Senior Taliban leader declared a phony |

Senior Taliban leader declared a phony

The Los Angeles Times

KABUL, Afghanistan — If it sounded too good to be true, that’s because it apparently was.

Afghan officials and Western diplomats acknowledged Tuesday that a man claiming to be a senior Taliban leader, who was flown to the Afghan capital in a NATO aircraft for talks earlier this year, was almost certainly an impostor.

The incident was an embarrassment for Western military intelligence and for the government of Afghan President Hamid Karzai, both of whom were at least temporarily taken in by the ruse.

And it underscored the difficulties that lie ahead if efforts continue to engage the insurgents in talks.

The Karzai government and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization have signaled that after nine years of war, some form of political settlement probably is the only real chance for a durable peace. This year’s increase in the number of American troops has been aimed in large measure at reversing Taliban battlefield momentum, in hopes of luring the insurgency’s leadership to the bargaining table and its foot soldiers away from the fight.

The Taliban movement all along has issued strenuous public denials that meetings between emissaries of the movement and the Karzai government have been taking place.

But U.S. officials in recent months had been speaking more openly about contacts between the insurgency and the Afghan administration — some involving “very high-level Taliban leaders,” Gen. David H. Petraeus, the commander of Western troops in Afghanistan, said in September.

The man in question was believed by Western and Afghan officials at the time of the talks to have been Akhtar Mohammad Mansour, a senior member of the Taliban leadership hierarchy. The meetings were first reported by The New York Times, which reported yesterday that Western officials had concluded that the man representing himself as Mansour was not him.

In its original report, the paper did not name Mansour, but yesterday identified him as the person that Afghan and NATO officials had believed they were dealing with in three encounters.

Because the Taliban movement operates clandestinely, many of its senior leaders are known by sight only to a handful of intimates. An Afghan official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the deception was not known until someone who had met Mansour years earlier saw a photograph of the fake Mansour and raised the alarm.

Taliban spokesmen could not be reached for comment. Two days earlier, the movement had issued a communique ridiculing the notion that NATO could prevail by keeping troops in Afghanistan until at least 2014 and possibly beyond.

Once the Mansour ploy became public knowledge, speculation swirled about the motivation behind the hoax. Some suggested the man in question could have been a Taliban plant or perhaps an operative acting on the orders of Pakistan’s intelligence service, which at times has been accused of supporting militant groups.

The U.S. Embassy had no public comment on the apparent charade. But a Western diplomat, speaking on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to discuss the incident, said in the early stages of any such talks, a degree of deception was to be expected — and that going forward, it would continue to be difficult to establish who was truly authorized to speak for the movement.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.