Friday April 20, 2018
Home India Kerala man am...

Kerala man among 36 Islamic State (ISIS) men killed in US Bombing in Afghanistan

The bomb used in the strike is claimed to be the biggest-ever non-nuclear bomb.

0
//
44
Iraqi Army
Islamic State (ISIS), VOA
Republish
Reprint

Washington/Kasargode (Kerala), April 14, 2017: An Islamic State (IS) activist from Kerala is believed to have been killed along with 36 IS militants when the US unleashed a massive GBU-43 bomb, also known as the “mother of all bombs”, on the terror group’s position in a cave network in eastern Afghanistan.

According to Indian intelligence officials, Murshid Mohammed, in his 20s, who hailed from Kasaragode in Kerala, was among the IS militants killed after the US military struck the IS’ position in Nangarhar province, near the Pakistan border, on Thursday with a massive 10-tonne missile-powered bomb.

NewsGram brings to you current foreign news from all over the world.

Speaking to IANS, a top intelligence officer in Kasargode said that around Thursday midnight they got information of Mohammed being killed in the US military assault.

“The information of the death came to a relative of Mohammed. Unlike similar news received in February about the death of another youth from here, this time there are no pictures (to establish the death),” the officer said.

A relative of Mohammed received only a message that he was killed, according to the Kerala Police intelligence wing.

NewsGram brings to you top news around the world today.

The bomb used in the strike is claimed to be the biggest-ever non-nuclear bomb.

It was so massive that it had to be dropped from the rear of a cargo plane, said Pentagon.

Afghan officials said 36 militants were killed in the strike.

“The strike has destroyed an IS headquarters, three IS hideouts along with several bunkers and deep tunnels as well as huge amount of weapons and ammunition,” the Afghanistan Defence Ministry statement said.

No civilian was injured in the raid which took place in Mohmand Dara village, Asadkhil area of the district, the statement added.

Check out NewsGram for latest international news updates.

The strike was designed to minimise the risk to Afghan and US forces conducting clearing operations in the area while maximising the destruction of IS fighters and facilities, said the US Forces-Afghanistan, which is part of NATO-led Resolute Support.

Afghan President Mohammad Ashraf Ghani hailed the attack on the IS position.

“Precautions were taken to avoid civilian casualties with this airstrike. Assessment of the casualties to the ISIS-K is in process,” the Afghan Presidential Palace said in a statement.

US President Donald Trump said on Thursday the bombing was “another successful job.”

The commander of the US forces in Afghanistan, General John Nicholson, defended the use of the bomb and confirmed the target of the strike was the network of tunnels that IS fighters use to move around and protect themselves from Afghan and US forces.

“This was the right weapon against the right target,” he said.

This is the third major military action the Trump administration has taken since assuming office on January 20, following a military raid in Yemen that left civilians and a US Marine dead and last week’s surprise strike on a Syrian airfield.

Afghanistan’s Ambassador to the US Hamdullah Mohib said the colossal Massive Ordinance Air Blast Bomb (MOAB) was dropped after fighting had intensified over the last week.

Multiple Afghan officials previously said they had no information about the bombing before it happened.

US State Department spokesman Mark Toner said Washington is “working with the government of Afghanistan and our partners in the region in order to deny any terrorist organisation — that includes Al Qaeda as well — a safe haven or any kind of material support on the ground.” (IANS)

Click here for reuse options!
Copyright 2017 NewsGram

Next Story

What to Make of Taliban’s Continued Rare Silence on Ghani’s Peace Offer?

0
//
32
taliban
Afghanistan's President Ashraf Ghani speaks at a panel discussion at Asia Society in Manhattan, New York, Sept. 20, 2017. VOA

Uzbekistan on Tuesday hosted an international conference on Afghanistan and offered to host peace talks between the Afghan government and the Taliban in an effort to help end more than 16 years of war in the country.

President Shavkat Mirziyoyev told senior diplomats from regional as well as NATO member states that his county was ready to host direct talks with the Taliban.

ALSO READ: Watch Video: Taliban Leader Mullah Mansoor’s Car in Flames attacked by Drone

taliban
Conference held in Tashkent, Uzbekistan, March 27, 2018. VOA

“We stand ready to create all necessary conditions, at any stage of the peace process, to arrange on the territory of Uzbekistan direct talks between the government of Afghanistan and the Taliban movement,” Mirziyoyev said at the conference.

taliban
Afghan President Ashraf Ghani, center, and delegates stand for the national anthem during the second Kabul Process conference at the Presidential Palace in Kabul, Feb. 28, 2018. VOA

The Taskhkent conference comes almost a month after the Kabul Process Conference in which the Afghan President Ashraf Ghani offered unconditional peace talks with the Afghan Taliban and pledged to recognize the insurgent group as a legitimate political party if it agreed to give up violence.

The insurgents have yet to formally respond to the Afghan government’s offer.

Expert offer different explanations to Taliban’s silence.

Rebecca Zimmerman, a policy researcher at the RAND Corporation, believes the apparent silence suggests there is some space for negotiations.

“In the past, they [Taliban] haven’t been shy about publicly rejecting talks for failing to meet preconditions, even while they have been having private conversations. So in this case, I think keeping a low profile means there may be some negotiation space.” Zimmerman said.

Zimmerman’s analysis of the situation is not too far from the calculation of some in the Afghan government.

ALSO READ: South Asia: Afghan government to examine reports of Taliban chief’s death

Optimism inside government

Mohammad Akram Khpalwak, chief secretary of the High Peace Council, a government funded body tasked with talking to the insurgents, told reporters earlier this month that they are waiting on an official response from the Afghan Taliban and that their sources indicated that the peace offer has led to high level deliberations among insurgents about what to do with the offer.

Afghan National Security Advisor Mohammad Hanif Atmar told VOA’s Afghanistan service last week that if the Taliban need more time than they would grant it.

taliban
Afghan National Security Adviser Mohammad Hanif Atmar speaks with The Associated Press in Kabul, Oct. 24, 2015. VOA

“They [Taliban] neither rejected nor accepted our offer yet,” Atmar told VOA. “If they [Taliban] need more time, they can have it. However, they [Taliban] should be aware that each day by choosing to fight, they cut a day from peace.”

P.J. Crowley, former assistant secretary for Public Affairs and spokesperson for the U.S. Department of State during Obama administration said the Taliban taking time to respond is not unprecedented.

“Going back to the process in the early stages of the Obama administration, there was months at a time where we had to determine if Taliban representation was authoritative,” Crowley said.

“The fact that there would be a conversation and then there would be a lengthy period before we got an indication that there was a response or that there were actions that led us to believe that Taliban were serious, those steps took a long time,” Crowley added.

ALSO READ: US Airstrike kills Afghan Taliban Leader Mullah Akhtar Mansoor, leaves no clear successor

Informal response

The Taliban did respond to a letter published in The New Yorker magazine by Barnett Rubin, an Afghan expert and associate director at the Center on International Cooperation at New York University, in which Rubin urged the Afghan Taliban to accept ceasefire and talks with the Afghan government.

Without explicitly referring to the peace offer, the insurgent group offered a rather cold response arguing that Afghanistan was “occupied” and that the Kabul Process was seeking the “surrender” of the Taliban.

Speaking to VOA, Rubin said it is not about whether the Taliban want to talk or not, but rather about who they want to talk to and about what.

“U.S. says talk to the Afghan government. Taliban say they [Afghan government] are not the decision makers. That is not who overthrew us. It is the Americans. We [Taliban] want to talk to the Americans. It is pointless to talk to other Afghans until we [Taliban] solve our problems with the Americans,” Rubin said.

“So it is not talks verses no talks. It is whom do they talk to and about what,” Rubin added.

Thomas H. Johnson, author of the book “Taliban Narratives” and director of the cultural and conflict studies program at the Naval Post Graduate School echoes Rubin’s assessment that Taliban views Washington as the real power and wants to talk to the U.S.

“This position also corresponds with their narrative they have suggested since the beginning of the conflict and also served as an explicit informational response to Trump’s suggestion that the U.S. will not negotiate with the Taliban,” Johnson said.

taliban
Armed Taliban fighters are seen at an undisclosed location in Nangarhar province, Afghanistan, Dec.13, 2010. VOA

“Taliban presently control more of Afghanistan since 2001 and their power and influence appear to be on the rise. It is reasonable to conclude that many Taliban including its leader Hibatullah Akhundzada believe they are winning and thus see no need for negotiation,” Johnson added.

Waheed Muzhda, a Kabul-based analyst with sources inside the Taliban believes their position has not changed in regards to talk with the Afghan government.

“I think they [Taliban] have time and again said that they do not want to talk to the Afghan government because it [government] does not have the real authority,” Muzhda said.

“The silence does not necessarily mean anything positive in terms of Taliban accepting the offer, as suggested by some in the High Peace Council,” he added referencing to officials’ remarks who suggested that Taliban are mulling over their response.

US position

U.S. wants the Taliban to talk to the government of Afghanistan and welcomed the Afghan government’s gesture to offer unconditional peace talks to the insurgents.

“There is a path to peace and stability with dignity for those members of the Taliban who are prepared to reject violence, end their ties with terrorists, and to accept the constitution and its provisions for minorities and women,” Alice Wells, deputy assistant secretary for South and Central Asia told VOA’s Uzbek service last month. VOA