Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Taliban Commanders Say They Were Tortured by Pakistani Intelligence

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Taliban Commanders Say They Were Tortured by Pakistani Intelligence

    Taliban Commanders Say They Were Tortured by Pakistani Intelligence - The Daily Beast


    Taliban Commanders Say They Were Tortured by Pakistani Intelligence

    Jan 12, 2013 4:45 AM EST Afghanistan’s former leaders are emerging from Pakistan’s shadowy intelligence lockups with tales of horror. Could the harsh treatment now backfire on their backers in Islamabad?




    It may be difficult to sympathize with the plight of former Taliban officials and commanders who have been incarcerated in Pakistan’s shadowy, extrajudicial prison lockups without charge for the past several years.




    But some of the more than two dozen insurgent leaders whom Islamabad has released unconditionally over the past two months, ostensibly as a means of reviving the stalled Afghan peace process, are now recounting in exclusive interviews with Newsweek and The Daily Beast the years of deprivation and torture they suffered at the hands of Pakistani intelligence. Not surprisingly, the harsh treatment they suffered has turned them against the Pakistanis, who, ironically, provide aid and safe haven to the Afghan insurgency as a whole.





    Mullah Nooruddin Turabi, Mullah Mohammad Omar’s former justice minister, who was freed late last month after being arrested in 2005, is the senior-most insurgent leader released thus far. Turabi, the sixtysomething, former hard-line head of the Taliban’s draconian moral police, is telling family members and friends at his house in Karachi that he was held in underground solitary confinement without sunlight, was barely fed, and was frequently tortured for five of the seven years he was incarcerated. During that time, he lost most of his eyesight in his one good eye. (He had already lost one eye and one leg during the war against the Soviets in the 1980s.)

    Turabi certainly didn’t deserve cushy accommodations. He personally and zealously supervised the enforcement of the Taliban’s tough dress, moral, and gender codes during the Taliban’s regime: beards of a certain length for men, burqas for women, and the prohibition of women’s education and employment outside the home or women leaving home without being escorted by a male relative. Turabi says that some of those who mistreated him told him they were doing it as payback for the way he and his police treated women under the Taliban’s rule. “Some of the interrogators told him he was receiving God’s punishment for the way he insulted humanity and treated women while he was minister,” says senior Taliban operative Zabihullah, who recently met Turabi in Karachi. (Zabihullah is a pseudonym.) He told Zabihullah that he believes the Pakistanis treated him even worse than the Americans would have: “The Americans would not have kept me thirsty for the sun for five years.”

    Until 2010, Turabi says interrogators never tired of asking him questions that he couldn’t answer: where are Mullah Omar and Osama bin Laden? “Some of the interrogators were nice and wished me and the Taliban well, but most were rude, nasty, and violent. But they all kept asking the same stupid questions,” he told Zabihullah. Some of his interrogators were even apologetic, saying they only arrested him and other Taliban leaders after receiving heavy pressure from the Americans. “The [Inter-Services Intelligence] explained they had no alternative but to arrest me and others,” Turabi told Zabihullah. “I can understand that, but then why beat, insult, and torture and lock me up in a dark room?”Although he was blindfolded during the interrogation sessions, Turabi says he believes American were present because of the incessant questions about Omar and bin Laden, but he does not implicate the Americans in his mistreatment.
    “Pakistan is not only breaking the backbone of the Taliban, it is also crushing the bones of the Islamic movement.”
    In the end, the intelligence agencies wanted Turabi to cooperate with them. Just before he was released, they asked him to tell Mullah Omar to use his influence with the Pakistani Taliban and order them to cease their attacks on Pakistan. But after so much pain and suffering, Turabi was hardly in a cooperative mood. “I told them no deal. The way you have treated me for seven long years, I have forgotten Mullah Omar’s address and I can’t even remember his face,” he told Zabihullah.

    Another recently freed Taliban commander, a former deputy provincial governor who requests anonymity for security reasons, says he was mistreated so badly that he believes Pakistan is the enemy and that “Pakistan hates the Afghan Taliban.” As a result, he says he is now more than ever committed to the Taliban’s cause. “We will never forget the mental and physical torture,” the commander told Newsweek and The Daily Beast. “Before I went to jail I was a Taliban, but now I am even more committed and solid. I will do whatever the Taliban shura assigns me to do.” To him Pakistan has become the main foe. “Pakistan and its secret service are the enemy No. 1 of Afghans and the Islamic movement,” says the commander, who was arrested at his house in Quetta in 2008. “Pakistan is not only breaking the backbone of the Taliban, it is also crushing the bones of the Islamic movement.”

    “Only God knows how many jihadists from many countries are rotting in these ISI black, underground cells,” he adds.

    Reports of torture, disappearances, and the mistreatment of detainees are nothing new in Pakistan. According to the U.S. State Department’s 2010 Human Rights Report, “extrajudicial killings, disappearances, and torture” are “major human-rights problems.” “There are reports that security forces, including intelligence services, tortured and abused individuals in custody,” the report adds. Amnesty International, in its report on Pakistan last December, says the Pakistani military has “free rein to carry out torture and enforced disappearances.” Human Rights Watch’s World Report 2012 says that “Thousands of suspected members of Al Qaeda, Taliban, and other armed groups… remain in illegal military detention” and that there is “continuing torture and ill-treatment of criminal suspects.” Pakistan’s security services strenuously deny the charges.

    But enemies can suddenly become friends or at least non-enemies. About six months ago, Turabi, the commander, and several other Taliban suddenly were flown from their clandestine lockups in Karachi to two ISI safe houses around Islamabad and Rawalpindi, they say. There they were united with about two dozen other Taliban, some very senior, including Mullah Omar’s No. 2 and brother-in-law, Abdul Ghani Baradar. There were some 18 Taliban in one house and six, including Baradar, in another. They said that Baradar seemed to be in charge and “be in good shape.” Neither Turabi nor the commander knows why they were arrested in the first place or why they were suddenly released from the cruel confines of Karachi to the relative comforts near the capital. “We don’t know why things changed,” says the commander. “One day we were the bad enemy, the next we were the nice prisoners.” Then they were released last month “unconditionally,” they say.

    If Pakistan is hoping the releases will give some momentum to the moribund peace talks, then it may be disappointed. After what Turabi and the other incarcerated insurgents have experienced, they may not be in a compromising mood. At least one Taliban operative in Kabul says it’s unlikely the releases will add good will or a fillip to any negotiations. “Those who were freed will not play any positive role for peace,” he says requesting anonymity for security reasons. “If the Taliban asks they will rejoin the attan,” he adds, referring to the traditional Afghan dance. ” The dance of war, not of peace.

  • #2
    I think Pakistan's ISI treatment of these animals is still far more human than Taleban (animals) treatment of others although ISI is equally detestable as Taleban. One should remember all the beheading, suicide bombing, and criminal brutalization of common people.

    Comment


    • #3
      ISI and Pakistan,already paying a high price,and it will end in the destruction of this criminal state.
      High achievement always takes place in the framework of high expectation.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Afghanistan2010 View Post
        ISI and Pakistan,already paying a high price,and it will end in the destruction of this criminal state.
        Talebans are no more than little puppies of ISI. They may bark they may bite but in the end it is the master who kills them if the rabbies-bitten animals become uncontrollable.

        Comment


        • #5
          That is your view,TTPs attack on ISI,signals a different messsage,that the afghan taliban are not linked to Pakistani or ISI,otherwise they would have started to fight TTP.

          TTP are indeed a group of thugs,but if it makes headaches to pakistan,that is positive for the afghan taliban and afghan government.
          High achievement always takes place in the framework of high expectation.

          Comment


          • #6
            US to speed up Afghan troop transition - Americas - Al Jazeera English

            President Barack Obama has promised to speed up a transfer of lead security responsibility from NATO to Afghan forces this spring, in a sign the pace of US troop withdrawals could quicken.

            After meeting Afghan President Hamid Karzai on Friday, Obama said NATO forces would have a "very limited" role in the country after 2014 and insisted that Washington had achieved its prime goal of "decapitating" al-Qaeda.

            The leaders met at a crucial moment in the final chapter of a long, bloody war, and as Obama balances the future security of Afghanistan with US combat fatigue and a desire to spend America's dwindling resources at home.

            "Starting this spring, our troops will have a different mission - training, advising, assisting Afghan forces," Obama said.

            "It will be a historic moment and another step toward full Afghan sovereignty."

            Obama said any agreement on troop withdrawals must include an immunity agreement in which US troops are not subjected to Afghan law.

            The president said the path of the US military remains clear and the war is moving toward a "responsible end" in 2014.

            War-weary public

            US commanders in Afghanistan have proposed keeping 6,000 to 15,000 US troops after 2014 to continue pursuing armed groups and training Afghan security forces.

            The White House tends to favour lower troop levels than military generals.

            US officials have said privately that the White House is asking for options to be developed for keeping between 3,000 and
            9,000 troops in the country.

            General John Allen, the top US and NATO commander in Afghanistan, had initially suggested that as many as 15,000 troops should remain - a number Obama would likely have a hard time selling to a war-weary US public.

            With some 66,000 US troops currently in Afghanistan, Obama is also deciding on the pace of this year's troop reductions.

            NATO allies are also steadily reducing troop numbers and Afghan forces are due to take the lead role in security across the country in 2013.

            However, doubts remain about their ability to shoulder full responsibility.

            Officials say Obama would be open to pulling all US forces out of Afghanistan at the end of 2014.

            Comment


            • #7
              Boo hoo, deserve them right, nobody gona have pity or symphaty for those animals.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Afghanistan2010 View Post
                That is your view,TTPs attack on ISI,signals a different messsage,that the afghan taliban are not linked to Pakistani or ISI,otherwise they would have started to fight TTP.

                TTP are indeed a group of thugs,but if it makes headaches to pakistan,that is positive for the afghan taliban and afghan government.
                Lol---that is what you can expect from a Taleb retard---This is the ISI having given the so-called Taleban the sanctuary---every Afghan Taleb is virtually an ISI puppy ---as for TTP, ISI has a long experience as how to handle the beasts.

                Comment


                • #9
                  BBC News - Obama to hold talks with Karzai on Afghan exit strategy

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    US’s ‘zero option’ in Afghanistan
                    These are extraordinary times when ‘all options are on the table’ — be it on Iran, North Korea or even Syria. Afghanistan has now been added to the list. The remarks by the United States deputy national security advisor Ben Rhodes on Tuesday that the Barack Obama administration is also entertaining a ‘zero option’ with regard to post-2014 Afghanistan has caught everyone off balance.

                    Did Rhodes really mean it? Does Obama indeed have such an option? Maybe, the hair splitting is beside the point. What it highlighted in political terms was a complex message to multiple audiences.
                    First and foremost, remember that Afghan President Hamid Karzai had just landed on American soil to confabulate with Obama about the US role in the post-2014 period.
                    Karzai carries a wish list. He wants to be hundred percent certain that the US’ commitment to Afghanistan’s stabilization continues beyond the troop withdrawal envisaged through this year and the next.

                    Although Karzai never loses an opportunity to claim he is the master of his house, he ought to know that without continued American backing, his house can collapse like a pack of cards. It’s plain realism combined with an acute instinct of survival in a harsh country.
                    Do not forget that out of the three dozen odd Afghan army brigades that the North Atlantic Treaty Organization trained in all these years, it is only one single brigade that can possibly acquit itself in the heat of a battle with the Taliban. Now, that is saying a lot.

                    But then, as the Americans would say, there is nothing like free lunch. If the US troops should remain in Afghanistan, well, there is a caveat, namely, the Pentagon will exercise full control over them and they will enjoy full immunity from the Afghan laws — even if they transgress in their behavior by, say, raping an Afghan woman, urinating on the Koran, walk into Afghan homes in search-and-destroy missions and so on.

                    More important, Washington expects an Afghan guarantee in the matter in black and white, and written and signed in a solemn document — a status of forces agreement.
                    Now, Karzai knows it is a ‘deal breaker’. In fact, this was exactly how Iraqi PM Nouri al-Maliki got rid of the US troops while pretending he wanted them around for the medium and long term. But Karzai is no Maliki and Afghanistan isn’t Iraq.
                    Karzai worked hard to get an Afghan ‘consensus’ in favor of granting the American demand. But it is just not one of those situations like when Lawrence of Arabia could bend and pick up a sheet of paper and write a promisory note on behalf of Her Majesty in London ostentatiously assuring the Bedouin chief in the Gulf of Aqaba on her behalf of a hefty bribe (in gold coins) to ‘incentivise’ him in the ‘Arab revolt’ against the Ottoman Turk.
                    Plainly put, Karzai lacks the the capacity — to deliver such an Afghan national consensus on a platter to the Oval Office. Now, Rhodes has put the ball back in Karzai’s court by gently reminding him, ‘Mr. President, it is all-or-nothing’.
                    By saying it aloud, Rhodes also hoped that his words will resonate in the Afghan bazaar and will rally opinion in that highly fragmented country in favor of an SOF agreement just the way Pentagon demands.
                    But, will the ploy work? A report by the RFERL (which is government-funded) effectively claims that the ploy is working and Rhodes rattled the Afghan nerves, and that Afghans are scared stiff that the US might abandon them to the wolves by exercising the ‘zero option’.
                    Frankly, it is all becoming a farce. The Taliban would be laughing at the whole lot of them — Karzai, Rhodes and the RFERL. As the Taliban would see it, the US has zero options today — except to end the futile war.
                    Equally, no regional power would take Rhodes’ threat seriously. There is a deafening silence in the regional capitals. Rhodes failed to explain why if there is such a ‘zero option’ in reality lying on the table in the Oval Office, why then did the Pentagon spend hundreds of millions of dollars in the past year to revamp and refurbish the military bases in Bagram, Herat, Kandahar, Jalalabad etc., so that they make a home away from home for the American troops.
                    Posted in Military, Politics.

                    US’s ‘zero option’ in Afghanistan - Indian Punchline

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X