QUAGMIRE?
“What is America’s purpose in Afghanistan?” That is the question that President Hamid Karzai was asked by Meet the Press’ David Gregory whom he
interviewed along with President Asif Ali Zardari of Pakistan in his show last Sunday. The stated rationale for U.S. involvement in Afghanistan and Pakistan is that
we are there because of 9/11 and the hunt for Osama Bin Laden. We are there because of our desire to destroy the Taliban who once ruled Afghanistan and to
keep them from spreading their influence into Pakistan and beyond.
What is the end game for Afghanistan? We define success in the same way that we did in Iraq — the desire to have a democratic government with strong
ties to the west that can rid itself of extremist Islamic elements and bring stability to its masses. Why are we in Pakistan and what is the successful outcome that
we are seeking? We are there because of Pakistan’s strategic importance in that it shares a long international border with Afghanistan that contains ethnic tribal
fiefdoms that harbor sympathies for Osama Bin Laden and the Taliban. Similar to Iraq and Afghanistan, the desired outcome is a civilian democratic
government that can bring stability while maintaining close ties to the U.S. and western nations.
When one looks at the enormity and complexity of the challenges in Afghanistan and Pakistan, the word “quagmire” comes to mind. Afghanistan has been a
country that no world power has been able to defeat, from Alexander the Great right up to the fairly recent invasion by Russia. The Bush administration found
that while it was fairly easy to topple the Taliban government, defeating them and undertaking the challenges of nation building proved to be far more difficult.
While the Bush Administration was focusing on the war in Iraq, the Taliban retreated to the mountain sanctuaries where they refortified themselves such that they
are on the offensive posing the biggest challenge yet to the survival of the Karzai government.
As was the case in Iraq, we have never been able to win over the hearts and minds of the Afghani people. In his statement to the American people last
week, President Karzai admonished that the major cause for Afghani resentment towards the U.S. stemmed from the “collateral” damage, or civilian deaths that
came from bombings by American forces. While that may be true, the situation is a bit more complicated than that. A big factor contributing to their resentment
is the inherent duplicity in U.S. policy towards that nation. The people have not forgotten the fact that it was the U.S. that supported and propped-up the Taliban
when Afghanistan was invaded by the Russians. This was no different that what we did in Iraq, Iran and Pakistan. We supported Mohammad Reza Pavlavi, the
Shah of Iran in a coup that brought a ruthless dictator to power that ultimately was responsible for creating the success of Ayatollah Holmani. With the rise of a
radical, anti-American Iran, we supported Sadam Hussein in his war against Iran. And in Pakistan, we supported the military junta led by General Musharaff
which now makes it very hard to win trust from the masses that he exploited.
With the Taliban and Al Qaeda making progress in Afghanistan and major encroachments into Pakistan, President Obama determined that it was urgent
that he summon President Zardari and President Karzai to Washington for trilateral talks. What is clear is that a bad situation is getting worse with no realistic
definable end-game in sight. Not being involved is not an option even as it is not clear what defines a win or victory in both nations. A long-term involvement in
both nations with no clear mission seems likely. If that somehow becomes the case, it may serve to be an Achilles Heal for the Obama Administration. Time will
tell…
interviewed along with President Asif Ali Zardari of Pakistan in his show last Sunday. The stated rationale for U.S. involvement in Afghanistan and Pakistan is that
we are there because of 9/11 and the hunt for Osama Bin Laden. We are there because of our desire to destroy the Taliban who once ruled Afghanistan and to
keep them from spreading their influence into Pakistan and beyond.
What is the end game for Afghanistan? We define success in the same way that we did in Iraq — the desire to have a democratic government with strong
ties to the west that can rid itself of extremist Islamic elements and bring stability to its masses. Why are we in Pakistan and what is the successful outcome that
we are seeking? We are there because of Pakistan’s strategic importance in that it shares a long international border with Afghanistan that contains ethnic tribal
fiefdoms that harbor sympathies for Osama Bin Laden and the Taliban. Similar to Iraq and Afghanistan, the desired outcome is a civilian democratic
government that can bring stability while maintaining close ties to the U.S. and western nations.
When one looks at the enormity and complexity of the challenges in Afghanistan and Pakistan, the word “quagmire” comes to mind. Afghanistan has been a
country that no world power has been able to defeat, from Alexander the Great right up to the fairly recent invasion by Russia. The Bush administration found
that while it was fairly easy to topple the Taliban government, defeating them and undertaking the challenges of nation building proved to be far more difficult.
While the Bush Administration was focusing on the war in Iraq, the Taliban retreated to the mountain sanctuaries where they refortified themselves such that they
are on the offensive posing the biggest challenge yet to the survival of the Karzai government.
As was the case in Iraq, we have never been able to win over the hearts and minds of the Afghani people. In his statement to the American people last
week, President Karzai admonished that the major cause for Afghani resentment towards the U.S. stemmed from the “collateral” damage, or civilian deaths that
came from bombings by American forces. While that may be true, the situation is a bit more complicated than that. A big factor contributing to their resentment
is the inherent duplicity in U.S. policy towards that nation. The people have not forgotten the fact that it was the U.S. that supported and propped-up the Taliban
when Afghanistan was invaded by the Russians. This was no different that what we did in Iraq, Iran and Pakistan. We supported Mohammad Reza Pavlavi, the
Shah of Iran in a coup that brought a ruthless dictator to power that ultimately was responsible for creating the success of Ayatollah Holmani. With the rise of a
radical, anti-American Iran, we supported Sadam Hussein in his war against Iran. And in Pakistan, we supported the military junta led by General Musharaff
which now makes it very hard to win trust from the masses that he exploited.
With the Taliban and Al Qaeda making progress in Afghanistan and major encroachments into Pakistan, President Obama determined that it was urgent
that he summon President Zardari and President Karzai to Washington for trilateral talks. What is clear is that a bad situation is getting worse with no realistic
definable end-game in sight. Not being involved is not an option even as it is not clear what defines a win or victory in both nations. A long-term involvement in
both nations with no clear mission seems likely. If that somehow becomes the case, it may serve to be an Achilles Heal for the Obama Administration. Time will
tell…