The writer, a native of South Waziristan, has a master’s degree in conflict-resolution from the Monterey Institute of International Studies in California and blogs at
http://coffeeshopdiplomat.wordpress.com/
A recent report titled “A successful outcome in Afghanistan” co-authored by General John Allen, has blamed corruption in Afghanistan, the resilience of the Taliban and Pakistan’s fickleness, for US failures in Afghanistan. The report warns that the US risks “snatching defeat from the jaws of something that could still resemble victory … if they accelerate their disengagement between now and 2014 and under-source their commitment to Afghanistan after 2014”. A case is made for President Barack Obama to declare how many US troops shall remain in Afghanistan post-withdrawal. The report claims that several thousand will be necessary for up to three years after the withdrawal in order to assist Afghanistan security forces develop their capability and technology. If a coalition of 140,000 Nato/Isaf troops, with their superior weapons and drones, were unable to manage the conflict in Afghanistan; and the surge even failed to achieve necessary results, then keeping a small number of troops behind is futile.
General Allen’s report argues that the US has a plan B for preventing Afghanistan from turning into a safe haven for al Qaeda, once again, with the following caveat: “this plan is not guaranteed to work, of course.” Plan B entails building a capable Afghan military, air force and special forces units, holding free and fair elections in 2014 and staying committed to creating stability in Afghanistan. US efforts to train and empower the Afghan National Army have not been promising thus far. Afghan forces continue to suffer from deserters and infiltrators and will probably be incapable of protecting their side of the border. Keep in mind that the US will have to spend $5 billion per year on the Afghan security forces alone, in order to sustain their current numbers. Meanwhile, green on blue attacks are on the rise and the Taliban continue to thrive in the remote and rural areas of Afghanistan. Billions of dollars have also been pledged to ensure free and fair elections next year in Afghanistan, failing which, the country will lose aid from the US.
One solution was always obvious and simple: talk to the majority Pashtuns. Instead, the US decided to change the dynamics of Afghanistan and empower the minority groups — the Northern Alliance, which includes Tajiks, Hazaras and Uzbeks. This resulted in a dramatic decline in the representation of Pashtuns, who represent a cohesive majority in Afghanistan and their intentional marginalisation cannot be sustained in any natural manner. Perhaps, the powers that be in Afghanistan bought into the erroneous generalisation that all Pashtuns are Taliban.
In the end, the report concludes that “Afghanistan will remain one of the poorest, least developed and more corrupt countries in the world for years to come”. The authors plead that the US and its allies must remain committed to pursuing stability and economic development in Afghanistan. They argue that compared with what has already been invested, in terms of human lives and wealth, it would be unwise to lose interest now. These statements are a flash from the past and remind us of the aftermath of the US role in Afghanistan during the 1980s’ Soviet invasion. After the failure of the US Congress to continue aid to Afghanistan for development, Congressman Charlie Wilson stated that “these things did happen. They were glorious and they changed the world … and then we (messed) up the endgame”
Published in The Express Tribune, June 7th, 2013.
Like Opinion & Editorial on Facebook, follow @ETOpEd on Twitter to receive all updates on all our daily pieces.
COMMENTS (24)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ
1730464033-0/BeFunky-collage-(12)1730464033-0-165x106.webp "article")
I dont know what the argument is about. It appears you all want to shoot the messenger. The auther is reporting what General Allen has publically stated; do you disagree with that? Then there is an opinion on who the negotiations should focus on; its either the Taliban or the Pustuns, what would you want? Finally calling Karazai a Pushtun is a bit of an insult to most self respecting Pushtuns; he and his band will be found woefully missing when the US withdraw or do you still think he will rule the roost.
@Bigsaf
Brilliant comment! I think you meant Shinwari not Shirwani.
@Rex Minor
Afghan and Pakistani Pashtun have nothing in common except for religion.
@bigsaf:
Do not make it complicated. The Pashtuns are a single Nation, the largest tribal people of the world. They are made up of different tribes, speak different Pashto dilects, but have a common religion, culture and traditions, all abide by Pakhtunwali. They fight among themselves but are one against non speaking Pashto foreigners!
Rex Minor
The paragraph on Pashtuns and non-Pashtuns is ignorant and erroneous. There have been many attempts at talks. COHESIVE? The Pashtuns are not represented as one whole group. They have different tribes and sub-tribes, that many times conflict with each other, let alone with other non-Pashtuns, such as Hamid Karzai's Popalzai tribe, which is now in government power, against Mullah Omar's Hotak tribe, which is a Ghilzai (known for warring) sub-tribe, out of power. While not all Pashtuns are Taliban, the Taliban are mostly Pashtun, with a Deoband bent and totally marginalized the non-Pashtuns or Darri speakers, which was half the country.
If this was so 'obvious' and 'simple', then there would not have been inter-Pashtun violence among regional tribes within Pakistan itself where ANP and other Pashtun groups pitted against other pro-Taliban Pashtuns, be they Afridis/Turis/Bangash's/Mehsud's/Wazirs,etc. It is not a monolithic group. They have minds of their own. Despite many intentional engagements, unfortunately some groups invoking Pashtunwali cultural codes, besides religious dogma and ethnic hatred, makes their marginalization worse. For example in rewarding development to the Afghan Shirwanis, another sub-tribe of the Ghilzais, there was opposition from other Afghan Pashtun powers, as well as an inter-tribal split leading to deaths. This is how messed up it gets.
@Zalmai: I tried 3 times to provide a factual rebutal but had no luck. The reason has already been pointed out by @Nadir
@ John
ET mods are on high alert today. They have not published any of my postings in response to this utterly biased and inaccurate column. I guess my comments were scathing compared to your insightful and sober posting.
I wonder how could ET team allow publishing such a substandard article. It has nothing new but the repetition of the same old stories told and retold to boost the wishful thinking of Pakistani hawks about the post-withdrawal Afghanistan based on the premise that the Afghan state is weak, which will result in the 1990s-style revival of Taleban. Such people should note that Afghanistan is not the same as it was in 1990s when the state had completely collapsed leaving the security and administrative vacuum behind.
It has changed a lot in terms of human development, security, administrative order, economy, etc. In the year 2012-2013, the GDP growth of Afghanistan was 11.8% versus the dismal 3.6% GDP growth of Pakistan according to World Bank report. And most of this growth was due to factors internal to Afghanistan including a strong harvest and robust performance of mining industry.
OK. If I read this correctly,
A. NATO/ US/ All non-Talibanis (Hazras, Tajiks and Uzbeks included) are loosing hearts and minds.
B. Talibanis are winning hearts and minds by the bucketful.
I guess to each his own.
PS- Where do the family members of the beheaded soldiers stand?
It is funny how ET mods have not allowed any of my retorts to this biased and fallacious column.
Where is the role of United Nations? It is not evident. For meaningful and lasting success everything in future must be done under the UN umbrella instead of USA.. Read Learning from History from last week
In that case, Pakistan better start preparing its cities for more refugees, more drugs and more weapons.
Iraq given back to shias majority, Afghanistan given to minority, Syria rule by minority what kind of mess going on.......
@Nadir
What does her father's rank or profession have to do with her article?
Afghan Taliban are spent force & they have expired past valid date. They are killing 40 Afghan women, children & civilian every day in IED blasts on average. They cant face Afghan Army, Police & Volunteers in fight. In the past 3 weeks 500 Taliban have been killed, 800 injured/captured during Khalid Bin Walid Operation. Can the author name one District which Taliban can hold or have captured so far? Dreaming of collapse of Afghan Army & State do not suit Pakistan either. It is requested from Pakistani Nationlists authors to please do not wish for collapse of Afghan army as this collapse will also bring Pashtoons death & destruction on very larger scale on Pakistani side of Durand Line. Please spare us more misery or the history would not forgive you.
Why do Islamic societies have such a tough time accepting responsibility? One more time it is the fault of the USA. Corruption in Afghanistan to Export of "strategic assets" from Pakistan - all the fault of the US! Putting the ax to yourself is preferable to good governance and neighborliness.
@Nadir, do you have a point??
Lets look at this in another way. Last time in the 1990s Taliban won because of men, materiel and army supplied by Pakistan. The world looked the other way. For Kabul the Soviet Union stopped weapons supply. Also last time Taliban was an unknown quantity and was welcomed.
This time the story will be different. Taliban has realized that it is much easier in Pakistan than in Afghanistan. Pakistan army is mired down in Pakistan itself. Technology itself has changed. Areas will be under 24x7 under watch by the Americans and therefore Talibans cannot amass themselves as in 1990s. Even a group of 50 will be shot from the air. Also the Afghan army will get constant supply from America, Russia, Iran, India and others.
Besides what kind of judgement are we making? The Afghan army will disintegrate because they are not brave but the same Afghans as Taliban are ferocious?
"Washington DC is already moving on from the South Asia region."
No its not. And as long as India is part of South Asia, it won't.
"Afghan forces continue to suffer from deserters and infiltrators and will probably be incapable of protecting their side of the border."
Because we do such a stellar job on our side?
"then keeping a small number of troops behind is futile..."
Their job isn't to 'manage' the conflict as you say, just to train Afghans to deal with it, up to a point where they feel far enough removed that they can leave without anybody blaming them for the mess.
"Keep in mind that the US will have to spend $5 billion per year on the Afghan security forces alone, in order to sustain their current numbers."
Keep in mind that relatively speaking, $5 billion is a drop in the ocean for a war that will eventually cost the US upwards of $1 Trillion.
I appreciate Allen's candid words... Lets see if they hit home or disappear into the deaf ears of politicians. Obama just droned away any chance at negotiating with the Taliban for the near term.
Indeed, take no responsibility, take joy that others are suffering and look the other way while our own country men die day in day out. But yes, lets celebrate Americas failure. Future COAS's daughter speaks, the nation listens.