 8 of the country’s 407 districts downplays the groups influence in rural areas and portrays only the best-case scenario.
Additionally, the Taliban was able to launch assaults on Afghan cities like Kunduz and cut off all roads to Maidan Wardak (a provincial capital near Kabul) in November, 2016 further showing the group’s ability to project their influence.
To keep Afghanistan from completely falling apart U.S. troops would probably have to be redeployed into combat missions in the near future. The U.S. troop surge from 2009 to 2012 saw American forces defeat the Taliban in their strongholds of Helmand and Kandahar while making the country more secure.
Given the success of the Afghan surge a similar mission could be launched, but this time it would likely have to be followed by restructuring the Afghan army and government. Since corruption permeates all levels of government and the military replacing just a few politicians and generals will not be enough. The problem is so endemic that the structure will likely have to be rebuilt from the ground-up.
This could take time, would face heavy opposition from the local population and would likely lack much political support in the United States., if Afghanistan is to have a military capable of suppressing the Taliban and maintain control of the country the entire institution needs substantial rebuilding..
On February 17th Pakistan closed all border crossings with Afghanistan while its army began shelling both sides of the border targeting camps belonging to Islamic State affiliates.
This escalations is due to a recent upsurge of terrorist attacks in the country. Last week a series of suicide bombings killed more than 100 people. The worst took place on February 16th at a Sufi Shrine in the Sindh province where the bomber killed 88 people and wounded over 200. Islamic State claimed responsibility for that attack.
The Afghan government criticized Islamabad’s actions saying that the shelling has forced hundreds of people to leave their villages. In return Pakistan asked Kabul to hand over 76 militants based in the country while Afghanistan demanded that Islamabad act against 32 terrorist training centers and 85 militant leaders still active within Pakistan.
Despite its own reputation for harboring terrorists the government of PM Nawaz Sharif insists that it is Afghanistan that allows jihadists to operate. The failure to acknowledge its own role in the spread of terrorism could result in Pakistan suffering more attacks.
Pakistan’s intelligence service, ISI, has provided support for the Taliban while the army drove them into Afghanistan with their military operations. Once inside Afghanistan the Pakistani Taliban splintered and some of them swore allegiance to ISIS. These groups have claimed the responsibility for bombing several Shiite mosques in Afghanistan.
Instead of destroying terrorist cells and training camps the Pakistani military either accommodated them or forced the jihadists to relocate.
When the army was not abating jihadists, it was ignoring them. IS presence in Pakistan was first reported in 2014, but the government refused to acknowledge its existence. After a series of IS attacks in 2015 and 2016 that led to deaths of over a hundred people the army finally admitted that the jihadists have presence in the country and began to crack-down on them.
In September of 2016 the army claimed to have captured the IS leadership in the country, but if that was true then Pakistan would not be shelling Afghanistan to root out their training camps.
Islamic State is not the only one with camps in Afghanistan. Al-Qaeda in the Indian Subcontinent (AQIS) set up large training camps in the country after it was pushed out of Pakistan. Since its creation in 2014 the AQIS has been responsible for killing LGBTQ activists in Bangladesh and trying to hijack a Pakistani navy ship in order to shell a U.S. one.
This was probably the result of Pakistan’s failed anti-terrorist policies. Now Islamabad is shelling Afghanistan to destroy jihadists that were placed there by its own army, which could have repercussions for cooperation between the two countries.
A spokesman for the Afghan government has already said that Kabul will not take much more of this and is ready to defend its borders against Pakistani attacks.
An Afghan/Pakistan war is unlikely given that Kabul is weak and dependent on foreign aid. However, Afghanistan might end its cooperation with Pakistan if Islamabad does not stop destabilizing the country.
Ending cooperation could make it harder for both countries to fight Islamic terrorism, which in turn might allow organizations like the Taliban or IS to expand. Without Pakistani help Islamists could take advantage of the Afghan government’s weakness to expand their safe heavens in the country.
This would allow them to plan and conduct more terrorist attacks in the region.
Twenty-four hours after the February 7th deadly suicide bombing on the Afghan Supreme Court in Kabul, the Khorasan Province of the Islamic State (IS) claimed responsibility for the attack. IS identified the bomber as Abu Bakr al-Tajiki, a Tajik national according to the SITE Intelligence Group. IS warned that “more devastating and bitter” attacks on Afghan courts and judicial staff members were to come in a statement released Thursday. The IS presents an ever growing threat and a rival to the Taliban.
As workers were leaving the parliament complex around 4pm, the suicide bomber entered the court’s parking area and detonated his suicide vest near an entrance where guards were performing security checks. Local police reported that 20 people were killed and 45 others were wounded in the explosion.
IS announced its expansion into Afghanistan in January of 2015 and has since secured footholds in at least four districts in the Nangarhar province. Initially, IS faced armed resistance from both the Afghan troops and the Taliban but in recent months their number of attacks has risen exponentially. IS increased its number of deaths and injuries from 82 in 2015 to 899 in 2016.
This increase in attacks can be credited to the fact that in mid-2016 IS altered its tactics and, according to the UN, “increased [its] ability to conduct large, deadly attacks against civilian targets in Kabul.” Last July IS carried out the first of four attacks on civilians in Kabul – a blast that targeted a Shia Muslim protest. The first three attacks all targeted Shia Muslims and the final attack targeted the Presidential Protection Service.
The Supreme Court bombing is the second major attack by IS on Kabul. The previous attack, deemed the deadliest attack since the Afghan war started in 2001, was in July 2016. IS triggered two explosions at a rally organized by the Shiite Hazaras that killed 80 people and wounded another 231.
An entire day passed before IS claimed responsibility for an attack that resembled previous Taliban attacks on Afghan judicial institutions.
Since the beginning of 2015 the UN Assistance Mission in Afghanistan (UNAMA) has documented 74 attacks on judicial authorities in Afghanistan by the Taliban. These attacks have resulted in death of 89 judges, prosecutors, and judicial staff members and 214 injuries.
The attacks in 2016 followed the execution of six convicted Taliban militants last May. Among those sentenced to death by the Afghan government was one of the top facilitators for al Qaeda in Afghanistan, Anas Haqqani.
The Taliban attempted to thwart the executions by releasing a hostage video to the American and Canadian governments of Canadian Joshua Boyle and his American wife Caitlan Coleman. They urged the American and Canadian governments to pressure the Afghan government to release the captured Taliban fighters.
President Ghani maintained his tough stance and continued with the executions despite the pressure from the Taliban.
Shortly after the executions, a suicide bomber targeted a bus carrying court employees killing 11 people in an act the Taliban called revenge. Just one month later, in June of 2016, Taliban gunmen killed seven people, including the newly appointed chief prosecutor, in a court building in the eastern Logar province.
Just last month the Taliban also claimed responsibility for the twin bombings of government workers outside parliament – this attack killed 30 and injured 70 others.
The UN reported 2016 the bloodiest year for Afghan civilians since the war began in 2001. The Afghan government stresses that is important that judicial members are considered civilians and thus these attacks are on civilians.
This rise in casualties is credited to the Taliban’s slow gaining of ground across the country. The Afghan government currently controls no more than two-thirds of the country and about half of that area is hotly contested. Until recently, the Islamic State (IS) was a relatively minor faction in Afghanistan.
Since establishing itself in early 2015, IS has been fighting the Taliban for land and influence. In June of 2016, both groups claimed responsibility for an attack on Kabul that left 14 dead. The presence of IS in Afghanistan and the Taliban’s opposition to IS present complications for the US in fighting IS in the war in Afghanistan.
On November 4th, the Pentagon confirmed that one of al Qaeda’s senior leaders, Nayef Salam Muhammad Ujaym al-Hababi, was killed in a drone strike by the US.
The attack was carried out on October 23rd in eastern Afghanistan of the Kunar Province. The US drone strike was targeted at al-Hababi and his deputy, Balal al-Utabi. Hellfire missiles were launched at two different compounds where al-Hababi and al-Utabi were hiding separately.
This attack is considered one of the most significant strikes against the al Qaeda in Afghanistan in years. Al-Hababi was added on the Specially Designated Global Terrorist list earlier this year in February by the US Treasury Department.
Al-Hababi, also known as Farouq al Qahtani al Qatari and Sheik Farooq, was the emir in eastern Afghanistan since 2015. He has targeted US coalition forces in Afghanistan for years and helped fundraise money for al Qaeda. Al-Hababi was also responsible for setting up safe havens across the country for terrorists. It is thought that he had longstanding ties with Osama bin Laden; files were recovered during bin Laden’s raid in 2011 that reference al-Hababi and the work he has done. Al-Hababi and al-Utabi were both heavily involved with attacks targeting Europe and the United States. Al-Hababi has also provided arms and logistics for Taliban fighters and other jihadists in Afghanistan.
Al Qaeda is still active in Afghanistan under the current leader, Ayman al Zawahiri. Earlier this year, the US military said al Qaeda is stronger in Afghanistan than previously estimated by the Obama administration and US intelligence officials.
Zawahiri threatened the US with 9/11 style attacks earlier this year in a video that went viral. Al Qaeda also made a threat to New York City, Texas and Virginia, claiming they would attack on November 7th, the day before the US Presidential Election.
Al Qaeda has more than 150 training camps in Afghanistan. They have conducted operations in 25 of the 34 provinces in Afghanistan, but could not carry out these operations without the support of the Taliban. Zawahiri has recently sworn allegiance with Mullah Haibatullah Akhundzada, the Taliban’s emir.
According to US officials, Siraj Haqqani, Taliban’s deputy commander, is also an al Qaeda top facilitator in Afghanistan. The Taliban control approximately 10 percent of Afghanistan, while they battle another 20 percent of the country against the Afghan government.
The Defense Ministry of Afghanistan says al Qaeda is staying quiet and reorganizing themselves as they prepare for future attacks.
Al Qaeda’s fatal resilience in Afghanistan has caught American and Afghan authorities off guard. The rebirth of al Qaeda is something the US and Middle Eastern countries should continue to watch out for. Even with 9,800 American troops in Afghanistan, al Qaeda’s competition against the Islamic State has helped the world divert its attention off al Qaeda. With 15 years of invading Afghanistan, the US is still targeting leading figures associated with al Qaeda and still active in the War on Terror.
On Wednesday October 19th, an Afghani soldier killed two Americans and left three wounded, after opening fire on Americans at an Afghan Army training facility in Kabul, Afghanistan. The unidentified attacker was killed when troops returned fire.
The attack was reportedly a “green-on-blue” attack, meaning an Afghan soldier or an Afghan police officer makes an attack against international service members. The Taliban have been known to infiltrate the Afghani security forces and make such attacks.
Right after President Obama proclaimed that the U.S intends to pull out and end combat operations did these attacks become popular in 2012; when they rose to account for 15% of coalition deaths. While observers typically attribute such attacks to Taliban infiltration, only about 25% of green-on-blue attacks involved Taliban in 2012.
Since 2008, there have been 92 “green-on-blue” attacks, leaving 150 international troops dead and 187 wounded.
The attack marks the 8th American death in Afghanistan in 2016.
Earlier this year in August more than 100 U.S troops were sent to a Helmand province, Lashkar Gah. Within the month of August one American was killed by the Taliban. The attack left another American and six Afghan soldiers wounded.
Ever since the 9/11 attacks, the United States has operated in support of the Afghani government and made it’s primary strategy an effort to strengthen Afghan security forces, some of which have later turned their guns on Americans.
Since 2001 to 2014 the U.S has been in Operation Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan. It is estimated that 2,357 US troops were killed during that time. Since 2014 it is estimated 83 Americans have been killed in Afghanistan.
President Obama officially ended the war in Afghanistan in 2014, but troops remain on the ground, some times under very restrictive rules of engagement.. In response to recent Taliban gains U.S. troops were finally permitted to directly target Taliban forces.
President Obama stated at a news conference on October 15th that there are currently 9,800 troops in Afghanistan. They will remain there until January 20th 2017, leaving his successor to determine the next move the U.S will take.
The U.S is not the only country to be campaigning against terrorism.
In August 2003 NATO authorized the United Nations to carry out on a new mission, International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) in Afghanistan until December 2014. The mission was to enable Afghan authorities and the Afghani government to provide adequate security across their borders. ISAF is NATO’s longest mission to date, with 130,000 troops from 51 nations. 90,000 of those 130,000 troops are American.
Once ISAF’s due date approached in 2014, NATO mandated another mission, the Resolute Support Mission, where 7,006 American troops are active. Launched in 2015 to train, advise and assist Afghan forces. NATO nations have committed to financially supporting the Afghan government until 2017, but may push that date back to 2020.
Despite all these efforts the Taliban control approximately 10 percent of the country, more than at any point since the Taliban’s Islamic Emirate was ousted from power post-9/11. Another 20 percent of the country remains essentially contested between Taliban and Afghan government forces.
October 3rd the Taliban took over the town of Nawa in the southern province of Helmand in Afghanistan after successfully detonating an improvised explosive device contained with a Humvee. After several hours of fighting Taliban forces gain controlled over Nawa by approximately 8:00 am local time.
The same day Kunduz, a northern province, was attacked in a raid by the Taliban. According to reports Afghan forces never allowed the Taliban to gain full control over Kunduz but police headquarters and other government areas were compromised.
Both Kunduz and Helmand are provinces with significant Taliban activity, their mission to gain territory in Afghanistan.
In early August of 2016 the Taliban took control of Nawa, including districts buildings and the management of national security building. By mid-August the Afghani government reentered the city and took back control.
In August 2016 the Taliban had control over 10 of the 14 Helmand’s provinces. Now they control 5 of the 14. Helmand is a very significant territory as it is the main location in the country for the production of opium.
The fall of Kunduz in 2015 represented significant capture of an urban center, it was their first city seizure during the last 15 years of war. However, this successful advance did not last after the Taliban faced heavy US airstrikes, permitting the Afghan government to retake Kunduz within 15 days.
Press reports from Afghanistan as of October 4th indicated that Nawa remained contested. supporting Afghan forces in Helmand and Kunduz. The Afghani military forced out the jihadi group out of Kunduz’s center with the help of US conducted airstrikes.
With President Ghani’s new financial aid of $3 billion and international support against the Taliban, it remains to be seen what their next move will be. Even with the most recent offensive blunted, the Taliban will continue to launch attacks in these areas.