TOPICS

Khyber Supply Route Closed - Again

thumb_mediumCarry On Khyber_79aa1.JPG

The Khyber Pass, through which 70% of US military logistic needs for troops in Afghanistan and enough food to keep Kabul from crippling famine passes, was closed again Tuesday. By my count, that makes the fifth time since the 30th of December. Militants blew up a key bridge, which was apparently unguarded at the time, only a few miles from the Pakistani regional capital of Peshawar, home to the main military garrison for the entire border region.

It was not immediately clear whether supply convoys could reach Afghanistan through alternative, smaller routes in the region. An official in the area, Fazal Mahmood, said repair work had begun on the bridge.

The top U.S. military spokesman in Afghanistan said traffic was already flowing again after the attack. "They made a bypass," Col. Greg Julian said.

Hidayat Ullah, a government official in the Khyber tribal area, said the 32-foot-long (10-meter-long) bridge was about 15 miles (25 kilometers) northwest of the main city of Peshawar.

Pakistan has dispatched paramilitary escorts for supply convoys and cracked down on militants in Khyber, but attacks have persisted in an area that up to three years ago was largely free of violence.

Col. Julian, Petraeus' spokesman, also made much of Petraeus plans for an alternative route for supplies through former Soviet states. Petraeus had last month described such a deal in very 'slam-dunk' terms, but there's an unforeseen problem. As I wrote was likely back in mid-January, Kyrgyzstan's president has announced, via the Russian press, that the US airbase in his nation is to be closed.

Kyrgyz President Kurmanbek Bakiyev spoke on a visit to Moscow minutes after Russia announced it was providing the poor Central Asian nation with billions of dollars in aid.

Bakiyev said when the U.S. forces began using Manas after the September 2001 terrorist attacks, the expectation was that they would stay for two years at most.

"It should be said that during this time... we discussed not just once with our American partners the subject of economic compensation for the stationing (of US forces at the base)," he said on Russian state-run TV. "But unfortunately we have not found any understanding on the part of the United States.

"So literally just days ago, the Kyrgyz government made the decision on ending the term for the American base on the territory of Kyrgyzstan," he said.

General Petraeus may have been blindsided by this news. He had previously claimed that the US airbase in Kyrgyzstan would play an important part in plans to develop a new supply line into Afghanistan, but that seems to have been well before Russia began pressuring the Kyrgyz government. His spokesman today dismissed the Kyrgyz leader's announcement as "political positioning".

That might be true. If so, the question former diplomats I've been talking with are asking is: "what does Russia want in return for an Afghan supply route?"

Interestingly, Afghan president Karzai was reported recently as considering a deal with Russia for military assistance. For Russia, Afgfhanistan is strategically placed between potential competitors and potential allies and Russia has always been interested in a military presence there if it could be accomplished without the kind of armed resistance that led to its withdrawal in the '80s. But there could be bigger prizes to seek too - like a new START agreement.

The Great Game continues with some new players and as ever one of the most powerful hands is held by whoever can open or close the Khyber - whether by direct action or deliberately looking the other way while local "armed entrepreneurs" do it for them. (I mean, really - a crucial bridge utterly unguarded only 15 miles from Peshawar?) Whoever has the Pass has the gorah by the short and curlies. As it stands right now, Pakistan is only reminding the US and its allies of that eternal truth. But with a US troop surge into Afghanistan in the offing and Pakistanis increasingly irate at airstrikes into their territory, the ability to cut off fuel and food to those troops and to the Afghan capital is a powerful potential weapon

Of course, as I noted last month too, there's already a perfectly good brand-new alternative road and rail route into Afghanistan...through Iran.

Crossposted from Newshoggers



Login or Register to post comments.

40 comments

Really, Afghanistan, where no country has won anything? The last thing we need to do is escalate a war in that effed up country. We just can't learn from history, can we?

Hubris of American exceptionalism prevents us from learning from History.

I present thee Hubris of American Exceptionalism! (Formerly Helen of Troy before the sex change.)

We learned much from Vietnam.

You send thousands of young men and women to die for a lost cause then you come home.

Now we appear to be doing it again!

We learned how to lose very well indeed!

are not fought to win anything unless it is to extend the fortunes of a given set of corporations.

The military industrial complex needs to actually do field work from time to time.

They would do field work all the time if they could get away with it.

It utilizes inventory, runs the billings sky high, and helps reinforce their basic reason for being.

They are getting away with it much better this time than in Vietnam. They had those pesky journalists running around then. There was a draft and people were objecting to getting killed.

Now they have privatized so much they don't need a draft. The 'News Media' is owned by entertainment conglomerates that have no interest in reporting facts.

Chalmers Johnson - The Sorrows of Empire

…News Media that are all owned by entertainment conglomerates and simply are not reported or living up to the first amendment established freedom of the press for so that journalists would be protected and virtually licensed to challenge the pretensions of high government officials living behind the walls of secrecy. To try to expose what they are doing.

The American public is very poorly informed. And as I say it is possible that it is already too late that there is really nothing else to do now but to start thinking about your escape route.

War is a racket. They are run by racketeers. Sooner or later our jig will be up.

to expand the war into Pakistan. They intend to arm and train the Pakistani army to wage war against other Pakistanis, while they conduct special ops/black ops worldwide. That, of course, has always been part of the cabal's plan. The problem remains until Obama orders the full withdrawal of all combat troops, and makes a massive number of arrests within and without the US military for treason and other war crimes. Then, and only then, can the world ever hope for a better future.

After the supply trucks got stranded, they went and burned the NATO ones.

And if you wonder why the locals won't turn over some already known to be responsible for attacks on the NATO route, read this. It's part 2 in a four part report. All four parts are decent for background. Parts 2 & 3 show a side to the Taliban not always shown here. Put that into perspective that historically the Pakistani government has treated these areas very badly, and you can see convincing the locals will be tough.

(For Cernig only, you read Descent into Chaos yet?)

Hope they stripped the supply trucks before they burned them.

You really ought to learn some of these guerrilla tactics. the way the economy is heading, you will likely need them.

Heh

I think the trucks were on the way back empty.

I was first told to learn guerrilla tactics back in the early 70s. Guy that said it made sure I knew how to shoot and track before he died too.

Now, I'm just hoping I don't really need to remember.

It's on my wish list, Hechicera.

here yah go uncle sugar, stingers aint gonna help yah now! comrads!

immediately, bring the troops home.

Cut the Military Industrial Petroleum Complex budget in half.

Dismantle the CIA.

Start thinking about making things that DON'T BLOW UP.

Dis-empower the Corporations politically.

Make the sun set in the east and suspend gravity while you're at it.

would serve any good purpose.

as usual.

How?

or revolution, or both.

No one said it would be easy.

I generally agree with your interpretation, and I agree that profiteering is a major factor in our current engagements. I also would like to see an end to this, but I wonder if we can do so now without encouraging future problems.

Although I don't completely buy the party line, there is a straight line between the power vacuum in Afghanistan and the Taliban support for Osama bin Laden and the attacks on this country and others. There is certainly evidence that the foreign policy of the previous administration made the world more dangerous and encouraged terrorism, but I think it's foolish to assume that unilateral disengagement will end all the animosity already built toward us.

Further, if bin Laden can claim victory against the U.S. in direct conflict, he will certainly have increased support and resources (see Somalia 1993, USS Cole).

Again, I don't buy into all the rhetoric, but bin Laden must be found and held to account. And the failed state that was Afghanistan needs to be reconstructed to prevent another Taliban regime funding, training, hiding, or otherwise abetting the next Al Qaeda. (By the way, Somalia and the Sudan could use some help too.)

Khyber Pass. Wasn't that a Romulan supply route on Star Trek the Next Generation?

explains the previous comment.

And the screen name.

I just had a mental image of the Taliban as tribbles.

any posts upcoming based on the The Great St. Trinian's Train Robbery?

:D

With music by Malcolm Arnold.

That's the answer ... shock and awe, indeed!

The Vietnamese had been resisting foreign aggression, principally from the Chinese, for at least a 1,000 years by the time they routed the French in 1954. And we, in our hubris, stepped right in to show them we were different. Didn't quite turn out as planned.

The same overweening pride got us into Iraq, and it's keeping us in Afghanistan. When is the US gov't going to figure out it's not omnipotent?

I remember laughing at the line in "Stripes," "We're the US, we're 10 and 1!"

"We're 11 and 3" just isn't funny (oh right, we won a "war" against---ta dum, Grenada!!!---so 12 and 3 by that reckoning.)

By the livin' Gawd that made you,
You're a better man than I am, Gunga Din! sighned your friend barry!

ps im sending 30.000 more of my friends to slay you din din din gunga din

Now I think the war (or whatever it is) will only be stopped by a middle aged man pretending to be a woman trying to get laid by a retired British general with a wooden leg named Smith. And “What was his other leg called.” All this may well be explained as a slightly more expensive form of British humor; and in the end everyone gets on a big ship and waves with a final shot of “The End?”.

Old bit of rhyming slang.

Khyber Pass rhymes with "ass."

So don't be confused if an old Brit tells you to "shove it up yer Khyber."

Some help from Tehran would go a long way.

My colleague Fester gets into some detail about just how much a thawing of hostility towards Tehran could help.

Regards, C

ever notice when afganistans a thread the hard core obamites are absent!

Carry on up the Khyber!

One of my all-time fave movies, where the bungling British battle the forces of the ruler of Afghanistan, the fiendish Khazi (British slang for a toilet, btw).

Mirth knew no bounds when I learned that the new ruler of the Afghanistan was a Mr Karzai. Life imitating art?

Anyway, it was something to have a chuckle about as the whole mess blew up in our faces.

Namely, the man who is advising Obama on foreign policy, Mr. Chess Master" himself, Zbig Brzezinski. He wanted the US in the region come Hell or high water. Well, ain't much water there, but lotsa Hell. Largely being felt by people who for the most part never did anything to us, but have lots of reasons to hate us now. And they've outlasted every Great Power that has ever tried to subjugate the area. As any history book will tell you. A pity that those in power appear to be selectively illiterate; hubris tends to do that to you...

Kyrgyzstan just wants money from the US, and we can assume the US will play hardball. I certainly don't put it past the US military to suggest to Krygyzstan's president's what it would be like if the US [CIA, NSA, DIA, etc.} becomes his enemy. The US military has been playing these games for 60 years.

was SOOOO damn important...why in the FUCK wasn't it guarded 24/7?

1. It would be political suicide for Pakistan Pres. Asif Ali Zardari to allow any sizable US/NATO force to be based on Pakistani soil for any reason.

2. Elements of Pakistan's military & intelligence service have proven notoriously sympathetic to the Taliban/al Qaeda. It would be no surprise if these militants were tipped as to when the bridge would be unguarded.

3. Pakistan has been historically, ludicrously ambivalent to terrorism on its own soil or elsewhere. Guarding stuff just isn't always a priority.

4. The Pakistani government is paranoid about securing their borders in the event of a war with India. Operations by Taliban leaders like Baitullah Mehsud are often tolerated as a sort of defense "cost." These leaders could somehow facilitate border security should an Indo-Pak conflict break out.

5. Pakistan's military is infamous for harsh treatment of "frontier" province citizenry. Tribal leaders customarily paid to guard the Khyber Pass route have become increasingly sympathetic to the Taliban. The Taliban's fear factor & money readily buy alliances. Bridges suddenly become unguarded.

-AF

Afghanistan, militarily anyways. We should maintain an immediate NATO peacekeeping force, but we should not be sending out anonymous drones to bomb random targets and dropping ordinance on people's houses in some totally futile effort to separate out people who are totally enmeshed together in ways we don't even come close to understanding.

I'm all for trying to aid the country, but this place is barely a country. Its more like a series of villages and then a capital. If we can help with agriculture & infrastructure, great. We'll never bomb them into submission though. And there is no such thing, realistically, as simply 'getting rid of the Taliban' - which nearly any hard-line Sunni Afghani can be described as being, depending on your definition.

The sad thing is that dispite the many disgusting social policies of the Taliban they were actually doing a good job of rebuilding the country before the illegal invasion by the bush Nazis.

Considering that Petraeus is about Douglas Fieth level of intellegence I don't see anything at all suprising here. Of course they left the bridge unguarded! The longer then can keep the conflict going the more money they can take away from people who work to make the world a better healthier palce and give to defense contarctors bent on destroying all that. Shit for $100,000 I'm pretty sure you could get Petaeus to leave whatever you wanted unguarded.

40 comments

Login or Register to post comments.