Afghanistan: A True Alternative

What else is there to do? That is the question flung at critics of our military commitment in Afghanistan by its promoters. Total victory or total humiliation, the Petraeuses and McChrystals tell us, are the only options. There are other answers and other outcomes. The key is to reappraise American interests in AFPAK. The advocates of slugging it out at all costs presume a vital stake in preventing another 9/11 -- if not worse. In order to achieve that end, we must liquidate all al-Qaeda presence -- in Afghanistan and in neighboring Pakistan. In addition, the Taliban must be eliminated as a political force lest they allow al-Qaeda to set up shop again somewhere in the country. That is an absolutist argument built on the idea that achieving a zero risk situation is possible and that it is essential. But it is a specious argument.

One, no one on this earth has the luxury of living with zero risk to their security. In this case, al-Qaeda -- itself a loose franchise -- can form and reform in a number of places. At the moment, it is incapable itself of doing more than surviving in the Hindu Kush. Terrorist organizations already are morphing and sub-dividing. Two, the scary notion that thousands of diabolical fanatics are out there devising clever schemes to do us in is fantasy. Little more than scare-talk. Were that true, there would have been many more attacks against prime American targets over the past eight years. American leaders, chomping at the bit to broadcast their successes, would have pulled out all stops in publicizing their heroism in thwarting the terrorists. Their silence speaks volumes.

Three, the Taliban in Afghanistan are native Pahtuns with local ambitions. Whatever their ideological affinities with al-Qaeda like groups, they never act outside their own country. Hence, their total elimination as political actors in Afghanistan is not a compelling objective for us. Yes, a return to a Taliban monopoly of power as in 2000 would not be a good thing from our perspective -- although hardly an 'end of the world as we know it now' situation. Preventing them from reconstituting their full control is a worthwhile objective. That goal, however, does not demand crushing them and turning Afghanistan into an American protectorate.

Four, a reasonable objective -- reasonable in terms both of American interests and feasibility -- is to foster a political settlement (or, perhaps, settlements) whereby the various Afghan factions themselves work out a set of arrangements that bring a measure of stability to the country. That is the best we can hope for. It means accepting that we have neither means nor necessity to shape the country's institutions, practices and methods for accommodating multiple factions based on ethnicity, region, tribe, sect and personal rivalry. After all, that is what they've been doing for a couple of millennia -- at least.

Five, our role in pursuing such a modus vivendi is that of a facilitator -- not a dictator. In practical terms, it translates into the following actions:

• Maintain the military forces we now have there -- for the time-being, followed by a drawdown at irregular intervals.
• Use them for two purposes: as a check on Taliban ambitions, and to create enough breathing room for all Afghan parties to move toward political understandings on their own terms. The prospect of a reduced American presence will concentrate nicely the minds of all non-Taliban groups and leaders. We also will stop serving as a Taliban recruiting tool.
• Keep a low profile in Pakistan -- militarily (including our gold crazed horde of privateers), politically and financially.
• Cease exploiting President Zardari's feebleness to expand American influence in the country; that is deeply resented and counter-productive.
• Encourage Pakistani leaders to seek a resolution of conflicts with the country's home-grown Taliban on their own national terms. Encourage them to do the same with the Punjabi based radical groups.
• A scaling down of American ambitions in both places will nicely concentrate Pakistani minds, too.

Finally, abandon the twin illusions that American well-being depends on shaping the affairs of other places wherever something may happen that discomforts us; and that people in those places want us to take custody of their well-being. That is an essential step toward restoring a clearer sense of realism as to what counts, what we can aspire to -- and what is beyond us mortal souls to accomplish.

Oh, we also have a few things to attend to at home.

 

Comments

[Agent420]

Afghanistan is a black hole, nobody has gone in there and come out in one piece.

[raskefing]

While it is difficult to face, the people who wield real power over the USA do not see themselves as Americans.
These are the same people who sold munitions to Germany , Italy Britain and the USA during world war 1 & 2. and made hundreds of billions,trillions in todays money . They are the same people who create booms and bust in the economy and make trillions !
Wars are the most profitable business on earth, also during wars all civil liberties of the nation can be tinkered with and whittled away as is happening in America right now.
The reasons given to the public are never the true causes for going to war! it is always about more money or power for the few and the taxpayers pay the price in blood and treasure !
If Americans do not put their foot down now and demand an end to the wars without end soon , third world status will be their lot !

[Carl Caroli]

The military is very hung up on winning any and every battle they are brought in to. They want to define what winning means and are loathe to see any solution that does not allow them to beat their chests over the vanquished. To even think that a military solution is the answer to any problem in this day and age is not only antiquated but a reflection of how little we, as human beings, have developed since Attila the Hun. While there is clearly a need to curb despots and tyrants, warring against a population struggling to survive is insane.

[eleanorhawking]

I agree. Let's leave the population to their own devices and let them defend themselves in their own civil wars. It's what they want to do; let them do it.

[melpol]

The war in Afghanistan is not against mythical Al-Qada, it is against millions of dissidents that refuse to respect the Karzai government. Thousands of disconnected groups led by fierce tribal chieftains demand autonomy. Each group has to be weeded out. It is a delicate process that might take decades. Karzai as commander in chief must lead the charge. A quieter and friendlier Afghanistan and the withdrawal of most American troops will come after the final battle is won.

[aspiecelia]

The Taliban is a reactionary organization which was created because of the invasion of Afghanistan by another country. The more we harm civilians and destroy homes, infrastructure, the ability to make a living, etc in a country the more terrorists there will be.

[eleanorhawking]

Alas, the Taliban, like Saddam, his sons, and his band of thugs, are the greatest harm to the civilians. While we have made many mistakes, the U.S. has helped many people too. For that, we've got a kick to the g ut.

[Enliberate]

But I'm thinking, that 's the whole point. We are there for some reason that is not being openly articulated. Perhaps it's a reason we just couldn't face or would tear our already split society wide open. Otherwise, none of this makes any sense. Most of us waste our time evaluating and criticizing matters that were decided long ago. Americans, by and large, cannot face their past, which means, of course, that the future cannot be adequately planned for. Obama seems decent enough but how easily he falls into the same old patterns. Why?

[opines]

Unwillingness to recognize and act upon the reality that our invasion/o­ccupations of Islamic territories could no longer be sustained (too costly/not enough manpower without a draft) will be cited by future historians as a major contibutant to the economic collapse of the United States in the second decade of the 21st century.

Unable to define 'success', admission of 'stalemate' or 'defeat' being politically unacceptable, we 'pressed' on, the printing presses churning out more unbacked greenbacks and the generals pressing for more boots on the ground.

Though the President knew it was unsustainable...

[nematsadat]

Great point about history. I do agree that it is unsustainable to keep adding troops and treasures to wars that should not have been ignited in the first place. Both the illegal US invasion of Iraq and the US support of mujahideen against the Soviets in Afghanistan were short sighted but pulling out will created even more uncertainty and greater unintended consequences.

The only way out is to reframe our thinking from a bottom-up approach in helping both Afghans and Iraqis lift themselves up. I think Presiden't Obama with his grassroots community building can be a leader for the next generations of these populations to empower themselves. Social engineering by pointing breaking down doors and pointing guns is a waste of resources, puts soldiers at unnecessary risk, and violates basic human rights of those it is inflicted upon.

[Enliberate]

I hate to say this, but maybe the President is just riffin', y'know?

[teccoord]

Afghanistan, Pakistan, and the Middle East …
Certainly, we can remember the cold war, and all the money spent and the many brinks of annihilation we had to face, we are now facing this again in the Middle East and surrounding environs.

[nematsadat]

Excellent point. Exactly the point I made in my recent analysis in light of the 20th anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall on "Why Afghanistan is the new post-Cold War Berlin."

You can view at: http://ohmygov.com/blogs/general_news/archive/2009/10/30/why-afghanistan-is-the-new-post-cold-war-berlin.aspx

Thanks,

Nemat
http://www.nematsadat.blogspot.com/

[earlray156]

Are you sure they actually spent that money like they say they did?
I'm not sure exactly how much they spent on the cold war, It would be kind of hard
to do an audit and truly know, Have we been duped more than we can possibly imagine?

I don't believe a single word any politician says anymore! Nothing ever adds up
and nothing ever gets done. And the pentagon still can't account for over a trillion defense dollars! It went in our politicians pockets democrat and republican alike. They are both on the same take and its been going on since wwII ! That group of people believed they made everyone free everywhere and nothing could be further from the truth.

[nolabels]

This is not an accident.

[teccoord]

Maybe we should take part in a total solution in the Middle East … a solution which includes …the security of the region, political independence of members in the region, the economic stability in the region, along with solutions to any other topical concerns of the members in the region. The more countries we include from the region, the greater the stakes for all the countries involved.
I believe the President is looking at a combination of solutions … no one solution works independently from the other. All are interwoven for a total solution to the ongoing dangers to peace. Some of the patches being woven together into this quilt of peace may include …
1. Political Solution …In the current situation, such as Afghanistan, where there are tribes, that don't like each other, some other form of governance might possibly evolve ... one where, perhaps each tribal area is independent of the others and represent themselves in the national assembly for that country. Admittedly, this could lead to other situations, where each territory wants to protect itself in terms of not sharing resources … that can be worked out … that has to do with creating an economic system that fits with the political system.

[teccoord]

2. Nuclear Threat Recognition …The Middle East and surrounding region is a dearth of explosions waiting to happen. We see as a result of going after Iraq, that Afghanistan and Pakistan are now involved in being taken over by the Taliban and the Al Qaeda, the original military of the terrorist group that attacked this country. Not only that, the nuclear capability of Pakistan could be taken over by the Taliban. We must show these two countries that we are at one with them in the protection of their Nuclear weapons. We do this by not being critical but empathetic.
3. Military Solution …During this moment, where we are trying to stop the Taliban and Al Qaeda, we must also devise a military plan that traps the enemy between the two armies of Pakistan and Afghanistan along with our countries military. We must also have a strategy to exit these military situations.
4. Economic Solution …We must come up with a plan to assist the tribes in general and the countries in particular with a creative economic plan. This last step is going to take a lot of out-of-the-box thinking..

[teccoord]

5. Nuclear Solution ... Set up a Middle East Nuclear Non-Proliferation Powers Partners Act. Wouldn’t that be interesting??? Wouldn’t that be exciting???? Wouldn’t that be amazing???? Think about the possibilities, when, not if; but when, it is accomplished, and finally come the establishment of peace in the Middle East …!!!!!!! The reason I bring this up, is that when we look at several countries … Israel, Pakistan, Afghanistan, possibly Iran and I am sure … other countries in the immediate area … as they continue to refine their capabilities to produce a bomb and a delivery system … we see an ongoing, very dangerous, and volatile situation in the Middle East.
Hopefully the current War spinning talking heads will see that Afghanistan is not the only problem. Pakistan is also a major concern for President Obama and all those involved with a total solution in Afghanistan, Pakistan and the rest of the Middle East. Perhaps sending 40,000 military to Afghanistan is not the solution. Perhaps we need to send military to both Afghanistan and Pakistan and surround the terrorist?

[Georgerz]

I still don't understand the refusal of President Obama to end the wars in Iraq and Afganisthan. It has been proven time and again that the prior administration went into war under lies and false pretenses.

[nolabels]

Gotta look hard...even if it bankrupts us.

[Blasphemy]

The U.S. has been so reactionary (and wrong) in both its philosophy and actions. If you can actually pin a certain country (and its people) down to an act of war, then you go to war with the objective of punishing that country and destroying its ability to wage war. If you react to an Al-Queda attack as the Bush administration did, and the current administration continues, you not only lose lives, money, and allies; you also waste the resources needed for your own infrastructure and people. The U.S. has become a haven for the self righteous and greedy corporate "BIG", that have removed so much of the greatness of this country. To give credit, at least President Obama is mending fences where it is so important. If it were not for the fact that our favor among nations of the world has been destroyed, Obama wouldn't have to waste time undoing the hate mongering of the former administrations, and more time could be spent pulling Americans back up from the poverty they have been driven into.

[TOOO]

For the umpteenth time: why would al-Qaeda give up its comfy residence in Pakistan, where the Pakistani government is pretty much protecting them? We made this huge commitment to Afghanistan to get al-Qaeda, they ran and hid in Pakistan, and now we're struggling to justify our occupation of Afghanistan - and not succeeding.

I'm not too thrilled with the Taliban, either - but is it really worth the lives of our soldiers?

[research]

The USA spends more than the rest of the world on War.

the USA is War inc.

And we still can't afford to take care of our citizens.

Our governmnet is for sale to the highest bidder, that makes it a Plutocracy.

Outlaw All contribution as the bribery they are, free public elections with free prime time for all the candidates.

The will bring Democracy to the USA,

And that will end the d@mn wars.

[Enliberate]

Well said. But, alas, these things will not come to pass. A junkie doesn't just drop their habit, not without a little drama anyway. Any hope of planetary survival rests with an abolition of war. Also, did you ever notice how a politician will take, say, $5000 in contribution and that little bit of money will buy, somehow, untold influence? Am I missing something?

[research]

The Congress folks are looking for repeat customers.