The Global media is abuzz with stories of the discomfort of the foreign troops in Afghanistan lately. Not long ago, the British Commander Carleton-Smith' statement about the Taliban gaining the upper hand was, generally, denounced as 'defeatist'. However, now even Robert Gates, the US Defense Secretary had to assert," There has to be ultimately, and I'll underscore ultimately, reconciliation as part of a political outcome to this." "That's ultimately the exit strategy for all of us," he affirmed. At long last with catastrophic losses inflicted on the ‘occupied’ country which also carried a cost for the superpower, history appears to be on course to repeat itself. A veteran specialist of the area, Christina Lamb after a recent visit to Helmand province, emphasized in an article, “...I wondered what we British are actually achieving in this faraway country where all our previous engagements, since our first military expedition 170 years ago, have ended in disaster."

How we got to the Déjà vu this time round in Afghanistan? The neo-cons advising a mediocre president since 2001 appear to have got him two terms in the White House but, as the last elections confirmed, he may end up as the worst incumbent. As he had little experience/ exposure, he could be misled by the likes of Karl Rove, Rumsfeld a la “stuff happens”, Cheney etc who, like their leader, are believed to have represented ‘special interests’. Harboring a strange agenda inspired by “The American century”, they launched a ‘war on terror’ post-9/11 tragedy. Interestingly not only in US but the world over people had doubts about American policy which were propagated through documentaries like ‘loose change’, ‘fahrenheit 9/11 etc. However, sympathy for the victims elicited won universal support.


The Taliban regime was, generally, disliked at home and abroad. No wonder the US with the help of Russia, the non-pashtun warlords of Afghanistan etc smashed the poorly-armed regime quickly despite their brave resistance. Duke of Wellington had averred that, “….next to a battle lost, the greatest misery is a battle gained.” Deriving political capital out of such success, the neo-cons stage-managed the Bonn Conference of 2002 which made profuse promises of democracy, development financed by massive aid etc. A surrogate regime was put in to power under Karzai which depended, mainly, on the Northern warlords who were obliged to support the new order. The Pashtun majority, including Taliban, became, generally, marginalized etc while the latter went in to hiding in the harsh countryside. Unfortunately the US etc could not live up to their projected policy.

An Oxfam report released recently highlights that "Western countries are failing to deliver”. Talking of aid utilization it attests that “40% goes back to donor countries in consultant fees and expatriate pay”. It further avers that “while the US military spends $100m a day, the average amount of aid spent by all donors combined has been just $7m a day since 2001”.

This was aggravated by the corruption, lawlessness etc let loose by the warlords who formed the backbone of the regime. Karzai soon had little influence beyond Kabul and he got dubbed as the ‘mayor of Kabul’ Even his own security remains in the hands of a US contingent. A famine-like situation hit the Pashtun areas in 2005 which allowed the Taliban to regain influence against ‘foreign occupation.’

The warlords of the North in search of more than their pound flesh started cultivating poppy massively for export of Drugs to the seller’ market which now forms, almost half of the GDP. Such a rip-off yielded Billions of $ to them as the US was obliged to blink. This encouraged the starving Pashtuns to follow suit for survival and their gains are also sizeable. Sensing the potential for a breakthrough, the Taliban started cooperating with the local population in this venture. Being better organized, they also provided reliable security to such operations in the South/ East. So in addition to gaining political support, they also made money.


Yet another factor that helped to swell the numbers of ‘insurgents’ was the indiscriminate bombing etc used by the US/ NATO on ‘suspects’ in Afghanistan/ Pakistan. More often such missions ended up killing women/ children. Robert Fisk, the veteran journalist, ridiculed US ‘intelligence’ in a fresh column alleging “If you can believe that bin Laden drops by a shopping mall on an American military base, then you can believe that everyone you arrest is a "terrorist", that Arabs are "terrorists", that they can be executed, that living "terrorists" must be tortured, that everything a tortured man says can be believed, that it is legitimate to invade sovereign states, to grab the telephone records of everyone in America.” In the latest of such outrages in Shah Wali Kot/ Kandahar 40 persons attending a marriage-party are reported killed which included 20 children and 11 women besides a bigger number of the injured.

“We cannot win the fight against terrorism with air strikes," Karzai had to say." This is my first demand of the new president of the United States, to put an end to civilian casualties." A similar disaster hit Wazirastan/ Landikotal Pakistan subsequently. The ‘insurgents’ hit back by seizing 13 trucks in the Khyber Pass carrying supplies for the NATO forces despite Pakistani missile strikes through helicopter gun-ships which killed a child and wounded six persons. Later the trucks were found abandoned near Jamrud. The incident angered the tribal people against the Govt as well as the ‘insurgents’.

Gwynne Dyer, a master analyst, is convinced that “The sporadic terrorist attacks…… will certainly diminish if western troops pull out of Muslim countries.” He lauds the German approach to the problem which “is just right: do the intelligence work, don’t over-estimate the threat, and above all don’t panic.”

Afghanistan’ history proves that foreign forces always provoke aversion. No occupation has lasted for long, thanks to the Geography and the ethos. Olaf Caroe, a great authority on the region, had said, "Unlike other wars, Afghan wars become serious only when they are over."

As the North remained pariahs under the Taliban, its warlords readily colluded with the US to oust the latter. The US put all their bets on Karzai etc to run a proxy entity. If Bonn Conference (2002) pledges had been kept by the US/allies, a new dispensation could have survived. Insecurity, which is aggravated by threat of yet another famine, as per the UN, haunts the Pashtuns. Out of desperation they miss the Taliban rule which ensured viable security and a drug-free society despite its harshness.

One can’t expect much from the ‘lamest of the lame-duck Presidents’, as Hillary Clinton put it, despite peaceful overtures involving the Saudi King/ Jirgas. The war in Afghanistan can’t be won as Clareton-Smith put it, "They know they can't outfight us but they clearly believe they can outlast us," which is historically valid. Prudence demands of the next President to heed the fate of the British/Soviet interventions in Afghanistan. To salvage American image, a settlement should be made to end ‘occupation’ which will remain its proverbial Albatross.

The writer is a former Secretary Interior.

Comments (0)

Subscribe to this comment's feed

Show/Hide comments

Name

Email

Website

Title

Comment

Write the displayed characters

Add Comment