One Less Weapon Against bin Laden

The "journalists"' first question was: "If you recapture all of Afghanistan, what will be your attitude to Osama bin Laden?" They didn't wait for an answer. One of the two French-speaking North African men detonated a powerful bomb, killing himself instantly and fatally wounding the man they had journeyed across the globe to meet: Ahmad Shah Massoud, leader of the ragtag Northern Alliance that is fighting a civil war against the ruling Taliban militia. Immediately, the finger of suspicion pointed to Osama bin Laden, the Saudi terrorist sheltered by the Taliban. But two days later the explosion in the country's Amu Darya valley was drowned out by the terror attacks on New York and Washington. Now, with bin Laden emerging as the most likely mastermind of those atrocities, the attack on Massoud has come in for renewed scrutiny. The inevitable question: Was there a connection between the two?

[an error occurred while processing this directive]

Neither theory is watertight. Massoud's death alone would not serve to remove the anti-Taliban alliance as a military force. If the intention was to rob America of an ally, it would have made more sense to first allow the Taliban time to militarily exploit the assassination before the U.S. and NATO could prop up the alliance. And bin Laden hardly needs to cement an already cozy relationship with the Taliban. Since 1996, he has supplied the Afghan militia with both funds and firepower. Among a Taliban foreign legion of some 10,000 is a powerful and still growing contingent of 2,500 to 3,000 Arabs personally loyal to bin Laden. If the two attacks were indeed linked it seems more likely they came as a furious double-barreled blast at bin Laden's principal enemies: the man stubbornly resisting his Taliban protectors, and the superpower he sees as an intolerable affront to his twisted—and by no means typically Islamic—fundamentalist vision.

Whatever the purpose, the removal of Massoud from his stronghold has presented the already splintered Northern Alliance with a leadership crisis at a critical juncture. The embattled guerrillas hold only one remaining province—northeastern Badakhashan—and Massoud's native Panjshir Valley. Attempting to fill Massoud's place as overall commander is Mohammad Fahim, a 44-year-old Panjshiri regarded as a competent military commander who lacks his former boss's magnetism and political flair.

It may be impossible to replace Massoud, Afghanistan's strongest champion of moderate Islam and a passionate nationalist who led the resistance against Soviet occupation, earning the title "Lion of Panjshir" for doggedly defending the valley. For years he complained about Washington's reluctance to rein in Pakistan's covert military support for the Taliban. "We have told Western countries again and again of the dangers of Taliban extremism, of bin Laden and his terrorists," he recently told TIME at his headquarters. In recent years, however, he came to be seen in some Western circles as a leader who could challenge not only the Taliban but perhaps also deliver bin Laden to justice. His assailant was not the only one asking the question: What would have been Massoud's attitude to bin Laden if he had recaptured all of Afghanistan? Now we will never know.