In response to the 9/11 attacks, Bush called for an invasion of Afghanistan to destroy al Qaeda’s sanctuary. Long-term objectives of the effort comprised establishing a democracy and eliminating circumstances which led to terrorism. Being unable to convince the Taliban to hand over Osama bin Laden, the US strategy evolved to include killing and capturing their leaders, Mullah Omar being high on that list. Meanwhile, in Afghanistan, the Taliban insurgency picked up and the death toll began to increase. Opium production flourished during this period as there were few other sources of income.
When US President Barack Obama took power in 2008, he shifted the focus back to Afghanistan and redefined the objectives. In 2009, he deployed an additional 30,000 troops and stated that his goal in Afghanistan was to “disrupt, dismantle and defeat al Qaeda”. In 2009, Defence Secretary Robert Gates stated that “at a minimum, the mission is to prevent the Taliban from retaking power… and turning Afghanistan potentially again into a haven for al Qaeda and other extremists”.
In his recent speech, Obama announced that 33,000 troops are being withdrawn by the summer of 2012 and that transition of power to Afghan security forces will be complete by 2014. Currently, Afghanistan’s newly-formed military consists of 150,000 soldiers but their ranks are scheduled to swell up to 260,000 in time for the 2014 deadline. Despite Nato’s efforts to train Afghan soldiers to read and write at the third grade level, almost 90 per cent of the recruits in the Afghan military are illiterate. High levels of desertion and infiltration also plague the Afghan security forces, which adds another aspect of uncertainty with the transition of power. Moreover, several insurgent groups remain firmly established in Kunar and Nuristan provinces, which border Pakistan’s tribal areas. Consequently, cross-border incidents have risen between Pakistan and Afghanistan. Several hundred militants crossed into Pakistan and conducted attacks in Upper Dir, Bajaur and Mohmand. In retaliation, Pakistan fired rockets on the border to target militants crossing over. Needless to say, relations between the two neighbours are troublesome.
This September marks ten years since the atrocious events of 9/11. Bin Laden is dead but al Qaeda remains very much alive. Conflict has spilled into Pakistan with death and destruction becoming a daily part of life. Meanwhile, the US has come full-circle and is now negotiating with the Taliban and preparing to allow them back into the official government. A recent and well-timed UN resolution draws distinction between al Qaeda and the Taliban. The pretext being that the Taliban only focus on conducting attacks in their own country unlike al Qaeda who carries out attacks worldwide. Thus, the Taliban have been removed from the UN sanctions list in order to help the US with their reconciliation efforts. These games do little to conceal the fact that the Afghan government is corrupt and poor. On top of that, their security forces can switch sides at any moment if enticed with money or threats. Despite the US government’s desire to keep Pakistan separate from their negotiations with the Taliban, it is time to face reality, the situation along the porous border remains and will continue to be a challenge for Afghanistan and Pakistan.
Hence, a comprehensive regional solution is required for long-term peace instead of a rushed secret backdoor deal which will certainly be short-lived. Our neighbour has been in a state of continuous conflict since the late 1970s. The ultimate resolution involves education and economic development, which entails long-term dedication and commitment from interested parties that are directly affected by the war in Afghanistan.
Published in The Express Tribune, July 11th, 2011.
COMMENTS (21)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ
@author "Our neighbour has been in a state of continuous conflict since the late 1970s" ......and Pakistan has been a model state of peace and stability?
@Faraz, Actually, once considered relatively stable, even the non-pashtun Northern areas of Afghanistan are now unstable. Please look back to the violence in Mazar UN compound and Tokhar. The Northern Alliance which is controlled by Fahim (whose tied to Iran heavily) are also very clear they do not want US presence. This is also the reason the US has been attacking Fahim's reputation with the over-hyped Kabul Bank scandal. They did this while also propping up two other Tajiks, Amarulleh Saleh and Abdullah Abdullah who have failed to attract the support needed.
The only way forward is a regional conference (Afghanistan, Iran, Pakistan, China,Russia, India) to come to bring the parties together to come to some agreement. Putting India aside, all the other above mentioned nations have made it crystal clear they oppose a US presence in the region. This appears to be the way forward. The good news for the region is that all these countries have been coming together to resolve this.(SCO conference, Tehran terrorism conference). This does not seem to have been pleasing to Washington DC.
Now the blame game starts, and the US continues to ask Pakistan to do a wide scale operation in the tribal regions. Pakistan has no interest in this, and has continued to reject the request. The result is today's withholding of military aid to Pakistan. Lets see how this unfolds.
In my opinion, Pakistan should reject all the military aid.
Pakistan is the victims of its own deed. It uses terrorists as an assets against India and claim to be the victim of terrorism. Harboring terrorists is a double edged weapon, Pakistan is facing the heat now.
A comprehensive regional solutions makes sense --- but no one in the region trust Pakistan so that's just not going to be in the cards. The reality if that India, Afghan, and Iran don't trust you and don't agree with your policy of using terrorist as strategic assets -- even your ally doesn't trust you. Pakistan thought it was going to be a king maker in the end game -- now it's going to be nothing other than a bomb recipient.
I agree that your "recommendations" are rather banal. But you write well and a little bit of more analysis might be helpful.
I feel the mistake is in thinking that 2014 is some magic number when this game will end. The U.S has messed up big time both in Anghanistan and Iraq. They still have not understood that might is not always right. Another lesson the US has to learn is that a nation should be responsible for its actions. I liked your closing paragraph.
we should blame ourself as being a failed state. instead of pointing qaida or bush. bush can kill terrorists from so many miles away. why not pakistan cared of terrorism in just near border areas. we cannot control our country. just blaming others on everything. there is no conspiracy against us. we are conspiracy of our oneself.
@ the author..
Grow up lady !!!... U have just narrated what everybody knows, which was already mentioned or reported in the news papers... Ur conclusion in the last paragraph too is very childish and immature ... as its the last thing to happen in Pakistan ... as the majority of the funds are gobbled up by the Army .... U need to really go deep in the matters and do a proper research to be a columnist.. All the best .. I really from the bottom of my heart would like to tell you .. i have no intention of insulting you ... or anything of that sort ..
@ khattak ... What about the durand line ??? Will pakistan give away the portion they are holding of Afghanistan ??? Pushtoons are in Pakistan tooo near the so called border of pakistan and Afghanistan..
What happens to the 400,000 ANA force when it is established and the US leave, who foots the annual bill and recurring expenditure??????
"US President George W Bush had said right after 9/11 that God had told him to invade Afghanistan."
That man and his ability to screw up and sound stupid during pretty much every speech he had given was a running joke for comedy shows and simple conversation throughout and even after his term. I was never a Bush fan but I think even the people who did support him will usually face-palm hard enough to break their noses whenever they're reminded of his verbal blunders. For the defense of the rest of the country's view, he was the only person I can think of that ever spoke of the war in such a way. The more common US view would be that no God would direct anyone to begin a war as the reasons for war are usually based in the interest of something humans created so it's fairly hard to say it's in a God's interest.
Ms Khan you say: Obama announced that 33,000 troops are being withdrawn by the summer of 2012 and that transition of power to Afghan security forces will be complete by 2014. But we should know this announcement is partly to win backing for his next elections. The number he announced to withdraw is roughly the number of soldiers he increased in Afghanistan after taking over as President. We should understand that among Politicians, President, People and Press of United states, its the PENTAGON which defines the american policies vis-a-vis world affairs and implements & propagates through the rest of them. Americans are fed and taught what pentagon wants them to have. Obama came with 'we can' and knows that he can only if the pentagon allows him. Not much different from Pakistan , really. Except the generals do not take over White house.
I think we should ponder about the possibility of sanctions being imposed on us after 2014. How will the country manage?
If you want to cripple a country, there is no need to wage a war, just impose sanctions on it. Iraq is a prime example. I think, US is preparing the background towards this position, for declaring Pak a terrorist state, towards organising UN declared sanctions and towards denying IMF sponsored loans.
2014 endgame should concentrate on these: Why no one is talking about this? Are we so sure that China will bail us out with their billions?
@Khattak
So what about the non-pushtoon who constitute 50 percent of Afghans? Tajik, uzbek, hazara, turkomen etc will never live under the medieval taliban regime
Bush said god had told him to invade Iraq. Your source Keith Oberman opens by saying very clearly that Bush "reportedly" got his instruction from God and then spends 6 minutes probing the religious motivation of Bush. But where has Bush stated personally in an interview or writing what you and Keith claim he said. He was a religious man who drew inspiration from his faith like most of us do. But he was no jihadist and there is no moral equivalence between that and Islamist penchant for holy terror.
Afghanistan and it's source of instability since 1979 are two nations. Soviet Union and Pakistan. One is finished while the other is gradually dying holding on to its "strategic" interests. Unless Pakistan stops its fatal attraction to Afghanistan there will be no stability in either country. Pakistan is obsessed - "if I can't have you, no one else will either. No matter the cost to me or anyone else for that matter".
No point in blaming USA for defending itself from those that attacked it. No point in blaming them for wanting to leave. But it sure feels nice not having to take any responsibility. That fits neatly with the national ethos.
@faraz: this will never happen in Afghanistan. No Pashtun will allow the US to stay. Just watch the Loya Jirga. It is against pashtunwali for them to accept foreigners.
It is also completely ridiculous that this is even suggested.
@Faraz,
As long as the US is in Afghanistan, there will continue to be instability in Afghanistan and the region. They, like the Soviets, will have no choice but to leave.
I mean, just take a look at todays news.
Lets cut the insurgency talk out. The Afghans have never tolerated foreigners, and this is nothing new. Words such as militancy and extremism are all meant to disguise the fact that the West is at war only with Muslim countries.
The fact it, no Muslim, no person will ever tolerate foreign (US) intervention.
Foreign intervention needs to end in the region and the world. Foreign intervention results in people opposing it. It is only the natural order of things.
Afghanistan should be divided along ethnic lines between pushtoon south and non-pushtoon north. And it seems US will retain air bases in Helmund, Mazar Sharif etc. to provide air support in case Taliban concentrate to attack cities in the Northern Afghanistan. US has failed to kill the insurgency but a conventional attack can easily be repelled through air strikes and heavy weaponry, like the 90s when mujahideen miserably failed to take Jalalabad from Communist forces although the attack was planned by our transport mujahid.
5 long paragraphs of history ending in a final paragraph which doesn't give any solution except generalized comment like "education and economic development", which won't work as the Taliban simply burn down schools you build or blow up markets.
We Pakistanis are great at criticizing the US but are clueless on our own solutions. The only exception is the military whose failed solution is support for militancy.
Afghanistan needs a regional solution? Why cant the Afghans sort their own problems out? How can Pakistan revile outside interference in her affairs while pushing to be part of other countries? You should also consider that Pakistan remains massively unpopular in Afghanistan. Americas effort of nation building may not have created a democratic utopia, but Pakistans efforts helping the Taliban in the 1990s to lord over the Afghan people, hasnt really won many Afghan hearts and minds.