Taliban Destroy 22 Supply Trucks in Afghanistan: No “Protection” Money on Northern Route?

Google Map showing relative locations of Aibak and the Salang tunnel in Afghanistan. (Click on map for a larger view.)

When the flow of supply trucks through Pakistan into Afghanistan restarted earlier this month, I pointed out a report from the Express Tribune on the large amounts of cash paid to the Taliban as “protection” money. A detail in that report is that the protection money paid is to “Afghan Taliban and local militants who are active on the Pak-Afghan borders”.

Today, the Taliban have claimed responsibility for an attack that destroyed 22 NATO supply trucks, most of which were fuel tankers. The attack was in Aibak, in Samangan province. The screen capture of a Google map of the area shown here indicates that Aibak is only 117 miles from the northern opening of the Salang tunnel that is the key choke point on the “northern route” that NATO used for supplies while the Pakistan crossings were closed. Does today’s attack mean that the Taliban in the north of Afghanistan have now placed a marker indicating that protection money will have to paid to them as well? It is not clear whether they were paid protection money while the Pakistan route was closed and it has now stopped or if they are angling for a hefty protection fee when this route is used for evacuation of NATO equipment as the drawdown moves into its active phase soon.

Here is Reuters’ description of the attack:

 A bomb planted by the Taliban destroyed 22 NATO trucks carrying supplies to their forces in northern Afghanistan, the Taliban and police said on Wednesday.

Eighteen fuel trucks and four supply vehicles were parked in Aibak, the capital of Samangan province, when a bomb ripped through them, wounding one person, local police said.

“At 2 a.m. the mujahideen attacked the invader NATO trucks,” the Taliban said in a statement, referring to the wagons which had been driven from Uzbekistan to Afghanistan’s north.

The Taliban in this region have been flexing their muscle lately:

The trucks were attacked in the same province where prominent anti-Taliban lawmaker Ahmad Khan Samangani was killed on Saturday at his daughter’s wedding, in a suicide bomb attack that killed 22 other guests.

It will be very interesting to see if reports of protection money along the norther route begin to surface.

One more aspect of this attack bears watching. From the AP story on the attack as carried by Dawn:

 ”We put explosives on a fuel tanker. When it exploded, we fired on the trucks,” Taliban spokesman Zabiullah Mujahid told The Associated Press in a telephone call.

Sidiq Azizi, a spokesman for the province, said many tankers and semi-trailers caught fire after the bomb went off around 2 a.m.

By mid-day, heavy black smoke still poured from the Rabatak area of the province where the truckers had stopped to rest. Firefighters were spraying water on the burning vehicles.

”There was a big boom,” Azizi said.

”It’s possible that is was a magnetic bomb from insurgents. We are investigating.”

The referral to a magnetic bomb is interesting. Going back to the Reuters report:

Separately, police in neighboring Baghlan province said they had detained 10 suspected Taliban members with so-called magnetic bombs, which they were trying to attach to supply trucks.

Will NATO try to assert that the magnetic bombs are supplied by Iran? Recall that Iran was accused of using a magnetic bomb in India to attack an Israeli diplomat in reprisal for the presumed Israeli magnetic bombs that have been used to kill Iranian nuclear scientists. The US made accusations of Iran helping the Taliban back in 2010 but never provided conclusive evidence for the Sunni Taliban and Shia Iranian regime working together. Will the accusations resurface based on the magnets?

Tweet about this on Twitter0Share on Reddit0Share on Facebook0Google+0Email to someone

6 Responses to Taliban Destroy 22 Supply Trucks in Afghanistan: No “Protection” Money on Northern Route?

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
Emptywheel Twitterverse
bmaz .@ThePlumLineGS Then maybe Ben Nelson should have paid more attention to the craven legislative handout to carriers he was crafting.
1mreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz Was away for a bit, but it looks like Loretta Lynch is predictably horrible on surveillance abuses, and flimsy, at best on voting rights.
3mreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz @elizabeth_joh @chriswnews Sure look like official PPD badges to me. This is outrageous waste of money if so. Hope 12 News does full story.
5mreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz RT @AlexanderAbdo: No, Department of Justice, 80 Percent of Tor Traffic Is Not Child Porn | WIRED http://t.co/3xzYgBu2TU
8mreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz @JimWhiteGNV @dpleasant I actually don't think that is much of a joke.
8mreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz RT @JimWhiteGNV: I think she's really Mukasey. RT @dpleasant: Lynch should have said something like, "I'm not Alberto Gonzales or Harriet …
9mreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz .@chriswnews @SteveMartos @phoenixpolice Uh, and exactly how much precious taxpayer money wasted so PPD could pimp bling around??? Do tell.
9mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel We can dream!?!?! Aspire to greatness! RT @CSPANBen: that would be more involved then we are capable of doing. Just watch all of it. :)
17mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel Anybody besides me consistently recall @russfeingold saying "We are not the prosecutor committee" when watching SJC? https://t.co/ZQlQKawuQu
20mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel Tho I suspect my school was pissed abt me being valedictorian for very different reasons than L Lynch's school was abt her.
24mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel FTR: My high school was not at all thrilled I was valedictorian (to say the least). Can I be AG too?
24mreplyretweetfavorite