Just three days after an Islamic State suicide assault team killed 129 people in Paris, the Afghan Taliban released a statement approving of the mass murder and said France’s “colonial policy” and involvement in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, and Libya justified the attack. The statement was released on Nov. 16 on Voice of Jihad’s Pashto language section of its website, and is reproduced in full below. A translation of the statement was obtained by The Long War Journal.
The Taliban’s statement of support for the Paris attack should come as no surprise. The Taliban also approved of al Qaeda’s attack on the Charlie Hebdo‘s headquarters in Paris in January 2015, which it described as “justice.” The Charlie Hebdo attack is referenced twice in the most recent statement.
While western officials still seek to negotiate with the Taliban, the group continues to support attacks in Western countries and demonstrates that it maintains close ties to al Qaeda, such as when it accepted al Qaeda’s oath of allegiance.
Paris in Fire Caused by Reaction to Its Own Actions
Analysts have noted the various factors regarding the recent bloody attacks in Paris and have assessed them from different angles. However, the main cause might be France’s colonial policy and its naked military invasions of the Islamic world. From the crusader wars until the 20th century, and even the 21st century, Paris under one pretext or another has occupied Muslims’ lands, dropped bombs on them, and created political and economic problems for them.
In the last decade, France, in order to gain, protect, and expand its colonial interests has carried out unrecorded military attacks in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, and Syria; it has killed, displaced, and imprisoned the people of those countries and caused damage to their properties.
Even though the attacks in France have no link to Afghans and Afghanistan, that country remained an ally of America during the invasion of Afghanistan from day one. France took a huge part in the elimination of an Islamic regime that the people liked. In the same way, it has killed and tortured people in Libya, Syria, and other Islamic countries.
A few months ago, a surprised attack on the Charlie Hebdo magazine office shook France; in the attack, 14 cartoonists, employees, and the editor of the magazine were killed.
Two Muslim youths carried out the attack in reaction to repeated printings of cartoons of the Prophet Mohammad. Nevertheless, after the attack, Charlie Hebdo not only did not stop its campaign of disrespect for Muslims, but the magazine repeatedly published disrespectful cartoons of the Prophet Mohammad with an unprecedented circulation.
The latest Paris attacks relate directly to the unpleasant policy of the country’s officials. In other words, the recent attacks in Paris are a result of France’s wrong policies. Therefore, in order to save itself from such dangerous attacks in the future, it is important that France, before anything else, reconsider its policies.
Are you a dedicated reader of FDD's Long War Journal? Has our research benefitted you or your team over the years? Support our independent reporting and analysis today by considering a one-time or monthly donation. Thanks for reading! You can make a tax-deductible donation here.
17 Comments
Life is hard when you can’t find anyone to surrender to. This is what happens when you put diplomats in charge of prosecuting wars. Obama doesn’t seem to understand that you need to win first on the battlefield, then you can sit down (assuming you went to war because you had to win). Kissinger and China made these Harvard lib Dems like Kerry think you could work miracles w back channels. It’s not true. That was a unique situation. The posture called for versus the Taliban is the old faithful, boot on neck. Afghans don’t want them back.
Should anyone be surprised? Of course the Taliban approve of the massacre of innocent people in Paris.
The Taliban, al-Qaeda, ISIS, the Khorasan Group: They all conform to the same tenets and principles of Wahhabism; no matter what their colors, ethnic origin, or interests, Wahhabism is a cancer on all of humanity.
What is schocking to me is that in light of this act of terror in Paris, the President of the United States sits down with the King of “Wahhabi” Arabia.
From MSNBC to Fox to BBC, everyone seems to be under the impression that Saudi Arabia is an ally of the West. The sooner our policy makers and our government stop living in the twilight zone and stop the delusional naitivity of treating and according the Saudis any degree of courtesy, the sooner the west can deal with the filthy cancer of terrorism that has its source of origin in Saudi “Wahhabi” Arabia.
We need to approve of ISIS sawing off the heads of more Taliban. In fact, behind the scenes, we should be zealously encouraging it. I’m still waiting for bedridden Baghdoggy to send that child suicide bomber to finish off old and decrepit Zawahiri. Just imagine how many potential recruits he’s losing.
You’d better believe the Taliban are scared silly of ISIS.
The important question this raises is whether the Taliban have finally given up on seeking world recognition for their government? If so, then there is little for them to consider losing in taking this position on Paris. And that should be a worrisome development in my opinion.
I find the tone of the communique very interesting: it sounds completely different from those of other jihadi outfits. It is almost academic. Is that due to the translator or is that normal?
To my above comment, I’d like to add a little insight. This statement by those tailbunnies is showing that they suffer from a “better US than them” syndrome if there ever was one. I mean, I’m sure they’d prefer that ISIS be sawing our heads off than theirs. My good sound advice for CIA is reciprocate. Fight fire with fire. Terrorize the terrorists.
I think every important person in Afghanistan is addicted to profits from the 60 billion USD street value narcotics industries overseen by the CIA.
After all, I mean really , if Vietnam could have rain forests sprayed, suerly poppy fields would be a breeze.
It think the status quo in Afghanistan suits all players, if Emir Mansour really wanted to win, he wouldn’t be talking like that.
One of the few good points in HRC’s foreign policy speech the other day was calling out “individual” Saudis for financing terror. We need to start seriously considering asset freezes and travel bans for these princelings that crash their Lambos in Beverly Hills, beat their servants and write checks to build madrassas and mosques where they don’t belong.
Avesta sad to say but you are completely wrong dude, for starters I don’t think you understand what ‘Wahhabism’ is. The name comes from an 18th century theologian named “Muhammed ibn Abdul-Wahhab” who was supported by an Emir named Muhammed ibn Saud. The pair started a reformist movement that aimed to eradicate what they viewed to be polytheistic practises and beliefs that had crept into the Arabian peninsula at the time. To cut a long story short they opposed Sufism and unified the warring tribes of Bedouins that existed at the time in their various small statelet’s into a greater state in which the House of Saud would rule, and the Clergy would be the grandsons of Ibn Abdul Wahhab. Some followers of Ibn Abdul Wahhab became dissatisfied with Al Saud and rebelled against his authority, so their teacher declared them to be ”Kharijites” (Renegades) and gave Al Saud the right to fight these dissidents and until this day this tradition continues and I suggest you read what the ”Wahhabist/Salafist” scholars say regarding all the groups you mentioned. Also the Taliban are not ”Wahhabist” or Salafist they are in fact from the Deobandi school of Sufism.
sorry I forgot to mention, the current Mufti of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is a descendant of Ibn Abdul Wahhab, his name is Abdul Aziz ibn ‘Al Ash Sheikh’ (‘meaning family of the scholar’, Ibn Abdul Wahhab) Anyway he another descendent named Salih Al ash Sheikh both condemn ISIS, AQ all of the aforementioned. Obviously I’m in no way defending any group or the Saudi’s, their Clergy or any thing but I just believe it is important to know the differences between the beliefs of all the various groups.
Well the Saudi’s did supply the US backed FSA with all those TOW’s that make such great videos.
Avesta, it is not yet affordable, USA, UK and more are standing in line to sell weapons to the Arabs. Russia has said “njet” twice, once to Turkey and once to Saudi when they wanted to trade Syria against Jemen. It is a fast hardball game on right now and Nato powers are blown aside. It is telling and hard “real politic” when EU decides enough is enough, we have to make biz with Russia and with China through that corridor. Best option to shut down the Sunni arabs is of course to quicken the acceptance of Iran and US is fully aware and it is a game plan I think. Turkey as well as Sunni pushers will have to swallow Ottoman and Khaliphat dreams and we will keep on trucking.
No where does the Taliban say they support but they do give reasons why the attack has happened, reasons given by many westerners in recent days that condemned the attacks but note why it has likely occurred. In their statements Islamic Emirate state repeatedly they are not interested in attacking outside of Afghanistan in Europe. As for the RichardL comment regarding academic response, that is nothing unusual. Taliban spokespersons are usually well educated, know their socio-political history including the culture of the west. They can also be very funny and use satire even pointing even pointing to British comedians such as as a Fry and Laurie and their sketch on the psychiatrists when they suggested certain human rights groups should seek psychiatric help after their comments on Kunduz. In discussion regarding the above article the following response was given to me by someone in the AfPak region… “I would say the statement has been twisted by LWG, if some one asks a rational French wise person about attacks, he would surely answer the way IE has said. Any wise and reasonable sincere person will ask the Govt of France to Stop carrying out atrocities. France has been No 1 enemy of IE even before America attacked. Ahmed Shah Massoud was granted all aid and his troops were trained in France and weapons were delivered to NA by French Govt. France has stood as a criminal and dangerous enemy against IE. This point has not been indicated by LWG. Lets ask LWG about French role in recent history of Afghanistan. It is amazing that no other country actively was at war before 9/11 against IE other than France.”
Avesta, did you know that the Saudis built a megamosque in the heart of Brussels (Molenbeek) after a fire there in the 1960s? They filled it with their favorite radical Imams, encouraged emigration by poor Muslims and pow! look what happened. The worst vipers’ nest in Europe. Now they want to build 200 mosques across Europe for the refugees flooding in. These friends of Sharia work a long-term plan, and the friends of Barry just smile and say don’t offend their head-chopping, wife-beating “religion.”
Part of me hates to see terrorist apologists on here, Carol Anne Grayson, but another part is glad you are so that the watchers can watch you. Massoud was good guy, if a tad aggressive. That you support the Islamic Emirate after they’ve destroyed so much, and been so unbelievably awful towards women and Hazaras, and hidden in hospitals drawing fire on innocents, tells me all I need to know about you. Stow the “well-educated” hogwash, will you? That was just clumsy translation from the Pashto. Mullah Omar couldn’t even read the Koran.
stay away from the light carolanne!!
Well Taliban aren’t really Wahabi so not sure what you’re on about