Drawdown in Afghanistan

US must not repeat the same mistakes it made by abandoning Afghanistan following the Soviet withdrawal in 1988.


Editorial June 01, 2014
Obama administration must make sure that the Afghan government and its security forces are able to, at least, maintain some semblance of order so that Afghanistan is not used by non-state actors to plan and execute international acts of terror. PHOTO: AFP/FILE

US President Barack Obama faces considerable domestic criticism when confronted with a foreign policy crisis and the din is usually in favour of some kind of military action.  However, the case of Afghanistan suggests that this is not often the best way forward. After a passage of 13 years and hundreds of thousands of deaths, the US drawdown in that country is a clear proof of this.

As we have seen, military interventions tend to provide an impetus for extremism and a breeding ground for terrorists, which only further exacerbates the problem. We, and this region, are all too familiar with war and its aftermath. In addition to expending blood and treasure, the effects and repercussions of war do not remain confined to one generation; they are passed onto future ones. Mass displacements and mass demolitions of cities, towns and villages, are just some of the most visible externalities of war. Considering that Afghanistan has been in a state of perpetual conflict since the Soviets invaded it in 1979, the fallout of that nine-year occupation is still being felt and experienced to date. Since the US-led invasion of Afghanistan in 2001 — even though the terror infrastructure has been dismantled to a great extent — terrorism continues to exist, and rather thrives, coupled with organised crime.

On the receiving end has been Pakistan. We have been damned for assisting this UN-sanctioned war and damned for not doing enough. However, not discounting the ground realities in Afghanistan, it is essential that at least, a residual US troop presence in the country remain so as to bring Afghan security forces up to par with the standards required to fully impart their responsibility of securing that country’s borders and establishing the writ of the state, which is, at the moment, scant and limited to the capital and mostly in the western parts of the country. The southern and eastern provinces still remain largely ungoverned spaces and this problem must be urgently addressed.

We hope that the Obama Administration, for the remainder of its term, at the very least, assists to the fullest Afghanistan in the transfer of power to whoever wins the presidency in the run-off next month. Though US President Obama has said that his country will retain a force of 9,800 following the withdrawal of international forces at the end of this year, his administration must make sure that the Afghan government and its security forces are able to, at least, maintain some semblance of order so that Afghanistan is not used by non-state actors to plan and execute international acts of terror. This, of course, will be bearing only if the Afghan government signs the Bilateral Security Agreement, which President Hamid Karzai has so far refused to sign. The country’s future also depends upon the stalled peace dialogue with the Afghan insurgents and before the US entirely withdraws by 2016. It must now work towards bringing the insurgents into the fold. As it is, Pakistan bears the brunt of cross-border terrorism, while the Afghan government has acted like a bystander. This is an extremely serious matter that needs to be addressed if this region is to remain peaceful and the relationship between neighbours cordial. Pakistan has legitimate interests in making sure that Afghan soil is not used for illicit purposes against it, and in the event that such concerns are not paid heed to, it cannot be blamed for acting in its self-interest.

Unless words and commitments are not translated into action, cliches like peace is long overdue and hard earned will only remain just that: cliches. The US, as it transitions into a more advisory role in Afghanistan, must make sure that it remains engaged in the region for the long term and does not repeat the same mistakes it made by abandoning Afghanistan following the Soviet withdrawal in 1988. Only then will the US withdrawal be responsible. Otherwise, we could experience 2001 and a similar aftermath all over again.

Published in The Express Tribune, June 2nd, 2014.

Like Opinion & Editorial on Facebook, follow @ETOpEd on Twitter to receive all updates on all our daily pieces.

COMMENTS (5)

Zaid Hamid | 9 years ago | Reply

@Aschraful Makhlooq "Obama now find another country for invasion after Afghanistan because to interfere in the other countries matter in any forms and manifestation is your most favorite hobby passion because old habit goes hard and you have proven this phrase absolutely and precisely true……"

I agree with you. Pakistan would be a good choice.

Aschraful Makhlooq | 9 years ago | Reply

Obama now find another country for invasion after Afghanistan because to interfere in the other countries matter in any forms and manifestation is your most favorite hobby passion because old habit goes hard and you have proven this phrase absolutely and precisely true......

VIEW MORE COMMENTS
Replying to X

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

For more information, please see our Comments FAQ