5 ms·

Or it could be that the Taliban just pays fighters better [0] compared to the central government in Kabul. Their annual revenue from drug trafficking, extortion

Or it could be that the Taliban just pays fighters better [0] compared to the central government in Kabul. Their annual revenue from drug trafficking, extortion, and donations exceeds $1.5B USD [1]. Private citizens from Pakistan and Gulf states like Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Qatar give hundreds of millions of dollars to the Taliban each year [2]. Taliban fighters are also funded and trained directly by the Pakistani government [3]. Little wonder that they're able to take whole towns and cities without fighting, especially when the central government's fighters are underpaid when they're paid at all [4]. [0] https://afghanistan.blogs.cnn.com/2009/12/09/taliban-pay-vs-afghan-forces-pay/ https://afghanistan.blogs.cnn.com/2009/12/09/taliban-pay-vs-... [1] https://theconversation.com/the-taliban-are-megarich-heres-where-they-get-the-money-they-use-to-wage-war-in-afghanistan-147411 https://theconversation.com/the-taliban-are-megarich-heres-w... [2] https://www.bbc.com/news/world-46554097 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-46554097 [3] https://www.bbc.com/news/10302946 https://www.bbc.com/news/10302946 [4] https://www.reuters.com/article/us-afghanistan-security-idUSKCN1LX0FK https://www.reuters.com/article/us-afghanistan-security-idUS...

pseudo0 5y ago
Going off 2009 numbers, the US spent $5.8 billion in foreign aid on the Afghan Security Forces Fund, and about a billion more on various counternarcotics programs [0]. This funding went up to around $10 billion in 2011, and slowly declined to around $3.6 billion in 2019. This also doesn't include the air support, troop advisors, special forces, etc. that we provided to supplement Afghanistan's government, or the international aid provided by other coalition partners. So they clearly have a massive financial advantage over the Taliban, as this doesn't even include tax revenue and other standard military funding sources. Also, your [4] link is specifically talking about the police being underpaid and undertrained, not the army. My guess is that it primarily comes down to a huge motivation gap. The Afghani soldiers and police are in it for a paycheck, not to get shot, while the Taliban are fighting for an ideological cause they perceive to be just. [0] - https://foreignassistance.gov/cd/AFG?measure=Obligations&fiscal_year=2009 https://foreignassistance.gov/cd/AFG?measure=Obligations&fis...
- neartheplain 5y ago
  That funding must flow through the massively corrupt Afghan bureaucracy before soldiers or police ever see it. Much of it gets skimmed, wasted, and embezzled. Many nice houses in the D.C. area have been built with that money, not including the palatial mansions and homes of American defense contractors. >The Afghani soldiers and police are in it for a paycheck I think you meant, "Afghan soldiers and police." Afghani is (fittingly) the Afghan unit of currency. >...while the Taliban are fighting for an ideological cause they perceive to be just. It's not a matter of how many Afghans perceive a certain cause to be just. It's a matter of how many are willing to suffer and die for their cause to come out on top. Even if only a minority support the Taliban, as recent polling shows to be the case, they can impose their will on the majority if they're more willing to suffer and kill. Of course, suffering is easier to endure when you're getting paid.
  - pseudo0 5y ago
    > That funding must flow through the massively corrupt Afghan bureaucracy before soldiers or police ever see it. Much of it gets skimmed, wasted, and embezzled. This isn't exactly a compelling argument for our continued support of Afghanistan's government... We've been funding them to the tune of $3-10 billion a year in defense funding, and the corruption is so extreme that they are failing against the Taliban, with estimated total funding of $300 million to $1.6 billion [0]? That's an obscene level of graft. If 20 years on we still haven't reduced corruption to a manageable level, is it realistically even achievable? > It's not a matter of how many Afghans perceive a certain cause to be just. It's a matter of how many are willing to suffer and die for their cause to come out on top. Even if only a minority support the Taliban, as recent polling shows to be the case, they can impose their will on the majority if they're more willing to suffer and kill. Of course, suffering is easier to endure when you're getting paid. I saw the 13.4% statistic that you cited elsewhere, but I'm inclined to think that's either a low estimate or there are an awful lot of people who are ambivalent as long as basic government services continue. If the Taliban were truly culturally incompatible with the average citizen, surely there would be more organized resistance? From the news reports I've seen, the Taliban typically move into a new area, the local government rolls over, basic services continue, and the average person shrugs and moves on with their life. [0] - https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/taliban-afghanistan https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/taliban-afghanistan

pseudo0 5y ago

Going off 2009 numbers, the US spent $5.8 billion in foreign aid on the Afghan Security Forces Fund, and about a billion more on various counternarcotics programs [0]. This funding went up to around $10 billion in 2011, and slowly declined to around $3.6 billion in 2019. This also doesn't include the air support, troop advisors, special forces, etc. that we provided to supplement Afghanistan's government, or the international aid provided by other coalition partners. So they clearly have a massive financial advantage over the Taliban, as this doesn't even include tax revenue and other standard military funding sources. Also, your [4] link is specifically talking about the police being underpaid and undertrained, not the army. My guess is that it primarily comes down to a huge motivation gap. The Afghani soldiers and police are in it for a paycheck, not to get shot, while the Taliban are fighting for an ideological cause they perceive to be just. [0] - https://foreignassistance.gov/cd/AFG?measure=Obligations&fiscal_year=2009 https://foreignassistance.gov/cd/AFG?measure=Obligations&fis...

neartheplain 5y ago
That funding must flow through the massively corrupt Afghan bureaucracy before soldiers or police ever see it. Much of it gets skimmed, wasted, and embezzled. Many nice houses in the D.C. area have been built with that money, not including the palatial mansions and homes of American defense contractors. >The Afghani soldiers and police are in it for a paycheck I think you meant, "Afghan soldiers and police." Afghani is (fittingly) the Afghan unit of currency. >...while the Taliban are fighting for an ideological cause they perceive to be just. It's not a matter of how many Afghans perceive a certain cause to be just. It's a matter of how many are willing to suffer and die for their cause to come out on top. Even if only a minority support the Taliban, as recent polling shows to be the case, they can impose their will on the majority if they're more willing to suffer and kill. Of course, suffering is easier to endure when you're getting paid.
- pseudo0 5y ago
  > That funding must flow through the massively corrupt Afghan bureaucracy before soldiers or police ever see it. Much of it gets skimmed, wasted, and embezzled. This isn't exactly a compelling argument for our continued support of Afghanistan's government... We've been funding them to the tune of $3-10 billion a year in defense funding, and the corruption is so extreme that they are failing against the Taliban, with estimated total funding of $300 million to $1.6 billion [0]? That's an obscene level of graft. If 20 years on we still haven't reduced corruption to a manageable level, is it realistically even achievable? > It's not a matter of how many Afghans perceive a certain cause to be just. It's a matter of how many are willing to suffer and die for their cause to come out on top. Even if only a minority support the Taliban, as recent polling shows to be the case, they can impose their will on the majority if they're more willing to suffer and kill. Of course, suffering is easier to endure when you're getting paid. I saw the 13.4% statistic that you cited elsewhere, but I'm inclined to think that's either a low estimate or there are an awful lot of people who are ambivalent as long as basic government services continue. If the Taliban were truly culturally incompatible with the average citizen, surely there would be more organized resistance? From the news reports I've seen, the Taliban typically move into a new area, the local government rolls over, basic services continue, and the average person shrugs and moves on with their life. [0] - https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/taliban-afghanistan https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/taliban-afghanistan