District in western Afghanistan falls to Taliban, group claims

As the Taliban presses its northern offensive in Kunduz and Takhar provinces, the group has also continued to attack the Afghan government and military in other theaters. Early this morning, the Taliban claimed that it overran the Khaki Safid district in the southwestern province of Farah.

“Mujahideen of Islamic Emirate [Taliban] in western Farah province launched a large scale attack midnight on Khak-e-Safid district center and all surrounding enemy positions,” the Taliban stated on its official website, Voice of Jihad. “The assault resulted in Mujahideen taking over the district administration building, police HQ, a large ANA [Afghan army] outpost and all surrounding enemy defense check posts as well as causing the enemy deadly losses and seizing a sizable amount of enemy arms and equipment.”

The Taliban claim cannot be independently confirmed as the reporting in Afghanistan has focused on the deteriorating situation in Kunduz. But in the past, the Taliban has been accurate in its reporting of districts said to have been taken.

Khaki Safid district has been contested for the past year, according to reports from the area. “There are four administrations in Khaki Safid,” an Afghan farmer told Reuters earlier this year. “One is the governor. Another is Afghan local police. Another is the Taliban. Another is Daish,” he added, using the title popular in South Asia for Islamic State.

The Taliban clashed with the forces of the Islamic State Khorasan Province in Khaki Safid in late May, and repelled an attempt to seize the district.

If the Taliban’s takeover of Khaki Safid is confirmed, the jihadist group has takenĀ five districts in three provinces (Khak-e-Safid in Farah; Yangi Qala, Ishkamish, and Bangi districts in Takhar; Khanabad in Kunduz) and the provincial capital of Kunduz in the span of three days.

Bill Roggio is a Senior Fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies and the Editor of FDD's Long War Journal.

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.

Tags: ,

5 Comments

  • Fred says:

    As mike merlo pointed out in the Kunduz article, winter is coming. Hopefully that will give the Afghans a chance to regroup and figure out how to face this threat. I suspect that their “national army” is the wrong vehicle for addressing this challenge, and more resources should be directed towards supporting the local police.

    • mike merlo says:

      @Fred

      I couldn’t agree with you more about the “national army” & “local police.” The whole shebang should’ve been under the control & administration of the US Military. This nonsense of indulging in these esoteric flights of fancy of dragging all these contractors & ‘Blink Tankers’ in to arrive at some chalk board fantasy is absolutely no way to do Nation Building. This is what happens though when you have a gaggle of full of themselves naive novices aka Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld & Powell, particularly Rumsfeld, who are not only beyond clueless but a pompous arrogant lot to boot.

      You train the whole lot of the country; the Armed Forces, the Judiciary, the Magistrates, the Constabulary, the Magistrates, the Stewards of the Financial apparatus, etc., under ‘one roof.’ All of this training to be run by the Principal Force in the country responsible for its Security & Safety of denizens & the Host Nations Sovereignty, the Military. Not by a bunch of Party Apparatchik’s & the rest of the sleaze ball money grubbers who inevitably ooze out the woodwork conniving to get their claws on millions & billions of dollars

  • kimball says:

    Kunduz the Mosul of Afghanistan? Tadjikistan as for Syria. Pakistan chased a lot of foreigners and likeminded Talibs north and NW from Waziristan. Kunduz area will be end of the road or maybe drowning in the Oxus. Drones would be useful as well as more of road motors.

  • Tim Francis says:

    Mike, Rumsfeld has been gone for 10 years. Why is that still relevant? If it is, then why haven’t initial conditions changed?

    • mike merlo says:

      @ Tim Francis says: It’s relevant because much of what Rumsfeld put into place to train Afghan Security Forces & distribute resources & funds & a host of other Institutional reorganizational changes etc., are still in place. Besides the beyond ignorant decisions he made that unnecessarily prolonged the invasions/occupations of Iraq & Afghanistan by years. Governments & Militaries are averse to change. That’s just an unfortunate byproduct of Institutions & like minded organizations. I’ve ‘seen’ nothing that would lead me to believe “conditions” have changed. Why would they? Why should what opposes us change?

Iraq

Islamic state

Syria

Aqap

Al shabaab

Boko Haram

Isis