# Taliban (Allegedly) Issues Code of Conduct, Tightens Control?



## The Bread Guy (27 Jul 2009)

This, from Al Jazeera English service (excerpts from manual, translated by AlJazz, here):


> The Taliban in Afghanistan has issued a book laying down a code of conduct for its fighters.
> 
> Al Jazeera has obtained a copy of the book, which further indicates that Mullah Omar, the movement's leader, wants to centralise its operations.
> 
> ...



This part intrigues me:


> Mullah Omar is quoted as saying that creating a new mujahideen group or battalion is forbidden.
> 
> "If unofficial groups or irregular battalions refuse to join the formal structure, they should be disbanded," Omar says.
> 
> ...



Counterpoint this, from _Newsweek_, from a bit of a bio on Mullah Omar's 2 i/c:


> .... Current and former insurgents are divided over whether Baradar would be as effective a peacemaker as he is a general. "I get the feeling that he is not as tough and hardline as Mullah Omar," says Akhund, the Helmand subcommander. Mullah Hamdullah, a senior Taliban intelligence operative from Ghazni province, agrees: "He's not an extremist like some commanders. If there were ever to be negotiations, Baradar would be the best man to talk to."....



Does Mullah Omar read _Newsweek_?  Or is he really trying to rein in outliers?  Hmmm...

_- edited to fix spelling -_


----------



## North Star (27 Jul 2009)

There were reports of internal codes of conduct in 2007 for the TB. Nothing new, except perhaps for Al Jazz.


----------



## The Bread Guy (27 Jul 2009)

North Star said:
			
		

> There were reports of internal codes of conduct in 2007 for the TB. Nothing new, except perhaps for Al Jazz.



If you mean the attached, there appear to be some differences suggesting Al Jazz's document may be new:
1)  while the old "code" says;


> Anyone with a bad reputation or who has killed civilians during the Jihad may not be accepted into the Taliban movement


the new document is more specific about avoiding civilian casualties:


> "Governors, district chiefs and line commanders and every member of the Mujahideen must do their best to avoid civilian deaths, civilian injuries and damage to civilian property. Great care must be taken."


.
2)  The 2006 code talks about unit consolidation:


> A group of Mujahideen may not take in Mujahideen from another group to increase their own power. This is only allowed when there are good reasons for it, such as a lack of fighters in one particular group.


while the new document appears to be more specific dealing with creating new units:


> "Creating a new mujahideen group or battalion is forbidden. If unofficial groups or irregular battalions refuse to join the formal structure they should be disbanded. If a governor or leader has in the past had a unit or active group in another province, they should bring it to the attention of the leader of that province. That leader should then take over command of the group."


3)  The 2006 list o' rules doesn't go into this level of detail re: "civic action":


> "The Mujahideen have to behave well and show proper treatment to the nation, in order to bring the hearts of civilian muslims closer to them. The mujahideen must avoid discrimination based on tribal roots, language or their geographic background."


----------



## PuckChaser (27 Jul 2009)

If this is true, they obviously think they need to change tactics to be able to be effective. We must be doing something right.


----------



## The Bread Guy (27 Jul 2009)

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> *If this is true, they obviously think they need to change tactics to be able to be effective. *We must be doing something right.



Or at least LOOK like they're changing tactics, right?  

Wonder if this'll lead to Tailban statements along the lines of:  "In the case of the martyrdom attack where the children were killed, although his intentions were good, Shaheed <martyr> Bloggins acted on his own accord - our rules specifically call on fighters to consider such actions very carefully."  Yeah, right....


----------



## ModlrMike (28 Jul 2009)

Does anyone else find it ironic that a group that eschews literacy has issued a book?


----------



## The Bread Guy (29 Jul 2009)

ModlrMike said:
			
		

> Does anyone else find it ironic that a group that eschews literacy has issued a book?


I guess the girls & women won't be getting them then, right?  Good one... ;D


----------



## Shec (29 Jul 2009)

> Governors, district chiefs and line commanders and every member of the Mujahideen must do their best to avoid civilian deaths, civilian injuries and damage to civilian property. Great care must be taken.



And have their policy wonks defined "civilian" ?  This I'm sure many of us would like to see.


----------



## The Bread Guy (29 Jul 2009)

Shec said:
			
		

> And have their policy wonks defined "civilian" ?  This I'm sure many of us would like to see.


Good question.  Perhaps "civilian" = "non-collaborator or non-supporter of puppet regime"?


----------



## The Bread Guy (30 Jul 2009)

Highlights from the Associated Press with reaction:


> .... Copies have been seized in operations throughout the country, NATO spokesman Brig. Gen. Eric Tremblay said.  "It seems to be a form of propaganda to try to show there is a central control over the insurrection," he said.
> 
> The requirement for Taliban fighters to respect the rules of war contradicts the reality on the ground, Defense Ministry spokesman Mohammad Zahir Azimi said, noting that Taliban fighters captured and beheaded an Afghan soldier this week in the eastern Paktika region....


Translation:  any allegations of alleged Taliban rules of conduct are horse hockey.



> .... An Associated Press count of civilian deaths based on reports from Afghan and international officials shows that 453 civilians have been killed in insurgent attacks this year. The count also shows that 199 civilians have died from attacks by Afghan or international forces....


Translation:  the Talibs are killing more than 2 civilians for every one ISAF is accused of killing.


----------



## NL_engineer (30 Jul 2009)

So I guess they don't follow it well; unless bombing pro Government towns doesn't count.


----------



## The Bread Guy (30 Jul 2009)

NL_engineer said:
			
		

> So I guess they don't follow it well; *unless bombing pro Government towns doesn't count*.


Which touches on Shec's question regarding what THEY consider a "civilian"...


----------



## OldSolduer (30 Jul 2009)

ModlrMike said:
			
		

> Does anyone else find it ironic that a group that eschews literacy has issued a book?


Its ironic that the leadership is literate, but the rank and file are quite often illiterate. It reminds me somewhat of the Soviet model of keeping the "Proletariat" oppressed while claiming to be their saviors.

Am I out to lunch on this comparison?


----------

